Menu
TwitterRssFacebook
More Links

Are you looking for an experienced agent to help you buy or sell a home? Contact Jim the Realtor!

Carlsbad
(760) 434-5000

Carmel Valley
(858) 560-7700
jim@jimklinge.com


Category Archive: ‘Realtor’

Strict Code of Ethics?

Want to know how serious the National Association of Realtors is about our ‘strict Code of Ethics’?  They paid for this ad:

I love Phil Dunphy when he is playing a realtor on the show Modern Family, but this is different – he is representing the agents on the street in these ads.

We have a few seconds to impress upon the consumer how serious we take our Code of Ethics, and that’s the best we can do?

Posted by on May 22, 2017 in Ethics, Jim's Take on the Market, Realtor | 0 comments

Real Estate Made for TV

People want to see cut-throat realtors! Video here:

http://www.ocregister.com/2017/05/18/orange-county-real-estate-wars-to-debut-on-bravo-tv-july-6/

“Real Estate Wars,” a Bravo-TV reality show pitting Orange County agents against one another as they try to woo wealthy clients and settle bitter scores against a backdrop of luxury homes, will debut on Thursday, July 6 at 10 p.m.

The show “brings the cut-throat world of real estate in Orange County to life,” Bravo said in its announcement on Thursday, May 18. “With 10 agents, eccentric clients, multi-million dollar deals, old vendettas, and one common goal of winning, all is fair in real estate and war.”

Posted by on May 18, 2017 in Jim's Take on the Market, Listing Agent Practices, Realtor, Realtors Talking Shop | 1 comment

The Future of Selling Homes

The onslaught of new-fangled ways to sell homes is getting bogged down in their own zeal – there are so many choices now, which way do you go?  You have the sexy off-market package driven by celebrity realtors above, or the typical new-age mobile app at a discount below:


Find Home from Reali on Vimeo.

The Winners?

  1.  The widget that spends $100 million/year on advertising.
  2.  Single agency.

The scarcity of sales should drive more agents out of the business, and the those agents who remain will be increasingly focused on putting their own buyers and sellers together.

We have the listing agents who hold listings off-market in order to find their own buyer, but there are also agents who will do ‘sold before processing’ with an outside agent. This happens quite frequently.

If a listing agent isn’t going to round-trip the commission, and instead let a second agent represent the buyer – why wouldn’t you do what is best for your own client (the seller), and expose it to all agents via the MLS?

An old veteran agent told me that he hoped he would sell his new listing before MLS input, and he did – and an outside agent represented the buyer.  The house had been vacant for years so there wasn’t an occupant who held up the showings – all he had to do was install a lockbox, take a few photos with his phone, and spend 15-30 minutes doing the MLS input.

He did input the listing onto the MLS after he found the buyer, so was it the installing of the lockbox and taking a few photos too much of a burden?

Why wouldn’t he do what is best for his seller?

He must either be flat out lazy, or he wanted everyone on the MLS to see that he was the latest to breach his fiduciary duty.  It is like a badge of honor!

The realtor business is slowly eroding right before our eyes.

Save

Posted by on May 15, 2017 in Frenzy, Jim's Take on the Market, Listing Agent Practices, Realtor, Realtor Training | 0 comments

Dual Agency Is No Good?

The idea of an agent representing both buyer and seller in the same transaction gets a lot of play among realtors and consumers alike.

The do-gooder agents will tell you to get your own realtor, instead of relying on the listing agent to be your agent too.  Most of their arguments are centered around the listing agent being more loyal to the seller, so obviously the buyers will get screwed.

But have you noticed how often you see a low sale (which stand out these days because they are so rare) being a result of the listing agent representing both parties?  The buyer and agent conspire to write a low offer, and somehow the agent convinces the seller that it’s the best they can do.

It usually a long-time listing, where sellers are giving up hope – and they let down their defenses because of the lack of offers.

Before sellers take a lowball offer, especially written by the listing agent, they should insist on lowering the price to the midpoint to see if there are any other takers out there.

Usually if a listing has languished for more than a month or two, buyers give up on it, rather than making a lower offer. A decent price reduction could get it back on their radar, and give the house a chance to sell for fair-market value.

Posted by on May 13, 2017 in Jim's Take on the Market, Realtor | 0 comments

Real Estate Speed Dating

Real estate hysteria is reaching new levels:

LINK

It sounds like an unorthodox concept: Meeting complete strangers to see if you’re compatible to buy a house together. But as bizarre as it might sound, that’s exactly what happened on the third floor of the Toronto bar the Pilot in Yorkville on Thursday night.

Lesli Gaynor, the organizer of C-Harmony: Creating Co-operative Connections said the idea came to her when she watched her sons using dating apps.

“I have three young men and I was thinking about their reality and thinking about all of the apps they engage with on a daily basis and one of them has … used a dating site,” Gaynor said.

“It literally occurred to me that why can’t we take that kind of app or that style of meeting people and apply it to different things. It works for romance, so I think it could work for a mortgage.”

Gaynor said prospective buyers would combine financial resources to purchase real estate in Toronto.

“I combine my revenue with your revenue and your income with my income, we have more buying power and then we buy a property,” she said.

The former social worker turned real estate agent said while it seems unconventional, the idea of sharing space with strangers happens more often than you might think.

“People share homes all the time but there is a landlord,” she said.

“You might rent the bottom of a house and I might be your upstairs flatmate and it’s just that it’s controlled by a landlord as opposed to being controlled by you.”

Gaynor said she wants to stress that there is no expectation that participants need to exchange information and the evening was meant to open people up to the idea of co-operative purchasing.

“We are hoping people will meet and discuss their needs and they might go ‘hey, I really really like you and I could potentially buy a house with you’ with a solid legal agreement,” she said.

Posted by on May 7, 2017 in Jim's Take on the Market, Realtor, Realtors Talking Shop, The Future | 2 comments

Offering Too Low

Part of a realtor’s job is to help manage expectations – not only those of their own clients, but expectations of the other agents and their clients too.

Recently I received an offer on a listing that was 25% under the list price.  They also wanted my seller to carry the financing for 30 years – which is unheard of – and oh yeah, it was contingent upon the sale of the buyers’ home too.

I told the agent (whose email-signature noted they were in the Top 10 statewide for their company) that if I was the seller and that offer was presented, I’d fire my agent.

Just like when we’ve seen a home with range-pricing that is too wide, it becomes impossible to bridge the gap – for three reasons:

  1.  Once a buyer puts a number on paper, their mind starts believing it’s real.
  2.  Buyer’s remorse is real too, and they cool off quickly.
  3.  Sellers are skeptical, and don’t feel like negotiating much.

It may be discussed as just a place to start, but once a buyer submits their price in writing, it becomes a comfortable number.  Going much higher than where they start is usually a function of how fast agents respond.  My rule-of-thumb is two counters max for each side, in less than four days.

In this case, my sellers weren’t desperate, they had already determined that they wanted to sell for at least 93% of list and were willing to wait for it.  I told the buyer’s agent that our price gap was too big, and I nicely asked the agent and buyers to go back to the drawing board.

Three days later, I received a new offer with bank financing, instead of seller-carry, but it still had the original price of 25% under list. It came with the buyers’ love letter; a full-page of reasons why my listing was the perfect fit for the buyers.

Was the love going to make the looming price gap surmountable?

In spite of houses around the county selling for 99% of list this year, we countered with a price that is 4% under our list – not bad, considering the original offer price.  On their counter, the buyers came up to 82% of list, but it took two days to arrive.  I knew the remaining price gap and time left wasn’t looking good.

I always want to respond promptly, because of #2 above – buyers cool off quickly.  We dropped another 2% within a few hours, but it wasn’t enough.  Two days later, the agent emailed that they lost interest – no counter, no love.

Five days gone by (seven days since the original offer), and the initial 25% gap killed our chances.  They knew before writing the offer that it would take at least 93% of list to buy the property, and they still offered – so initially there was some willingness to pay that or close.

If they would have started at 82% of list, and trimmed the time spent to 3-4 days, could we have made it to escrow?  I think so!

Posted by on Apr 18, 2017 in Jim's Take on the Market, Realtor, Realtor Training, Why You Should Hire Jim as your Buyer's Agent, Why You Should List With Jim | 4 comments

Realtor Rules of Engagement

We are in the business of selling thousands of homes every year (last year in San Diego County we sold 23,962 homes worth $17,168,811,888).

Wouldn’t you think that there would be a set of rules to guide us?  There isn’t, and what’s worse is that you don’t know what to expect on each house for sale:

  • Will the listing agent create a bidding war?
  • Will the listing agent take the first offer?
  • Will they do their advertised open houses, or not?
  • Will the listing agent tilt the table, and take his own buyer’s offer?

Each sale is different, and there is no telling what will happen.  The uncertainty creates an environment where qualified buyers are denied the ability to compete, and the chaos helps to fuel the buyer frustration, which keeps the frenzy going.

Think if we had a marketplace where you knew that every home was going to be sold the same way. Pick any process – it would bring a logical, business sense to the market if everyone played by the same rules!

I believe that the auction format is the process that is the fairest, but there isn’t a consensus among the big industry players to change anything about the current environment.  Will it ever improve?

This week I submitted an offer on behalf of a buyer, and the listing agent reported that he had multiple offers.  I asked:

“Are you the kind of agent who discloses the other offers?” and included this video from last week:

He said he would need to ask someone, and then wondered, “Are you one of those agents who would”?  I said, “Absolutely, it’s in everyone’s best interest – agents, buyers, and especially sellers.”

Twenty minutes later, he tells me the price and details about the offers on the table, and the price of a previous escrow that didn’t work out – it was the highest of the bunch. He also said that he expected more offers, and that they will just take the best one.

He also added, “You were the only one to ask for more info, so there you go 🙂  Good job working for your clients.”

The industry will be reluctant to adopt the auction format, but maybe we can take baby steps and get there eventually.

Posted by on Apr 1, 2017 in Auctions, Jim's Take on the Market, Listing Agent Practices, Realtor, Realtor Training | 3 comments

Relief from Realtors

Hat tip to Richard:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/jersey-city-creates-no-knock-registry-as-relief-from-realtors-1490741911

Longtime homeowners in Jersey City, N.J., are trying to put the kibosh on endless aggressive real estate solicitations sparked by a hot property market.

In response to complaints, the Jersey City Council unanimously passed a resolution creating an anti-solicitation city program referred to as a “No Knock” registry. Residents that sign up will receive “No Knock” decals for their front doors, and violators who continue to inquire at those homes can be fined up to $2,000 and sentenced to 90 days of community service.

“It’s something that we want to address and do it in a proactive way that builds community as opposed to creating conflict,” said Council President Rolando Lavarro.

The population of Jersey City, the state’s second-largest municipality, grew 6.7% between 2010 and 2015, according to the U.S. Census.

Median housing prices there have increased 17% over the last six years, to $305,000 in 2016 from $260,000 in 2010, according to RealtyTrac.

Amid the rapid residential development, longtime homeowners say that persistent offers from real-estate investors and developers have at times escalated to the point of harassment.

Assunta Folcarelli, a crossing guard who has owned her Jersey City home for 35 years, said realtors started calling her six years ago asking to buy her home. She has repeatedly declined but said solicitors continue to call, show up at her door and send her letters.

“They keep on calling up, they want my house. I say, ‘Wait a minute, where am I going to go?’” said Ms. Folcarelli, 57 years old. “It’s kind of scary.”

Michael Griffin, a lifelong Jersey City resident and local activist, supported the registry’s creation but said the city needs to do more to protect vulnerable homeowners from developers. Mr. Griffin said the city needs to educate residents about cash offers, including in several neighborhoods where many homeowners live at or below the poverty line and the old Victorian and brownstone homes are attractive to developers, he said.

“Not too many people in my community have seen that much money at one time,” Mr. Griffin said. “It may look like a sweet deal to them, but they might not be realizing the taxes involved when you take a lump sum of cash like that, or not thinking what their next move might be. Will you be able to sustain yourself just by renting? Rents in Jersey City are high.”

Posted by on Mar 30, 2017 in Jim's Take on the Market, Market Buzz, Realtor | 1 comment

BRE on Realtor Teams

Broker supervision is a nice idea but rarely practiced.  We need perp walks!

In September 2015, the California Bureau of Real Estate (CalBRE) issued an advisory which was captioned “Disciplinary Warning to Real Estate Salespersons Who Act, Conduct Themselves, and/or Advertise as ‘Independent’ Real Estate Professionals — and a Simultaneous Caution to Brokers Who Allow or Support Such Practices”.

(http://www.calbre.ca.gov/files/pdf/adv/Independent%20Real%20Estate%20Professionals.pdf)

Licensees of CalBRE are well advised to review that prior advisory since we continue to see some of the same bad practices identified in that writing.

This discipline “advisory” is being issued as a supplement to that prior warning since CalBRE has taken notice of the use by some real estate salespersons of names and designations (and attendant Internet and marketing materials) that suggest to the public – and mislead consumers into falsely believing – that such salespersons are real estate brokers.

A scenario that we have repeatedly seen is the use by a salesperson (who for this illustration we will identify as John Doe) of a fictitious business name that would lead members of the public to incorrectly believe that the business is operated and managed by a real estate broker. In this example, salesperson Doe conducts business using the name Doe Real Estate.  Doe advertises using that business name, and the advertisements are connected to, or accompanied by, a webpage and other materials that extol the virtues of Doe Real Estate.  The public would not think that Doe is a salesperson who must be supervised by another, and would most certainly conclude that Doe Real Estate is a real estate broker or brokerage.  And the above practices are unlawful.

In addition to the above, many salespersons continue to brand and identify themselves as “independent” real estate practitioners, and they practice and advertise as such.  Unless those salespersons are operating as “teams”, in full compliance with the California laws and rules pertaining to teams (e.g., the disclosure of I.D numbers and the name of responsible broker, and the surname of at least one of the licensee members of the team along with the use of the terms “team”, “group” or associates” with regard to the team), that is unlawful as well.

Further, and depending on the specific language employed with respect to the name(s) and designation(s) used by the real estate salespersons, there might be a violation of the law relative to the use of fictitious names.  Please see the prior guidance given by CalBRE on the proper use and licensing of fictitious names.

As was also stated in the prior warning, under California law, with its two-tiered licensing system, real estate salespersons cannot provide – or advertise that they can provide – real estate services independently of their responsible brokers.

Likewise, salespersons must be associated or affiliated with, and be reasonably supervised by (which supervision includes broker review of the advertising used by the broker’s salesperson or salespersons pursuant to Commissioner’s Regulation 2725(e)) a responsible broker in order to engage in real estate licensed activities in California.  The law provides no exceptions.

CalBRE will take appropriate disciplinary action (including the imposition of significant fines, and  – where appropriate – the revocation of licensure) against real estate salespersons who engage in the unlawful activities discussed above, and against real estate brokers who permit their salespersons to engage in such activities.

Save

Posted by on Mar 24, 2017 in Jim's Take on the Market, Realtor, Realtor Training | 0 comments