Portola Springs Realty
New member
aquabliss said:
Very well! They will have a new phase release (18 homes) this weekend. I will let them know.
Irvine Pacific without Seller's Agent?
- Thread starter jpatki
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
Very well! They will have a new phase release (18 homes) this weekend. I will let them know.
I see several buyers trying to bring their agent in after the fact. The purpose for the broker co-op is for the agent to find a home that meets the buyer's criteria and bring the buyer to the community. This is why the builder requires that the agent accompany them on their first visit. It has nothing to do with the agent representing them. The agent should be the procuring cause in order for them to receive the co-op.
We all know that TI knows more about what buyers want than builders. Yet they don't listen.
#3CWGsWillSellFasterThanCaliRooms
Sounds like a FCB. I pay all cash, I deserve to be on top of the list/a discount/designer credit/broker rebate.
Builder reps lurk on these boards and I think this discussion is valuable. Its not about knowing more than them but an opportunity to provide feedback and for them to evaluate it. It is their money and their choice on how to use it.
I agree that the intent is a referral fee but it is poorly executed and has gaps. Here are just a few that come to mind.
1) Why does the agent have to be present at the first touring vs the buyer noting down their agents name in the sign in card? And don't say its because they want to stop after the fact rebates to buyers as that is fairly new.
2) Who is likely the biggest referrer of a community? Agents or existing early phase buyers? Why does the rebate only go to an agent? Why can't it go to a early phase buyer?
3) If a buyer didn't come in with an agent, why can't some of those funds that were set aside for the referral fee be used to discount the product or offer something else?
4) What is more valuable to a builder? An agent who brings in someone to tour or an agent who brings in someone to sign a purchase agreement? If latter, why not say "agent must be present at signing"?
i think in general the answer to these questions is the builder doesnt want to give away money and they want to make it as hard as possible for someone to get the money. I think Pavillion park was 700 homes? 700 x lets say $20,000 co-op is $14,000,000 - that is a lot of money to just give out with no strings attached, even if it is from a separate marketing budget.
Ya agents may steer you towards resale but with or without co-op, some buyers are pretty adamant on buying new. They'll just go and buy without an agent. No skin off the buyer's back (if no co-op exists). IMO, the co-op is totally unnecessary but once one builder/tract offers it, the rest have to follow suit. And likewise since one agent started doing kickbacks, the rest have to follow suit. And so now you have the current system where buyers will absolutely factor in the co-op rebate as part of the buying equation.
But let's say there was some rule that prohibited builders from offering co-Ops, would new home sales greatly suffer? Probably not. People love new home smell.
Very well! They will have a new phase release (18 homes) this weekend. I will let them know.
Portola Springs Realty
New member
TRNeighbor.com said:
I see several buyers trying to bring their agent in after the fact. The purpose for the broker co-op is for the agent to find a home that meets the buyer's criteria and bring the buyer to the community. This is why the builder requires that the agent accompany them on their first visit. It has nothing to do with the agent representing them. The agent should be the procuring cause in order for them to receive the co-op.
TRNeighbor.com
New member
@RKP...Your first mistake is assuming all real estate transactions are equal. Re-Sale, FSBOs and New Homes are all completely different! The seller has the right to compensate (or not at all) the procuring party any amount previously agreed upon.
Let's say your buyers walk in to an Open House, like the home, and later tell you to place an offer. After researching the home, you discover that it's a FSBO not cooperating w/ agents. Or, you find out it's a FSBO that will pay a commission only if you bring in the buyer on the first visit. What do you do now? If you inform your buyers of the Terms of the Sale, and they still want to proceed w/ that home, you're SOL.
Again..."don't let your kids wonder around the mall without you" (this is a metaphor, USCT, there are no kids actually wondering around a mall).
All I'm saying is that a real estate agent's job is getting smaller and smaller as technology progresses; hence the free willingness to credit their clients w/ with their 'hard earned' commission. If an agent could just follow a few simple industry-wide RE rules, as well as make an effort to earn their tens-of-thousands of dollars, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Let's say your buyers walk in to an Open House, like the home, and later tell you to place an offer. After researching the home, you discover that it's a FSBO not cooperating w/ agents. Or, you find out it's a FSBO that will pay a commission only if you bring in the buyer on the first visit. What do you do now? If you inform your buyers of the Terms of the Sale, and they still want to proceed w/ that home, you're SOL.
Again..."don't let your kids wonder around the mall without you" (this is a metaphor, USCT, there are no kids actually wondering around a mall).
All I'm saying is that a real estate agent's job is getting smaller and smaller as technology progresses; hence the free willingness to credit their clients w/ with their 'hard earned' commission. If an agent could just follow a few simple industry-wide RE rules, as well as make an effort to earn their tens-of-thousands of dollars, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
To rkp's point... apparently there are still buyers out there who are working with agents but may not know these co-op rules. Agent incentives were not very common during the height of the bubbles so not everyone is aware of the "first visit" requirement.
Additionally, if you are an agent who has been working with a buyer and the buyer decides to visit a new home without letting you know, all the time you have spent with them becomes null. Now, to be fair, most agents should tell their buyers "If you want to visit a new home, please let me know first", but sometimes, buyers can't wait.
Now I realize that a percentage of buyers don't even use their real agent, maybe just a cousin or friend who has an RE license so that they can get a portion of the co-op but still, I think the builders should bend a bit... after all they are most likely making a higher percentage than a resale seller.
When we toured that small new home community in Lake Forest a few years ago, I told the saleslady that I have an agent and she was nice enough to let me tour the models and just told me to have him come in on our next visit. But I forget which one in Irvine, maybe Stonegate, where they told me that my agent has to register me first before I look at the models.
As a resale seller, it's understandable to enforce these type of rules, but I think builders should be a bit more lenient because I'm sure the percentage of non-broker sales are still higher.
Additionally, if you are an agent who has been working with a buyer and the buyer decides to visit a new home without letting you know, all the time you have spent with them becomes null. Now, to be fair, most agents should tell their buyers "If you want to visit a new home, please let me know first", but sometimes, buyers can't wait.
Now I realize that a percentage of buyers don't even use their real agent, maybe just a cousin or friend who has an RE license so that they can get a portion of the co-op but still, I think the builders should bend a bit... after all they are most likely making a higher percentage than a resale seller.
When we toured that small new home community in Lake Forest a few years ago, I told the saleslady that I have an agent and she was nice enough to let me tour the models and just told me to have him come in on our next visit. But I forget which one in Irvine, maybe Stonegate, where they told me that my agent has to register me first before I look at the models.
As a resale seller, it's understandable to enforce these type of rules, but I think builders should be a bit more lenient because I'm sure the percentage of non-broker sales are still higher.
TRNeighbor.com
New member
Why are there buyers still out there not informed on this?...Especially in Irvine...which proves my point that agents are getting lazy. As previously stated, It's an agent's duty to inform buyers of the different types of purchases out there!!! Not sure how much clearer that could be.
If an agent can't help but to be lazy, then maybe they should give their clients a stack of business cards to give to the sales office. If the builder makes a stink about it, then call your agent and have them come in asap. If the buyer is loyal, then they will wait or come back with their agent.
From reading other posts, it appears that most builders are allowing buyers to view the models and return later w an agent; hence bending the rules.
If an agent can't help but to be lazy, then maybe they should give their clients a stack of business cards to give to the sales office. If the builder makes a stink about it, then call your agent and have them come in asap. If the buyer is loyal, then they will wait or come back with their agent.
From reading other posts, it appears that most builders are allowing buyers to view the models and return later w an agent; hence bending the rules.
TRNeighbor.com
New member
@RKP...Not opposed at all...I totally want buyers to get a chunk of their agent's commission back, especially from builders. Heck, if it's being offered by the builder then you're entitled to it. I just don't like hearing agents whine about not getting a fat check when they aren't even there to show/procure the home.
The builder's "incentive" is actually a Referral Fee.
If you got a call from a stranger to buy your product, then at some future point received a call from someone else saying they want a cut for sending in their client to you, how would you feel? I'd say, "Prove It! How do I know they didn't see my marketing on their own"
The builder's "incentive" is actually a Referral Fee.
If you got a call from a stranger to buy your product, then at some future point received a call from someone else saying they want a cut for sending in their client to you, how would you feel? I'd say, "Prove It! How do I know they didn't see my marketing on their own"
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
Technically... it's OUR money.qwerty said:It's easy for all of us to tell the builders what the rules the should be regarding handing out their money
We all know that TI knows more about what buyers want than builders. Yet they don't listen.
#3CWGsWillSellFasterThanCaliRooms
irvinehomeowner said:Technically... it's OUR money.qwerty said:It's easy for all of us to tell the builders what the rules the should be regarding handing out their money
Sounds like a FCB. I pay all cash, I deserve to be on top of the list/a discount/designer credit/broker rebate.
qwerty said:It's easy for all of us to tell the builders what the rules the should be regarding handing out their money
TRNeighbor.com said:
Builder reps lurk on these boards and I think this discussion is valuable. Its not about knowing more than them but an opportunity to provide feedback and for them to evaluate it. It is their money and their choice on how to use it.
I agree that the intent is a referral fee but it is poorly executed and has gaps. Here are just a few that come to mind.
1) Why does the agent have to be present at the first touring vs the buyer noting down their agents name in the sign in card? And don't say its because they want to stop after the fact rebates to buyers as that is fairly new.
2) Who is likely the biggest referrer of a community? Agents or existing early phase buyers? Why does the rebate only go to an agent? Why can't it go to a early phase buyer?
3) If a buyer didn't come in with an agent, why can't some of those funds that were set aside for the referral fee be used to discount the product or offer something else?
4) What is more valuable to a builder? An agent who brings in someone to tour or an agent who brings in someone to sign a purchase agreement? If latter, why not say "agent must be present at signing"?
qwerty
Well-known member
rkp said:qwerty said:It's easy for all of us to tell the builders what the rules the should be regarding handing out their money
TRNeighbor.com said:
Builder reps lurk on these boards and I think this discussion is valuable. Its not about knowing more than them but an opportunity to provide feedback and for them to evaluate it. It is their money and their choice on how to use it.
I agree that the intent is a referral fee but it is poorly executed and has gaps. Here are just a few that come to mind.
1) Why does the agent have to be present at the first touring vs the buyer noting down their agents name in the sign in card? And don't say its because they want to stop after the fact rebates to buyers as that is fairly new.
2) Who is likely the biggest referrer of a community? Agents or existing early phase buyers? Why does the rebate only go to an agent? Why can't it go to a early phase buyer?
3) If a buyer didn't come in with an agent, why can't some of those funds that were set aside for the referral fee be used to discount the product or offer something else?
4) What is more valuable to a builder? An agent who brings in someone to tour or an agent who brings in someone to sign a purchase agreement? If latter, why not say "agent must be present at signing"?
i think in general the answer to these questions is the builder doesnt want to give away money and they want to make it as hard as possible for someone to get the money. I think Pavillion park was 700 homes? 700 x lets say $20,000 co-op is $14,000,000 - that is a lot of money to just give out with no strings attached, even if it is from a separate marketing budget.
TRNeighbor.com
New member
@RKP..
1) to prove the agent procured the buyer.
2) because the buyer is most likely not licensed to sell re, and therefore not entitle to a referral fee greater than $50.
3) a) not fair to those who paid more because that referral money went to their agent. b) they're in the biz to make a profit.
4) the referring agent is not involved w signing, just procuring the buyer. The builder takes over at onset.
1) to prove the agent procured the buyer.
2) because the buyer is most likely not licensed to sell re, and therefore not entitle to a referral fee greater than $50.
3) a) not fair to those who paid more because that referral money went to their agent. b) they're in the biz to make a profit.
4) the referring agent is not involved w signing, just procuring the buyer. The builder takes over at onset.
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
I think co-ops make a difference.
1. For buyers who are easily swayed by the opinion of their agent, an agent will push resale if there is no broker co-op on new.
2. For buyers with agents who will rebate them a portion of a co-op.
If they didn't make a difference, builders would not offer them at all. But I think they understand that there is some incentive by doing so... and quite frankly it's nothing if you consider that their price hikes between each phase is usually more than the co-op.
1. For buyers who are easily swayed by the opinion of their agent, an agent will push resale if there is no broker co-op on new.
2. For buyers with agents who will rebate them a portion of a co-op.
If they didn't make a difference, builders would not offer them at all. But I think they understand that there is some incentive by doing so... and quite frankly it's nothing if you consider that their price hikes between each phase is usually more than the co-op.
irvinehomeowner said:
Ya agents may steer you towards resale but with or without co-op, some buyers are pretty adamant on buying new. They'll just go and buy without an agent. No skin off the buyer's back (if no co-op exists). IMO, the co-op is totally unnecessary but once one builder/tract offers it, the rest have to follow suit. And likewise since one agent started doing kickbacks, the rest have to follow suit. And so now you have the current system where buyers will absolutely factor in the co-op rebate as part of the buying equation.
But let's say there was some rule that prohibited builders from offering co-Ops, would new home sales greatly suffer? Probably not. People love new home smell.