quote:

Originally posted by jaaron11:
Thanks for all of the responses. I'm a bit surprised that there's not more love for FSBO, but it's hard to argue with experience.

Interesting read for me. With the smarts this group has and for most to say go with a realtor, if I were in this situation one day, I would hire a realtor.

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
In my experience owner-sellers often don't have a realistic idea of where their home sits in the market, because of their attachment to it and all the labor they put into it which they expect will lead to higher profit.

This.

What you know for sure as a buyer looking at a FSBO is that the seller is trying to save 3% by DIY selling. DIYers generally are not experts in pricing real estate, and are generally emotionally attached to their current home. So at the get-go, potential buyers have reason to expect that 1) that the beastie is probably priced above market, and 2) that the sale and closing probably would not proceed as smoothly as one where both buyer and seller have professional help.

Now that's a general assumption, and sure there are exceptions to the presumption of an inexpert, emotional seller and of proficient, expert brokers. But my generic advice to a buyer interested in an FSBO property would be to assume the pricing is off at least 3% or more and factor that in the offer, and to expect surprises during the due diligence and close.

quote:

Originally posted by jaaron11:
Thanks for all of the responses. I'm a bit surprised that there's not more love for FSBO, but it's hard to argue with experience.

Experience isn't expensive. It's priceless

Realtors, inflating the price of housing for over a hundred years.

Unless it is a really hot property, I've always seen houses listed by Realtors sell faster and for more money. A lot of people are afraid of the home buying process to begin with and dealing directly with a private seller makes them more apprehensive.

My neighbors had their house FSBO for like 8 months for $675k.....finally they gave it to a realtor and ended up listing it for more money and sold it for $732k a month after listing it.

I've sold many homes over the years, the most recent one in November, and have never used a realtor. No way I'm paying someone who doesn't know my house as well as I do $10-20K to sell it for me.

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:
Unless it is a really hot property, I've always seen houses listed by Realtors sell faster and for more money. A lot of people are afraid of the home buying process to begin with and dealing directly with a private seller makes them more apprehensive.

My neighbors had their house FSBO for like 8 months for $675k.....finally they gave it to a realtor and ended up listing it for more money and sold it for $732k a month after listing it.

My experience is mostly the opposite seeing homes listed through realtors being overpriced (to get the listing) only to languish on the market to eventually sell for a lot less.

I've sold and bought FSBO once and it was because it was a hot market here in Denver. At the time there were several good companies that did all the paperwork and closing for a set fee, (500 bucks or something)everything went off without a hitch.

A lot has to do with the market and your situation, how fast you need a close and the market and how business savvy you are.

I wouldn't have tried to do it without help. I wouldn't hesitate to do it again all things being equal.

Last house we sold we listed with a realtor called something like 1-2-3 (it’s been a long time). They advertised a variable rate commission depending on how much work the owner wanted to do, so it was a type of hybrid between FSBO and a do-it-all realtor. Worked well for us as we had them handle all the legal paperwork while we did open house showings, etc. Might think about something like that if you prefer trading your time for lower commission costs.

My suggestion is to find a flat fee agent, such as redefy.com or trelora.com .

The internet has changed how buyers look for, and find, properties. Listing agents do little, in my opinion, to justify taking a 3% commission. As long as you get realistic asking price, good photos, good description on the MLS, Zillow.com, redfin.com, trulia.com, etc, buyers' agents, and the buyers themselves, will drive viewings of the property, and ultimately bring offers. The flat fee agents can give you that service, and save you a ton of money.

Those "flat fee" agents allow you to decide what to offer the buyer's agent, wether it's a flat fee, or a percentage of the sale price. Unless the market you're selling in strongly favors sellers, I'd suggest offering the buyer's agent the "traditional" percentage, or close to it, for your market. While buyers' agents are supposed to show all the properties that meet their buyers' criteria, some will steer their clients away from properties where the seller is offering a commission well below the "traditional" percentage.

To see how much you can save, if you offer a buyer's agent a 3% commission, and pay a flat fee of $3000 for listing, on $300,000 property, you will save approximately $6000.

There is some value to using a traditional agent for buying, especially if you're first time buyer, and/or moving to an area with which you're very unfamiliar. However, even then some savvy buyers don't need the expertise of a traditional buyer's agent.

The very first home I ever bought, I found the property on my own, approached the seller's agent, and explained I was basing my offer on NOT paying a buyer's agent commission, and I saved that 3%. That was done long before sights like Zillow or Redfin existed. With the information so easily available on the internet, that is more realistic for many people.