Are you backtracking now?

I hope you’re not this guy.

http://publicinformation.seattle.gov/cpi/smc.publicInformation.search.action.defendant.defendantNumber.action?defendantNumber=94033

Why? Total waste of time, effort and resources, IMHO.

Every time I hear an agent talking about improving or changing their site I think about my Teamster days in college. After work I’d sometimes have some of the guys up, and one of them commented on the pet rat I had in a cage. He said: “Do you think he fantasizes about a girl rat climbing up onto the table and getting into the cage with him?”

I sort of view agent websites that way. “If only I had a better website, the clients would find me.”

It clearly is our duty to sell at the highest price when we represent sellers. The issue at hand is that many, if not most agents, don’t receive sufficient training regarding how to represent buyers in opposite fashion.

I took the ABR “Accredited Buyer Representation” course. I was so appalled by the curriculum that I do not use the “credential”. One would think that to be an ABR one would receive sufficient instruction regarding valuing property for a buyer. Clearly we value property for a seller, and offer advices as to now or later being better. So why not buyers?

Beyond that, cost of service and contracted for service becomes the same as stock broker – no advices vs. stock broker with advices.

The difference is in the cost. “Online Purchase” Real Estate Brokerages are not including advices in their cost structure. So if advices are not included in the higher cost service, the cost shouldn’t be higher than an online order taking service.

Here’s a question, are agents licensed by law to “sell” a home? In order to sell stocks or bonds you need a series 7 and 63 license I believe. If the answer is “no” then technically all agents can do is offer advice or opinion right?

Personally, I would like to see more agents do less “selling” even if that means they don’t close the deal. Hopefully, the next wave of agents won’t be so eager to pump up the market.

Comparing Redmond vs. Duvall is like comparing two separate industries in the stock market. Choosing which house within the preferred area, is the same as choosing which stock within the preferred industry.

Agents generally make a lot more than stock traders who offer advices, so suggesting they shouldn’t apply the same skillset is like saying agents are overpaid.

Everyone knows that their stock and portfolio advisor can’t always be right, same as an agent regarding home values. But you pick your stock broker and agent based on the fact that they will at least have an educated and informed opinion.

When someone asks, and they do, “What can I sell this for in two years?” I clearly tell them in any market that I cannot tell them that. Many are surprised, so I’m guessing some agents actually put a number on that. But I do tell them whether or not the likelihood is up or down for the market generally and for that particular house specifically.

When the market may be flat to down, product selection becomes much more important then when the prediction is for the market to go up significantly. Buying brand new or turnkey clearly is not as wise when the market is flat to down. In fact it almost always goes down like a new vs. used car. So the market needs to be going in an upward trend for the owner to camouflage the dip in value of new or turnkey, due to the appreciation being higher than the depreciation factor.

Since late 2006 or before, my advices have been to buy something that needs something. It gives you an edge, and some protection, to be able to sell it in better showing condition than you found it. Buying where it is “cheaper” is buying where appreciation has been less significant and NOT a good plan. Best area will always go up more in a good market and hold value better in a weak one.

It’s fine to tell someone you might have a 5% loss in value, and for them to say they can live with that. It’s another thing to think that, and not tell the client. People deserve to know what you are thinking. It’s up to them to choose the agent whose opinion they value, same as when they choose a stock broker.

I actually like to use the stock analogy that you did. With stocks you have a lot more information about what’s going on, and there are people that concentrate only on analyzing a few companies. And despite that, they usually still can’t get it right!