Comments on: Worthy of the public trust? http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/ Seattle's Leading Resource for Real Estate Information Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:01:18 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: JD Blackwell http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-186370 JD Blackwell Fri, 28 Sep 2007 20:07:31 +0000 http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-186370 And that's as it should be, Michelle. There's a big difference between the conventional broker business model of playing the numbers and the satisfaction of doing it right. And that’s as it should be, Michelle. There’s a big difference between the conventional broker business model of playing the numbers and the satisfaction of doing it right.

]]> By: Michelle DeRepentigny http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-186348 Michelle DeRepentigny Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:21:15 +0000 http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-186348 I was a broker for a large, franchised company with 3 offices. I got time of wall hangers (barely active licensees), politics and whining. So I opened a new company with a different perspective and much more rigorous recruiting qualifications. We specialize in serving first time buyers and I'm truly happy again. There is nothing better than the feeling on closing day, knowing you have truly helped someone with one of the most important purchases of their life. I was a broker for a large, franchised company with 3 offices. I got time of wall hangers (barely active licensees), politics and whining. So I opened a new company with a different perspective and much more rigorous recruiting qualifications. We specialize in serving first time buyers and I’m truly happy again. There is nothing better than the feeling on closing day, knowing you have truly helped someone with one of the most important purchases of their life.

]]> By: JD Blackwell http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-186302 JD Blackwell Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:42:39 +0000 http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-186302 BTW, Ardell; while you've never made it any secret that you're a Broker with 60 agents in your office, it might be appropriate to mention in this context that lower standards mean more agents making YOU more money. Success in the typical broker model is predicated on how many agents you get paying you splits. More marginally qualified agents barely making threshold is better for you than fewer, higher qualified agents far exceeding it, leaving you with less. The real business of real estate happens at the level of agent/client. The rest of the "industry" (brokers, NAR and the MLS) are motivated by other things not necessarily in the best interests of agents and consumers. If you want to talk about greed, your end of the industry might be a good place to start. BTW, Ardell; while you’ve never made it any secret that you’re a Broker with 60 agents in your office, it might be appropriate to mention in this context that lower standards mean more agents making YOU more money. Success in the typical broker model is predicated on how many agents you get paying you splits. More marginally qualified agents barely making threshold is better for you than fewer, higher qualified agents far exceeding it, leaving you with less. The real business of real estate happens at the level of agent/client. The rest of the “industry” (brokers, NAR and the MLS) are motivated by other things not necessarily in the best interests of agents and consumers. If you want to talk about greed, your end of the industry might be a good place to start.

]]> By: JD Blackwell http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-186282 JD Blackwell Fri, 28 Sep 2007 16:55:48 +0000 http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-186282 Thinning the number is just a side benefit. The core of my position comes from deeply believing that what we do is a service industry that, done well, puts people in *homes* (notice I didn't say I "sell" houses) at the best possible price without the transactional drama that so often comes with poorly qualified agents. I also believe that the tacitly sacrosanct 6% commission could go the way of the dodo bird if ALL of us were spending more time doing more transactions and less time getting them in the first place. As for the standard I got in on, I brought a whole lot more to the table with it, including an MBA, negotiating skills honed at union contract tables and an engineer's talent for identifying and solving problems. I don't expect ANYONE to match that but I do expect the agents on the other side of my transactions to perform far better far better than 60 hours will get them. I understand Canadian agents are required to have a 4 year degree and that some states require an associates. Did you know that Bellevue Community college has an AA program in real estate? *That* should be the standard we get in on and if you're so worried that I'm trying to close the gate after I got in I'd gladly meet the bar all over again. Not that I wouldn't be gracious enough to grandfather in you and the rest of existing agents. As for greed, I've said before that by doing more transactions I could easily justify giving excellent full service for 4%. I still make a good living, the "limited service" dorks evaporate, the public gets a better deal and we all look like heroes. What do you gain by keeping the bar low? Someone to look down on? Maybe it's the engineer in me but I like being surrounded by intelligence and competence in my colleagues and peers We all perform better in that environment. The 60 hour standard was written when a P&SA was rarely more than 3 pages and any idiot could handle them. The stakes are much higher now and the contracts more complex. The public deserves better and the experience new agents gain shouldn't be coming so much at the hands of unsuspecting buyers and sellers who have every right to expect that a license confers some degree of competence. Thinning the number is just a side benefit. The core of my position comes from deeply believing that what we do is a service industry that, done well, puts people in *homes* (notice I didn’t say I “sell” houses) at the best possible price without the transactional drama that so often comes with poorly qualified agents. I also believe that the tacitly sacrosanct 6% commission could go the way of the dodo bird if ALL of us were spending more time doing more transactions and less time getting them in the first place. As for the standard I got in on, I brought a whole lot more to the table with it, including an MBA, negotiating skills honed at union contract tables and an engineer’s talent for identifying and solving problems. I don’t expect ANYONE to match that but I do expect the agents on the other side of my transactions to perform far better far better than 60 hours will get them. I understand Canadian agents are required to have a 4 year degree and that some states require an associates. Did you know that Bellevue Community college has an AA program in real estate? *That* should be the standard we get in on and if you’re so worried that I’m trying to close the gate after I got in I’d gladly meet the bar all over again. Not that I wouldn’t be gracious enough to grandfather in you and the rest of existing agents. As for greed, I’ve said before that by doing more transactions I could easily justify giving excellent full service for 4%. I still make a good living, the “limited service” dorks evaporate, the public gets a better deal and we all look like heroes. What do you gain by keeping the bar low? Someone to look down on? Maybe it’s the engineer in me but I like being surrounded by intelligence and competence in my colleagues and peers We all perform better in that environment. The 60 hour standard was written when a P&SA was rarely more than 3 pages and any idiot could handle them. The stakes are much higher now and the contracts more complex. The public deserves better and the experience new agents gain shouldn’t be coming so much at the hands of unsuspecting buyers and sellers who have every right to expect that a license confers some degree of competence.

]]> By: ARDELL http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-186028 ARDELL Fri, 28 Sep 2007 04:54:02 +0000 http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-186028 Like I said, those who want to raise the entry standard want a bigger piece, and are using "raising the standard" as a means to their end. More greed based talk. Wasn't that the standard that got YOU in? It was OK for you but not others? How do you justify THAT logic beyond more money for you? Pretty crappy argument. There is NO entry standard that will replace experienced agents sharing their knowledge with newer agents. You're just looking for a way to thin the numbers it seems. Like I said, those who want to raise the entry standard want a bigger piece, and are using “raising the standard” as a means to their end. More greed based talk. Wasn’t that the standard that got YOU in? It was OK for you but not others? How do you justify THAT logic beyond more money for you? Pretty crappy argument.

There is NO entry standard that will replace experienced agents sharing their knowledge with newer agents. You’re just looking for a way to thin the numbers it seems.

]]> By: JD Blackwell http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-185924 JD Blackwell Fri, 28 Sep 2007 01:13:33 +0000 http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-185924 Spend some time in England (NYC for that matter) and you might come away with the impression that if real estate agents were anywhere near as qualified and competent as the taxi drivers that the industry AND the public trust would be in a much better place. The number of taxi licenses is limited presumably to maintain a high standard and, according to a Baltimore cabbie I know, to assure that a balance is met between transportation needs and and to protect the drivers (self employed contractors) from having to resort to unsafe or illegal practices to make a living. Raising the standards would pretty much weed out the part-timers, hobby agents and the not-so-bright and that's a good thing. Just understand that limiting the number of licensees in a given profession in the public interest does indeed have precedent. I don't quite get the "cut the pie smaller" comment. I want a bigger piece and I think the people eating it should demonstrate a much higher level of education and training than the piddling 60 hours currently required. It would be better for consumers and better for our collective image as well. Beyond that, I don't think we're too far apart. Perhaps my way of getting there is a bit more aggressive and not terribly friendly to the industry status quo as some have the stomach for. Raising the standard will certainly have the effe Spend some time in England (NYC for that matter) and you might come away with the impression that if real estate agents were anywhere near as qualified and competent as the taxi drivers that the industry AND the public trust would be in a much better place. The number of taxi licenses is limited presumably to maintain a high standard and, according to a Baltimore cabbie I know, to assure that a balance is met between transportation needs and and to protect the drivers (self employed contractors) from having to resort to unsafe or illegal practices to make a living. Raising the standards would pretty much weed out the part-timers, hobby agents and the not-so-bright and that’s a good thing. Just understand that limiting the number of licensees in a given profession in the public interest does indeed have precedent.

I don’t quite get the “cut the pie smaller” comment. I want a bigger piece and I think the people eating it should demonstrate a much higher level of education and training than the piddling 60 hours currently required. It would be better for consumers and better for our collective image as well.

Beyond that, I don’t think we’re too far apart. Perhaps my way of getting there is a bit more aggressive and not terribly friendly to the industry status quo as some have the stomach for.

Raising the standard will certainly have the effe

]]> By: ARDELL http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-185683 ARDELL Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:40:48 +0000 http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-185683 JD, Not sure why people with "liquor licenses and tax drivers" should represent some kind of "bar raising" due to limiting the amount of licensees. I have no desire to make agents as good as taxi drivers :) Every time I see "reduce the amount of licensees", I see someone wanting the pie to be cut into smaller pieces. It never sounds like better...it sounds like someone wanting more, by cutting out some of the competition. I'm in Kirkland, but I'm more into hands on change, than sitting around chatting about Pareto Curves. It's only been 30 days since I've accepted a challenge to influence change, but so far I'm hopeful. Seems that at least 50% of that 80% are hungering for real knowledge and skill. Real change is a slow process, but I hope to see some measurable results within 12 months. I'd rather build a model for others to follow, than sit around talking about what's wrong with "other brokers". Someone has to prove, with real results, that it can be done, and that the public will support this change for the better. Just as buyers and sellers should have more options as to cost, agents should have more options as to management style and Company focus. At the moment I'm too ticked off about the foot on the necks of agents regarding MLS download agreements. I could spit blood about how the brokers control the MLS in a way that does not support the growth of agents as individual businesses within the broker model. Clearly voting should represent both Brokers and Member Agents, and not just Brokers trying to steer everyone to Company vs. Agent. Keeping members weak, within a system of landlord policy making, as if the landlords are the ones footing the bill, is my puke point this week. JD,

Not sure why people with “liquor licenses and tax drivers” should represent some kind of “bar raising” due to limiting the amount of licensees. I have no desire to make agents as good as taxi drivers :)

Every time I see “reduce the amount of licensees”, I see someone wanting the pie to be cut into smaller pieces. It never sounds like better…it sounds like someone wanting more, by cutting out some of the competition.

I’m in Kirkland, but I’m more into hands on change, than sitting around chatting about Pareto Curves. It’s only been 30 days since I’ve accepted a challenge to influence change, but so far I’m hopeful. Seems that at least 50% of that 80% are hungering for real knowledge and skill. Real change is a slow process, but I hope to see some measurable results within 12 months.

I’d rather build a model for others to follow, than sit around talking about what’s wrong with “other brokers”. Someone has to prove, with real results, that it can be done, and that the public will support this change for the better.

Just as buyers and sellers should have more options as to cost, agents should have more options as to management style and Company focus.

At the moment I’m too ticked off about the foot on the necks of agents regarding MLS download agreements. I could spit blood about how the brokers control the MLS in a way that does not support the growth of agents as individual businesses within the broker model. Clearly voting should represent both Brokers and Member Agents, and not just Brokers trying to steer everyone to Company vs. Agent.

Keeping members weak, within a system of landlord policy making, as if the landlords are the ones footing the bill, is my puke point this week.

]]> By: JD Blackwell http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-185548 JD Blackwell Thu, 27 Sep 2007 06:47:04 +0000 http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-185548 The "Rudy" story is charming and happens just barely often enough to prevent it from being completely beyond the realm of possibilities. Those Rudys still came in under qualified and somehow managed to afford to spend nearly all of their time doing the things that may get him a listing or a buyer and virtually none learning the essential nuts and bolts of taking care of a client. How long did it take those Rudys to get good at it with only 60 clock hours? 10? 20? How many of those Rudy clients wound up losing money when an experienced agent on the other side danced them through the transaction *his* way? And Rudy is one of the 20% who make it past his first renewal. What about the other 80%? They may have enough relatives to get them a few transactions but they invariably deliver a less than dazzling performance. This mediocrity drags us all down and creates a glutted industry where the Pareto Curve is turned the wrong way; instead of spending 80% of our time and resources getting the client in the first place we should be spending it doing the deals. The Rudys of the world will thrive regardless of how high the bar is set. The rest won't try. The “Rudy” story is charming and happens just barely often enough to prevent it from being completely beyond the realm of possibilities. Those Rudys still came in under qualified and somehow managed to afford to spend nearly all of their time doing the things that may get him a listing or a buyer and virtually none learning the essential nuts and bolts of taking care of a client. How long did it take those Rudys to get good at it with only 60 clock hours? 10? 20? How many of those Rudy clients wound up losing money when an experienced agent on the other side danced them through the transaction *his* way? And Rudy is one of the 20% who make it past his first renewal. What about the other 80%? They may have enough relatives to get them a few transactions but they invariably deliver a less than dazzling performance. This mediocrity drags us all down and creates a glutted industry where the Pareto Curve is turned the wrong way; instead of spending 80% of our time and resources getting the client in the first place we should be spending it doing the deals. The Rudys of the world will thrive regardless of how high the bar is set. The rest won’t try.

]]> By: Rhonda Porter http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-185341 Rhonda Porter Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:46:10 +0000 http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-185341 Jillayne would have a hay-day with their definition of a Loan Officer: http://www.bls.gov/k12/money03.htm Jillayne would have a hay-day with their definition of a Loan Officer: http://www.bls.gov/k12/money03.htm

]]> By: ARDELL http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-185240 ARDELL Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:38:35 +0000 http://raincityguide.com/2007/09/25/worthy-of-the-public-trust/#comment-185240 http://www.raincityguide.com/2006/11/17/rudy-the-realtor/ Here's the Rudy the Realtor piece I wrote almost a year ago. http://www.raincityguide.com/2006/11/17/rudy-the-realtor/

Here’s the Rudy the Realtor piece I wrote almost a year ago.

]]>