4 ms·
On a property sale, the owner is choosing to pay a broker to list, show, market, etc. A licensed broker is required to gain access to distribution via MLS. If t
by rabbimarshak 12y ago
On a property sale, the owner is choosing to pay a broker to list, show, market, etc. A licensed broker is required to gain access to distribution via MLS. If the owner wants to show it themselves to save the commission, the are free to do so. In the rental scenario, the customer has to face the 'extortion' of the broker to gain access to the unit. They are not hiring the broker to save them time as with the sale.
- uptown 12y ago"In the rental scenario, the customer has to face the 'extortion' of the broker to gain access to the unit." Not really. The owner of a property could certainly personally show a rental. They just typically choose to hire a property management company to handle that process (as well as the other management tasks) for them, and they outsource the task of finding a renter because it doesn't cost them anything to do so - the renter pays it. Doing it this way allows them to scale their operations by using 3rd parties to handle the showings for as many properties as they own without having to handle it themselves. They have no incentive to change.
- rabbimarshak 12y agoAgree that outsourcing is necessary to scale, but the commission model does cost the landlord indirectly. The argument is not against the use of brokers but changing the fee structure so that the landlord earns more, tenant pays less, and broker is paid for time. Higher rent seems like an incentive to change.
- uptown 12y agoYou still haven't explained why a broker would accept that model when there's plenty of property owners content with sticking to the existing, proven model.