I guess if you don't think there is any skill involved in selling or buying houses, then you would see it this way.
There are many things that we think we could do better than someone who is trained and experienced, just to save money, but its quite likely that for many of us its a false economy, because the result will not be up to scratch..... i would see that selling RE privately is often like that.
It may look like its an easy thing to do, based on some hyped article on the internet, but I think its a different matter when you actually go and do it yourself.
Unless you have the right property at the right price in the right market, and also have the right personality to sell it, and a willingness to negotiate sensibly, I dont think it will work.
I find it interesting that you are more willing to take advice from an internet article in a completely different market than seasoned investors from the market you are in.
To me, this indicates that you may well not be able to manage the process of negotiating with buyers who often don't see the value in a property that you may well think is fantastic.
But if you are committed to it, go ahead and see if it works......
Pen
Firstly, I didn't say that agents have no skills. They do, it's just that they aren't really for the benefit of the vendor first and foremost. They are skills that assist the agent in his/her business, which is to collect as many commission payments as possible. That's why almost all training is geared towards the listing process and not the selling process. It's a fact. Yes, there is also some training in the art of negotiating or what I like to call price mediation. Look up “mediation” and see if that doesn’t better describe what agents actually do.
You say that you need the right property... Right for whom? Me? You? Joe Blow? Investor? Family? Young? Old? Location? Rich? Poor?
Every property is right for the right buyer. You will not hear an agent on this planet say otherwise. If you have a dump that needs doing up, then it is the right property for renovators, for instance. There is no such thing as the right property. Also you will be hard pushed to find an agent who advises you not to list because of "market conditions".
I am not arguing the case for selling privately simply based on one set of statistics form a survey (commissioned by an agents body) that happens do be on the Internet alone. I think agents here will recognise that my arguments are probably based on some level of experience and insight other than just an Internet article, hyped or otherwise. (And no, I will not participate in a game of 20 questions.)
The stats I was quoting are in my opinion accurate in the US context, given who commissioned the survey, and I believe that apart from volume they would also be accurate here. I simply wanted to draw attention to a wholly feasible alternative to the “somewhat” costly and mostly unsatisfactory practice (I’m sure that Real Estate Institutes around the country would know exactly just how unsatisfactory in percentage terms) of using an agent to sell your property. I am also pointing out that there is no logically valid reason that, if done properly, you can’t sell your property yourself in any market condition as long as there aren’t any practical restraints such as distance, multiple interests etc.
Agents will also say they are trained in the legal aspects of a property sale. Yes, they are to a point, but they are far from qualified legal practitioners and their training would be better be described as “authorised” to complete certain aspects of the standard offer documents. I don’t believe that their authorisation extends to providing any legal advice whatsoever. I’m sure that any legal practitioners here would agree (and please confirm) that the levels of legal “qualifications” agents need are rudimentary at best and certainly are not a strong safeguard against any potential legal problems. If you factor in possible incompetence from an already low base of legal capacity required by agents then the potential danger of legal complications are even more prominent.
On the other hand if you are selling privately, all legal matters need to be handled by both the sellers and buyers solicitors in the first instance, thus negating any potential legal complications from the very start and providing confidence in the process. From a legal standpoint it is therefore actually much safer to sell privately than through an agent with mere lay qualifications and possibly only a dubious grasp to boot. And remember, the legal costs are the same either way.
Agents prefer to focus on price; private sellers prefer to focus on features and are far better equipped to point them out in detail and with authority. As a buyer you are looking for and buying features. Agents will actively compare your property with others and use your property to sell another. Is that acting in your interest at all times, as required by law? Please, dear agents, tell me hand on heart you have never done and never do this! You do it everyday, right? I forgive you, oh mighty agents, but lets call a spade a spade, ok? So as a vendor you have agents walking around your property telling buyers who knows what and to what end. Is this a comforting thought, knowing that your friendly agent isn’t always acting in your best interest as promised and required by law? I suppose you should then feel grateful when it’s your turn to be compared favourably against some other poor souls property.
Is this really the best, most cost effective way to sell your property? The answer is clearly: "No"! But it’s the way it is and we are constantly encouraged to forgive and look the other way for the sake of perceived convenience. And who likes to admit that they are submitting to being deceived because the alternative has been painted as just to difficult to manage. Better then to defend the practice than to look and feel foolish…
I think most of us here know full well that these few examples I have cited are only the tip of the iceberg in terms of scenarios showing how agents are not acting in the best interest of us vendors as a matter of course. It’s not really their fault, because the true nature of their role doesn’t really allow for them to in fact act in a vendor’s interest at all time as is required unless they want to go hungry. But should you feel compelled to support their choice of occupation by subsidising it out of your own pocket?
I am in property to make a profit and I am interested in lowering any costs associated with doing business effectively. Others here might be in property investments for other reasons… Giving agents huge sums of money to do a job that uses industry practices based on a systemically flawed model, which is inherently unable to serve my/your best interests, doesn’t seem to me to be a particularly rational or cost effective way to do business. Oh, and good on you if you read the whole post!