3 ms·
I can see this point of view for a developer/builder, maybe… but that often comes in the form of a warranty or builder guarantees. You talk about increased liqu
by calmworm 3y ago
I can see this point of view for a developer/builder, maybe… but that often comes in the form of a warranty or builder guarantees. You talk about increased liquidity as if homes are a commodity, traded quickly and often. This isn’t the case. I can’t even imagine how this scenario you’ve imagined plays out.
The real estate agent should not be required to guarantee that their clients home will be “liked” for X months or years. This makes no sense.
- plagiarist 3y agoFor 3% of the purchase price on inventory of $100k+ they absolutely should be accountable for their client being satisfied with the purchase.
- calmworm 3y agoThese are specific lines you’ve drawn. Maybe you can provide a scenario in which this is accountability is required… A good agent will spend the entire 30-45 day process ensuring their client is getting what they want and what they are paying for. A good agent does not want a buyer to end up in a house that is bad for them in any way. And even then that’s only counting the days between the acceptance of an offer to closing day. Oftentimes an agent will spend months or even a year or more with clients.
- plagiarist 3y agoIt is strange that you claim you cannot imagine how selling a primary residence sooner than expected increases the number of houses being sold, but you do have the imagination to pretend an agent is working full time for single clients in 30-45 day stretches to ensure they get what they want (despite misaligned incentives to do so). And that they "often" spend a year on this.
- calmworm 3y agoYou’re exaggerating my claims and won’t answer for your own.