Broker for owners - benefits / advantages?

No, separations! No one wants to handle the house sale together or individually anymore. That would mostly only cause bad blood if one makes concessions on the price and the other gets less money.

aha... So that's where the wind blows from.

Sure, I absolutely agree with you! During a separation, you have no head for negotiations etc... 100% agreement.

The price for this "relief" through the broker – namely the lower proceeds achieved (broker fee) – must of course also be paid. It's a service. It is ordered and must be paid for. Absolutely understandable in the case of a separation.

So I add: (According to today's market situation – 2017)

When does a broker make sense?

- Bad location
- You live too far away to conduct viewings (although there are cheaper solutions for that).
- Separations (although there are different kinds. But generally understandable).
- You are 100 years old and correspondingly poor on foot.

When does a broker not make sense?

- Well, unless we are talking about the luxury class or a ruin in an extremely bad location, then in today's market situation a broker makes no sense, except for the points mentioned above.

You think!
The crux is: no one wants to spend more on a house than it is worth. Whether with or without a real estate agent.

Have you ever sold a house @ Farido?
Or should I ask: have you ever BOUGHT a house?

I know, those resistant to advice will never change their opinion, that's a fact [emoji2]

No one wants to spend more than it is worth. I totally agree with you.

If the house is worth 400k and you want that amount (rightfully so), then you shouldn't hire an agent. Because if someone is willing to pay 400k (because that's what the house is worth), they won't pay 430k.

If the house is worth 400k and the buyer would additionally pay an agent, then the house is just worth that. Meaning; 430k. Supply and demand.
Therefore, you would have thrown away 30k.

And yes, I have already bought a house. Remember? The one by the lake in Hamburg for under 100k with 1000sqm of land? The lucky find.

That's why I can have this debate about agents back and forth quite calmly. Either way, I didn't have to pay for one 8-)

Nobody wants to spend more than something is worth. I totally agree with you.

If the house is worth 400k and you want that amount (rightly so), then you shouldn't hire an agent. Because if someone is willing to pay 400k (because that’s what the house is worth), then they won’t pay 430k.

If the house is worth 400k and the buyer would also pay an agent, then the house would also be worth that. In other words; 430k. Supply and demand.
Therefore, you would have wasted 30k.

And yes, I have already bought a house. Remember? The one by the lake in Hamburg for under 100k with 1000 sqm of land? The lucky break.

That’s why I can have this debate about agents calmly. Either way, I didn’t have to pay this one anyway.

That’s a naive calculation.
Most people here have built or plan to build.
If you add up all costs, starting from the plot, ancillary building costs, house price, outdoor facilities, furnishings (kitchen), etc., you end up with a price that is far higher than the property’s value after completion.
Yet it’s done anyway.
Likewise, when buying a house, there are other ancillary costs like notary fees and especially real estate transfer tax (6.5%).
Since this levy is simply extracted by law from the state and even though this compulsory payment cannot be avoided and no service is provided in return, hardly anyone complains about it.
However, about the “outrageous” agent, who is (rightly) compensated for their time and money spent but often can achieve a higher selling price, people grumble as if they are stealing money.
Everyone is free to decide whether to use an agent’s services and contacts, and the buyer is equally free to exclude such properties if an agent is involved.

Hi,

I think we interpret the word "milkmaid's calculation" differently.

The

Since this is simply squeezed out by the state through legislation and although this compulsory levy cannot be avoided and there is no service in return, hardly anyone gets upset about it.

1) surely SOME people do get upset about it.
2) if you have decided on a house, you cannot avoid these costs. In contrast, you can easily avoid an agent.

However, people complain about the "outrageous" agent, who is (rightly) compensated for his time and money spent, and who can often achieve a higher selling price, as if he were stealing money from them.
Everyone is free to use the services and contacts of an agent, and likewise the buyer is free to exclude properties when an agent is involved.

Complaining about the agent is not the issue at all. He does everything right.
It was about whether you NEED one or not.
And I clearly stated my view on this question further above.

If the state asked me whether I WOULD LIKE to pay property tax or not, I would say "no."

I just wanted to say that people might get briefly upset about the GES, but that's usually it. Real estate agents are sometimes downright demonized as money-hungry profiteers who get paid way too much for no service, etc. Of course, you can sell your property privately, but that can be harder than you think, and in the end, you end up offering it below value just to get rid of it. On Ebay Classifieds, a house priced around 400k€ has been listed for many months in a very nice location. The house certainly has that value, and off the top of my head, I can think of 2-3 interested parties from our portfolio, at least one of whom would be 90% likely to buy the house. I also told the owner that he would have to sign a contract with us, but as a seller, he wouldn't have to pay anything, only to be legally secured that the contact goes through us. However, the owner refuses to accept that we earn money from the sale and therefore won't sign anything. Moreover, if the contact were to come through us, which it won't without a contract, he even demands half of the buyer's commission!!! In other words, he wants half the pay for our work. He has been trying to sell his house this way for at least half a year without success, and we have 3 interested parties who have to keep waiting, just because some people are so stubborn and see real estate agents as a red rag.

I told the owner that as well, also that although he would have to make a contract with us, as a seller he doesn’t have to pay anything, ...

Why actually? Why from your point of view does the BUYER have to foot the bill for a service that the seller uses from you?

In other words, he still wants half the wage for our work.

Can we make it concrete, what exactly is being worked on for just over 16k in this case? Maybe this transparency will also help the agent convince all the critics when they see what the money is being charged for?