I haven’t had a good rant in a while… and unfortunately, I don’t have enough time to have one right now – so the Reader’s Digest condensed version will have to do.
Most agents who have been in this business a few years or more know when something doesn’t look right. We’ll see something – and although we don’t know the underlying logic… we instinctively know it’s just not right.
This morning, I was perusing some rental properties for a client. As with listings for sale, it’s not uncommon to find some agents who are offering a ridiculously low co-broke. This morning was no different.
This particular agent is offering a 10% co-broke if you show the property. Since many brokerages charge transaction fees – the co-broke on this listing could easily be less than the transaction fee. Kinda gives “co-broke” a whole new meaning.
Now don’t get me wrong – a 10% referral fee for sending the client to a property shown by the listing agent is just fine. But 10% for bringing the tenant and showing the property is a non-starter – I don’t care who’s doing the paperwork.
Just for giggles and grins – I pulled up this agent’s recent history. One sold listing and more than sixty leased listings. Every single one of them offered a measly 10% co-broke… and all but two were leased out by – drum roll please – the listing agent.
[snarky comment] What an unexpected surprise! [/snarky comment]
Of course, both of those co-oped listings rented out for full asking price… while nearly every single one of the double-ended listings involved a rent reduction… sometimes several hundreds of dollars in rent reduction.
Now maybe you think that I’m just whining about some agent who is too greedy to offer a more generous co-broke – that’s fair. Maybe you think that I believe that a co-broke of 25% is more appropriate. I will tend to agree with you on both counts.
But there is an underlying ethical problem here.
When you list a property for lease and offer a ridiculously low co-broke – you are denying your client the best possible chance for Read more