Bill, I could, I guess, do a search based on commission rate, but I don't play that way. I will however, know certain companies office code and eliminate most of them from my showing list. Never do I eliminate all from any particular company, but I never let the customer sit at my computer and do a joint search with me. I only give the customer a customized link with no more than 12 homes at one time. If they do their own search on the internet, I will help them eliminate some of the homes they picked out. The reason I eliminate some listings may change from one customer to the next. And, I am sure the ones that get eliminated will not surprise you.

I will show any listings regardless of commission. The point is to find the buyer a home that they want and are happy with, get to closing happy and receive referrals or later business based on my merits not my pocket intake.

I typically type up my agency to state the fee as listing amount or 3% but do not charge my client if the list amount is less than 3%.

My minimum is 2%. Most of my clients choose which listings they want to see via my e-mails to them. If they want to see one that is less than that, such as 1.5%, I will show it, but I tell them up front what the commission paid to the selling agent is and if they like the home and want to make an offer, I will send a CBC to the listing agent before I submit the offer. If the seller does not agree to pay a reasonable commission, I will not go forward with the offer and my client will will then have to decide what to do. Listings with selling office commissions like $1000 or something like that..I will not show at all!

I don't have a minimum. I will share the split from the listing no matter what it is. I have a buyer in a home and if I have done my job right, they will call me when they are ready to sell, hopefully.

I go where my clients want to go.  I do search parameters according to there criteria, not mine.  If the commission is low, I'll try to re-negotiate, but accept what I get.  I count on future referrals from my clients and part of getting those is making sure I'm a part of them attaining their real estate goals.

Buyers should be thanked for the opportunity to be of service to them. Period.  No fee, no angles, no compensation for percentage shortages. Close the deal and the buyer will let 7 buyers know about your service at gratis.

So Mary, If your buyer likes a house and the selling office is offered $1,000 (not negotiable) you will do the transaction for your client? I sure hope the listing agent will be professional during the escrow!

Gail, yes. I am the broker of my office so I do not have to again split with anyone. Typically we sell our own listings, but when I have a buyer looking at other listings, I will work for my buyer for whatever that split works to be. I have not had any problems with it.

I have never had that happen to me, and I really don't know If I would follow through denying my client service if it did. It just urks me because you know the listing agent probably has a 5 to 6 percent listing...you eventually find out when escrow opens.

During the seller's market frenzy it was common for listing agents in a certain brokerage to take a 5% or 6% listings and give the selling office 2%.

Gail,on your mls doesn't it spell out commission offered to both sides?

Bill, if you and I are the only 2 Realtors in the country (oh, if that were true), we could charge the buyer, the seller, the inspector, the appraiser, and the lender.  And for a better product.  But with "Rookie the Realtor" and the hundreds of thousands like her who just got their license from a 2-week course at Walmart trading in their back teeth just for a chance to use their lockbox key, "When in Rome.....".

Mary...no. The selling office commission must be on all MLS listings, but the listing office commission is not. In California, if you want to negotiate the commission, it must be done with a CBC before the offer is submitted. To send a CBC requesting a different commission split with the offer is unethical.

I rarely discuss what I am getting paid with my buyer clients.  There are some listings I won't show as I do not trust the agent/brokerage but if my client asks specifically for that home I do.  Generally we are looking at 2.5 to 3% for buying side so it is not much of an issue.  If they are offering 2% but I know it is perfect for my clients I will show it.  I would rather have them sold than decide to wait and move in with their mother....

So, to be clear - commission does not matter as much to me as a professional with ethics on the other side.

Ditto Trista! And I question the ethics on the other side if the commission on the MLS to the selling office is $1,000! I have seen $500!

I show no matter what the commission is. I just put under contract a FSBO and I'm only getting $1500 from buyers. FSBO wouldn't pay me anything, so my buyers are. This will be the first time I've been paid by a buyer. I don't charge buyers anything if the commission is less than what I want.

Hi Bill,

I don't "cut" commissions because the seller wants to "cut" commissions... what else would I expect the seller to want to do?<P>If I have an MLS listing that "rates" a discount from ME... I extend that discount from ME and publish the rate to the selling Realtor at the expected MLS rate... I do not presume to "cut" someone else's pay level.<p>I find this very easy to sell to a preferred client (either because of long time relationship, family or social circle) and they are offered this... they don't demand it.<P>Did you ever notice that the sellers that "demand" commission cuts usually like to overprice too? If the seller is going to decide the marketing plan and the pay schedule... why not encourage him/her to go FSBO for a while?<p>I don't expect to double-end much more than 1 out of 4 listings (and with single and dual agency... less!) and I have the highest respect for the Realtors showing my listings... so much so that I send each one who shows one of my listings a certificate for a FREE LUNCH at my favourite restaurant... that's just for showing! We also have a program within our franchise to award a $7,500 bonus to the last one drawn from 46 sales registered in that program AND another FREE LUNCH to all... the latter is for selling Realtors from any and all companies.<p>Cut commissions mean cut showings... very nice some Realtors say they don't care what they are being paid... but many do and I know I am doing everything to get all the showings I can for my vendor, which will get him/her the very best price available.

Regards,

Anastasia

Good Question!

I don't look at commission when putting a home on my Buyer's list.  If they're really interested, want to make an offer, and it's below 2.5%, I ask if they will be willing to.....especially if it's a tough mortgage, tough house.  I've had one turn me down (I didn't abandon him) and the others have said "Yeah, no problem" as long as it will fly with the Lender.

I don't eliminate based on commission, and I don't include just because of "Bonus to Selling Agent".

I ask my Buyers to give me a wish list.  What you "need", what you "want", what you can " without".  I go with that, regardless of FSBO, commission, REO, etc.

My job is to get them into the home and financing where they will be happy.  If I've done that, I've done my job.

Unfortunately, we are in a business of providing services and we don’t work for free. With that in mind, I don’t think commission should be the standing point to decide whether to show the homes to the clients or not. For me personally, if the client likes the house, then I will show it to them. Commission is the last thing I looked at. In the area that I do business in, the average commission is 2.5%. There are some that offer less, but I don’t take it into consideration. I know that perfecting my quality of service will give me more business in the near future.

I have noticed that there are not too many offers under 2.5% recently and more and more 3% & 4%.  I think the sellers in our area realize that the market has changed.  They see the properties that have sold are offering higher percentages and they want to compete.  

Now to answer your questions on what we did.  Pretty much nothing different.  Most of our buyers are on our IDX, if they saw something they wanted to see we would show them.  Interesting enough we didn't see any of those lower percentages included.  Could be Anastasia is right on, they were over priced and our clients noticed that too.

Jana

We are a small office, and probably discuss the merits of working with a particular agent ( or not working with them ) more than the fee on a transaction.

We send out a list of properties that match a criteria, and let the buyer decide.  

The fee is never discussed with the buyer:  Past experience with listing agents often is.

I've sold two this year where my side was 2%. One was a FSBO.  I usually show what my clients are looking for and check the commission when it comes time to make an offer.  

The key to low payouts to selling agents is understanding the mindset of the seller. To me, when I see a low split, (and while I'll still show it because my job is to find a home for my buyer) I believe it offers some insight into the seller. I'll make a generalization here but more often than not, the listing is likely to be overpriced as well.

I don't have a limit ... I show them what they want to see. The only time I would ask a buyer to pay the commission would be e.g. in case of HUD foreclosure where the coop commission in the MLS is listed at $1 and needs to be paid by the buyer ... otherwise, even if I get paid very little, I look at it as an investment into the future business.

Bill, interesting topic, my initial MLS search is for properties that fit the client’s needs and wants. After I have selected those properties, I look at what commission is being offered, I look at any bonus being paid, and I make sure that I eliminate overpriced listings and I will eliminate any low commission listings unless they are perfect matches. I have always been able to find listings that offer great matches to the clients needs without scraping the bottom of the commission barrel.

The statement that an agent doesn’t pay any attention to the commissions is a mistake since anyone with any sense is going to pick the one that matches and pays more. Given the choice of lower commissions or higher, why would someone pick lower, if they can satisfy the client. I am in business to make money and provide a service. My services are not free and I don’t think my clients would do any differently if the rolls were exchanged.

Clients pick their home selection based on the price and value they perceive. I select listing based on the same criteria. It isn’t against my religion to make money and if I have an opportunity to make more, that is good, not something to be ashamed of. It is more shameful to not pay attention to you return on the time you invest. In reading some of the comments, it would appear that if you select the lowest commissions available you are somehow doing your client a favor. I see no correlation in commissions and service provided other than the agent works for less.

I have also found that seller’s willing to give higher commissions tend to also be willing to negotiate in a more reasonable fashion. I would venture to guess that I receive as many referrals from clients I have made a good rate of commission on the sale, as those that feel that the low commission sale is going to offer them a greater chance of referrals. A happy client gives you referrals, regardless of the amount of money you make and I will continue to look at that stat when I select listings to market. If it is low, the odds are against me showing the property.

Has anyone looked at the Realtors "Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice" recently?

Article 1 says "...Realtors pledge themselves to protect and promote the interests of their client. This obligation to the client is PRIMARY..."

To me that means that if a home fits my clients needs, I MUST make them aware of the home and show that home to the client, regardless of the co-op commission being paid.

As Realtors we can't decide to do otherwise. Doing so is violating the code we swore to uphold.

I'm surprised at some of post here. Especially those from GRI's.

I am a GRI, Real Estate & Mortage Broker and I've been licensed since 1986, and I know that alot of time is spent on the study of the code. We should know better.

This is exactly what the Justice Department is talking about. By not showing a listing we feel doesn't pay enough, we are not providing a

service to the general public that is fair and equitable.

Armando - You have 25 homes that fit the clients needs. You pick 5 that also pay a better commission. You have violated no code of ethics, you served the client, and also made a good business decision. Somehow you are assuming that the low commissioned homes are the best. I would agree that if you don't have homes that fit there need and base your selection on commission alone there is a violation. We have a 15 month supply of homes at the current time. I don't have to look hard to find one with the exact specifications they want and doesn't have a low ball commission. It can be part of the equation without any violations.

Gary- I don't see from what I wrote were "I'm assuming that the low commissioned homes are the best" I want to get paid as much as I can get paid.

What I'm saying is that we should make the client aware of ALL homes that fit their needs, and let them decide which one they want.

Your statement "I don't have to look hard to find one with the exact specifications they want and doesn't have a low ball commission". It seems you're making the decision as to what they'll see. How do you know they won't like the ones you're NOT going to show them because of the low ball commission?

Armando, this may sound harsh. So don't be upset when I ask. Are you a salesman or a chauffeur and tour guide?

Hmm....interesting topic.  I am shocked to say the least at some of your responses and from whom some of these responses came from!

I've got to agree with Armando on this one.  Some of you are wrong!  Plain wrong!

Picking which homes your buyers see based on the commission you get?  Who are you helping more?  Yourself or your buyer?

We are all in this business to make money, HOWEVER deciding which homes to show your client based on what YOU will get paid is ridiculous!

I send them everything that is available to them and they tell me which homes they want to go see.  Do I cringe if I see a lower commission, yes.  But I have never, not once EVER discussed with a buyer I had about the amount of money I was making off of that sale.  I have NEVER and never will ever pick which homes to show them based on how much money I will get paid.  My job is to find them the best house for them.  And if that means I only get "X" amount this time around, as long as I do my job and do it well, they will come back to me later and I will get paid once again for their business!

Some of you people are unreal!!

Greed will get you no where in life!  Some of you really ought to be ashamed of yourselves!!

Gregory, it's about upholding the LAW & the COE, not your wallet!!

Becky, I think you totally mis-read me. I am well within the LAW of how I conduct business. If there was only one house to sell in a price range the client was seeking to purchase they would see that house and I would drive across the river into Pennsylvania to get the contracts signed and in the attorney's hand. But, I have 50 homes in any given price range and nothing says I MUST show your overpriced listing that pays 1% minus $100. The agent who is doing a dis-service is the lazy paper pusher who put that home on the market to begin with. I would rather deal direct with a For Sale By Owner than put a dime in the "agents" pocket.

Gregory- I know where you're coming from with that question.

I am a REALTOR sworn to uphold the Realtor's Code of Ethics. As Article 1 says "...Realtors pledge themselves to protect and promote the interests of their client. This obligation to the client is PRIMARY..."

This obligation is above and beyond our own financial interests!

I have done well for myself and my family without compromising the Realtor's Code or my own faith based beliefs which are far more important to me.

I guess I could probably get away with not abiding by the Code as some seem to be doing, but it would bother me too much. I have to answer to a higher authority, don't you?

No Gregory, I clearly understood exactly what you said.  You're saying that it's ok for you to NOT show them everything based on what you get paid.

You're ridiculous!!

Armando, your interpretation of the Code is most likely why you "show" so many houses. I bet your clients become very confused over which house was which and forget what they were looking for to begin with long before they settle for the one they buy. You have most likely driven them and yourself to the point of exhaustion. Every buyer is not your client. The homeowner that put his home on the market to be sold may be more of your client than you think. I am not a SEARS catalog salesman. I am a professional real estate agent.

Becky, you're just a much better person than I am. Maybe Cathy will loan you the halo.

Now that's funny!!

Did I ever say I was better than you?  Nope!  I just told you my opinion of you!  Which hasn't changed from the first comment you ever posted on my blog!

Opinions are like a**holes.  Everyone has one and some stink more than others!!!

Armondo - The client has all 25 to select from. If I start with five that pay the most, as we are doing the search, do you feel that that is a violation. Or must I start with the one that pays the least to be ethical. I have not eliminated anything. They may look at three homes and choose the third one. Should I tell them no, we have more to see. I haven't gotten to number 25 yet. I present homes that I feel the client will like. My goal is to show what I consider the best. If I had one with a low commission that was better, it would be in the first five. My point is, that with the inventory I have, it is not hard to find the best with a decent commission, as well.

Gregory- Wrong. Since you were willing to bet, now you owe me :-)

My clients don't get confused. With my help they make the right decisions. I don't work hard, I work smart.

You are right not every buyer is my client. Only those that choose to work with me are my clients.

In Florida we're allowed to work as "Transaction Brokers" so what you said, "The homeowner that put his home on the market to be sold may be more of your client than you think" is also not true.

I know a SEARS catalog salesman, a very ethical man!

Gee, Becky. When you went away sulking and stated you were not coming back, I felt bad for you. I even mentioned that someone should contact you so you wouldn't leave. Now that you're back, I wonder what was I thinking. You keep swinging that bat from your lofty position and you’re sure to lose your balance. As they say in TV land, "Be careful out there."

It's a shame Bill left to catch his flight. You are just what he was expecting.

Armando, ask Becky to share the halo.

Went away sulking?

Umm....when was that?  I never said I wasn't coming back here.  I said I refused to post on the message boards because they censored my comments, but never here.

Get those meds straightened out Greg, you're starting to confuse yourself!

And I only swing my bats towards the people that need it.  Looks like some kneecaps still needed busting too!

Gary- If I've got a list of 25 homes that fit my clients needs, I'll email/fax the list to them and let them decide which ones they'd like to see. Most of the time they'll be no more than 5 on their list. I've been doing it this way and I've never sold a home for a co-op of less than 2.5%. Go figure!

Boy! Today is my first day on this site. I kinda like it, but it's taking too much of my time. I've got a few rounds of golf to tend to.

Lively bunch isn't it Armando?! ;-)  Welcome to Reliberation!

Martha, you're not going to add to this conversation? What is your interpetation of the Code? Is Armando suited for the halo? Or, do you think he makes up for the real estate commission by working the mortgage business in to the transaction? Come on, Martha. Tell us what you're thinking. Be careful of Becky's bat. I like to throw the ball fast and close.

Don't worry Gregory, my bat can smack your balls anytime.

You wanna keep digging?

Becky, I don't hate you and you are no competition to me.

Really?  I was almost certain Florida and New Jersey were right next to each other on the map.

Boy, you learn something new here every day!  I'll be damn!

I wasn't talking about real estate, Becky.

Wow guys. I am not sure where this went South, but from what I read it shows me there is some discretion in what we give our buyers on the list that meets their needs. An overpriced house is one that Greg mentioned and I would also consider it not worth showing to my buyers, but if they wanted to see it I would, but I already know that it will be an absolute possible never ending hassle to get the seller to agree to a reasonable price, wasting my clients time.

Promoting the interest of the client, I believe also means that you won't waste their time. I see nothing wrong with narrowing down a search. If they can't find anything within that realm, then broaden the search.

Am I missing something?

Ok, Gregory you win!  That's it!  My real estate career is over now!  I'm not your competition?  OMG!  The life I knew is over!!  

Maybe I should get used to saying the phrase "Would you like fries with that?"

I'm done posting back and forth here with you.  So go ahead Greg, you can have the last word.  I know it's what you've been waiting for....

So the floor is yours now....

Meanwhile, I'm going to Burger King to get a job application!  Anyone want anything?

OK.....the halo is M-I-N-E.......Mine!?!!?? HeLLLOOOOO!

Mother Superior Mary...you need to smooth this over.   Otherwise Sister Catherine Mary is going to have to take some action.  Sr. Rebecca, I know you're trying. Br. Gregory, step up and do the right thing.

Gosh, I leave for a couple of days and "H E double hockey sticks" breaks out.  I'm still trying to catch up.

Armando...Welcome to your Baptism and yoru first "family fight-night".  They usually coincide.

OK I have to get my 2 cents in here.  First of all, Michaela, the vast majority of HUD Homes pay 5%, there are some exceptions like the properties in lottery round instead of general offering. I'd be curious to know why the listing broker is putting $1 in the commission field.  Those homes that are for special populations such as GND or Disaster Evacuees aren't even supposed to be in the MLS.  Maybe they are trying to discourage anyone from selling a HUD home so they can get the buyers.

Second, I agree that a home should not be eliminated from a list because of the commission.  If you have a signed buyer rep agreement, it probably states the amount you are willing to work for and that your buyer is to pay the difference if the amount the seller's broker is paying.  Therefore, if the percent offered is 1% and you put on your BA that you are charging 3%, then you need to be having a conversation with your buyer for the difference or try to convince the seller's broker that you are to be paid more for any offers that you bring.  

Third, if I have a list of 25 homes that I have pulled up on the MLS based on the information on hand from the buyer, I don't eliminate any more homes.  The buyer can come in to the office, we can communicate by email or by phone, but I'm going to tell my buyer that I have a long list of homes that WE need to narrow down to 5 or 6 top choices to view.  It is their choice, not mine.  Will I give my input?  Yes, this one is overpriced, this one has a pet smell that even the pets can't stand, the pool hasn't been cleaned in 6 months, this one has gorgeous courtyard.

In our area, because we do run across the occasional listing that shows a dollar amount instead of a percentage, it isn't a big deal.  Usually that dollar amount is because the list price is so low that a percentage is a pittance.  There are some agents who charge an odd precentage and then put the extra on their side.  We don't know who they are until closing and we see it on the HUD1.  Some companies here have started using dual/variable commission a lot in the past 2 years or so. That is indicated on the MLS detail but not the actual percentages.  We have a place where sub-agents coop is indicated as well as buyer agent coop.  Many are starting to put 0 or no in sub-agent coop and only working with buyer agents.

What do you do with REO properties that base selling commission on NET sales price not GROSS sales price?  That isn't a decision that the listing broker makes.  It is made by the REO mgmt company or lender who owns the property.  How do you handle your buyer then?  Do you discourage asking for closing cost assistance so your commission won't be affected?  

Yes, Becky, I'd like some fries!  Bring lots of ketchup.

Velda, I forgot about REO properties. It has been awhile since I have even shown or had a request to see one. I have recently been out showing trailers priced between 35,000 and 50,000. They indicate, as you said, a dollar amount to be split between agencies. I have never had a problem doing HUD transactions. I would love to be the listing broker for them. The way I see it, REO and HUD will be the flooding the market very soon. Thanks for the reminder.

OK Velda, I got your fries.  I'll mail them to you.  I forgot the ketchup tho, so you're on your own for that.

I also find this link I had from a while back!  Look what I have to look forward to!

http://www.americanangst.com/dingfries.html

LOL   -- -Ding!

Gregory, it got too HOT in here, had to step over to the message boards....there were some comments about this over there.... :-0

Martha, I can't find it over there. So, I'll just stay put and keep stirring. Are you sure you don't want to add your two cents?

With the price of gas and cost of doing business I'd like to get a $200 retainer but I don't.

I really think buyer agents should work on a flat fee instead of percentage anyway.

Say between $150K and $200 - xxx

200-250

250 -300

and so on.

when you get a percentage, the more the buyers spends the more your commission....is that working for the buyers?

just a thought

Usually the buyer is not paying the commission.  It's the seller that pays the commission, Dan.  So whatever the commission the selling agent makes on the sale shouldn't have any affect on the buyer's interest positively or negatively. (did i say that right?)

P. S. - How we interpret how we serve the best interests of our clients, which is our first responsibility as REALTORS(R), is determined by our character.  I can't say which point of view shows the best character, it's not for me to judge, but I can say that flawed characters often get bitten in the *ss at some point.

Bee, the buyer doesn't care how much we make or don't make. I have never told a client or customer the percentage rate until we were going over the contract. You are right the seller, for the most part pays. Therefore, we owe the seller more of in performance than a buyer. My obligation goes out first to my listings, second to the company listings and third to the listings found on the MLS. If I can't find it there for a buyer, then I look at Fisbo offers. But, I control the show.

Bee, "If" I had a buyer who was my client by a written contract. Then I would be required to inform the buyer that a particular home that is on the market does not offer me adequate compensation for my efforts and he would need to pay the difference after we come to an agreement of price and terms of the sale. And, in reality, isn't the buyer paying the commission since the house was listed to include the commission in its asking price?

This whole discussion is why I have wondered for a long time why the entire structure hasn't reorganized along cleaner lines.  The seller pays his authorized agent, the buyer pays his authorized agent and no one has to worry about this problem at all.  Each agent has negotiated to the best of his or her ability the commission amount.  No subagency problems but then no double-dipping either.  Could still have the Intermediary issue though. Naturally, each state has their own way of defining agency and some of the terms I'm using probably do not fit those states.  Currently here in TX, we have Buyer Agency, Seller Agency, Seller sub-agency, and Intermediary.

Before everyone wants to get the hangin' rope out, I'm not advocating anything.  I've just wondered why the industry hasn't moved in this direction yet.  It just seems like the logical (yes, I'm a Trekker) outcome of having two separate areas of representation.  You're either taking care of a seller or taking care of a buyer.  Seems cleaner to me somehow.

Yes, I know, Greg.  I always cross out that part of the buyer agency agreement.  I remove commission from the equation altogether.  Could be why I'm poor :(.  The only reason I use the agreement is to have a commitment from the buyer not to fold under pressure from a slimy listing or site agent at an open house to "make an offer right now...it'll be gone by the time your agent gets here."  Did I say that out loud?

During my corporate sales training I was told that during a listing appointment when discussing commissions, show your prospect an MLS listing and point out the selling agent commission. Let them know that agents will see what is offered and may not want to show their home over others with a higher commission rate.  When I heard this, I was appalled! There are some things about this business I hate, and that is one of them.

My buyers pick what listings they want to see, and I go over each of them calling for availability, etc. When I see a listing offering the selling office 1%, it is almost always an individual broker and they can discount their fees to their seller. But an agent will be working for just about nothing after all the splits with their broker, costs and taxes. I would never abandon my clients in cases like this. I would tell them up front, I cannot work for nothing. I have not nor will I ever abandon a client and I have never used a BBA before opening an escrow.

When I see $1,000 to the selling office, I must assume the broker has a special deal going with the seller and if I ever had a client that wanted to make an offer in a case like this, I would make it clear that the ethics on the other side of the transaction may be shady and the transaction could be a complete nightmare. Not only will my client be taking a risk, but I would be also. It is my fiduciary duty to make that clear.

Many of my listings are at 4% with a 2% split to the selling office. I don’t have a problem with this…I feel sellers are paying way too much to sell their homes as it is, especially since home prices have doubled, but the cost of living has not. In my opinion 6% is too much now.  Okay… If you want to throw French fries, Becky…please be kind and hold the ketchup.  

I am puzzled…demanding 6% on a listing appointment is okay and some will otherwise walk away from the listing, but requesting at least 2% on the selling side is unethical?  Please explain….

Velda, I agree. Something is not right in Mayberry. Bee, you have won (almost) my heart and sole. I think I would want to list my home with you. But, before I list my home with you and not Armando, please tell me how you are different. What do you do to get my house sold that Armando doesn't do? Armando will list my house for just 1% commission and everyone here says they will show it. Why should I pay you more? You are prettier than Armando, but I do like the way his name sounds. Why, if there really is no difference between "showing" a house at the advertised special of $500 and Greg's demand for 6% why would I list with anyone but Armando? Has Armando left? Please come back! I am torn between hiring you or Bee and I need to ask a few more questions.

Gail, you may be using the BBA incorrectly. In New Jersey it must be presented and agreed upon before any negotiations begin. It would be wrong on my part to take a customer out and look at homes and then decide at contract time that I am working for my "client". Of course it is done all the time here by many "ethical" agents.

I would be unable to afford to do a listing for a mere 1%.  I would have to walk away. I explain how commissions are divided among brokers and agents, marketing expenses (to market THEIR) property, etc.  I also explain that there are some agents out their who will not show houses that do not offer 3% to the selling broker and that when they cut my commission effectively by 33% for every 1% they ask to reduce.  So, if you're only paying 1% to an agent, how could motivated could they be to do any additional marketing beyond putting a sign in the yard and adding it to the mls?

Wearing a completely different hat with sellers.  The objective is to get as many people to see it as possible.  Even though most of us here work in our buyers' best interest, that doesn't mean that most agents do so.  I know lots and lots and lots who won't show under 3%.

So, who is more ethical? The agent with two face (opps, I mean two hats!) or the agent who does what he says he what he does? Why would I pick you to sell (list) my house? Doesn't the guy who offers 1% correct that Bee will show and sell the home because it is on the MLS?