Matthew Rathbun

Oh here's a surprise... I was going to say what Danilo and Jim already have. Let the agreed price in the Buyer Rep Agreement and credit overages. Awhile back I did a comparison of Days on the Market for those that offered incentives for Buyer agents above what has become a "average" commission point. There was no data over a two year period that showed homes with incentives sold faster. I've had a few sellers ask me if we should increase BAC to help entice buyers. My answer has always remained the same - No. Take the incentive you would offer and reduce the asking price. Price sales - no greed. I would never be able to convince a buyer to buy a home because I had was going to get more money. Virginia law and the Realtor Code of Ethics compel an agent to disclose their income (for this service) to the Buyer. I think most Buyer Agents make this disclosure and then just give the overage to the Buyer - should the Lender allow those types of concessions. Having said all that... I don't think evil of Listing Agents or Builders who offer these incentives. They are trying to do EVERYTHING they can to get a buyer in the house, if that means giving up an extra $2,000 to play on the greed of an agent, than unfortunately that's what they may have to do. The Listing Agents job is to get the home sold.

I think that this argument is well founded, but if we can learn anything from the past, it's that the real estate world is epically bad at predicting the real estate future. There are just too many variables. I've heard a great deal about divorcing the commission - and in theory I agree. Only time will tell. There are a great many barriers. I think more than likely, we'll simply see agents as a concierge service and everyone else will use some Google / e-Bay type service.

I think that Frank's invention is like any other innovation. It will have it's critics and growing pains. I applaud the courage it takes to roll this type of progressive program out. There are a lot of unknowns, but we have to start somewhere. There will be some fine tuning over time, and since little to no laws have yet been developed for social media and interactive internet services as of yet, only time will tell. The only point I do want to make to the comments above is that the fear of an agent acting against the scope of their training and provide inaccurate or untrue information is a valid concern. However; if they are doing this on the webpage, then they are doing it with their clients already. Doing it on a venue of this type, just gives undeniable evidence of the improper behavior. It's complicated, for sure; but I think everyone's hope is that listing agents will do such a good job of promoting their listings, that this tool will only enhance the marketing efforts. For those who are uneasy, I understand. All new innovations have come with caution, and should. In 1995, 96 and 97 there were a lot of concerns about buyer agency, before that it was MLS in general. Both of those things have turned out to be good for the consumer.