Real Estate Articles & Blog - Don Dunning
Menu
  • Home
  • East Bay Realty Pro
  • Expert Witness
  • Hourly Consulting
  • About Don
  • Contact Don
  • Home
  • East Bay Realty Pro
  • Expert Witness
  • Hourly Consulting
  • About Don
  • Contact Don

Pitfalls of online agent ratings


By Don Dunning | August 11, 2014

Originally appeared in Bay Area News Group publications on August 8, 2014

“The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions.”
– Leonardo da Vinci

According to a National Association of Realtors survey, 90 per cent of real estate home buyers search online during the purchasing process. Those who do not have a relationship with a real estate professional may browse sites that rate agents. Regardless of the specific verbiage, online portals that evaluate licensees are asking, “Did your agent do a good job for you?” This seemingly simple question is actually much more complex than many realize.

Number of sales

A major problem with judging agents is that real estate buyers and sellers frequently have less than a full understanding of the process. Compounding this is the common, but incorrect, belief that nearly everything you need to know can be learned on the Internet.

Surveys tend to focus on the amount of “selling” an agent has done, more being better, and not on the amount of “representing,” which can often be difficult to quantify. The greatest false assumption is that agents who make the most sales should have the highest rankings. Ask yourself, is the dentist who treats the most patients the one you should choose? Maybe yes, maybe no, but do not confuse quantity with quality.

As I have said in numerous articles, an agent’s primary job is to stand in your shoes and represent your best interests. Do not assume all agents do this.

Seller rating the result

A seller whose home sold for well over asking price is usually happy with the result and will generally recommend his agent and rate him highly. Nonetheless, this seller might not be aware of some specific facts. For example, in today’s local market, almost any listing in a desirable location that is not overpriced will sell for higher than list price. Only the most incompetent salespeople can mess this up.

Let’s say there were 20 offers on a property and the two highest were at least $200,000 more than asking. At the time of the bids, the seller is probably not thinking about what could happen if he accepts an offer and, ten days later, that sale falls apart. There are numerous reasons why, when re-marketed, his house may not see nearly that number of competing contracts or that high a price. The seller could lose well over $100,000 in this scenario.

His agent may know this and, consequently, suggest to the seller that he include certain clauses in a counteroffer to maximize the likelihood the sale will close. These might include an initial buyer deposit of $50,000 instead of the $24,000 the buyer offered. Further, the contract could be changed from a limit on the buyer’s liability to significant liability for the buyer if he defaulted after waiving all his contingencies.

Knowledgeable listing agents who care enough to take these extra steps are worthy of the higher ratings. Not all are and few sellers recognize these nuances.

Buyer rating the result

After having failed in nine previous offers, a buyer is now thrilled to have finally prevailed in competition. He rates his agent highly for helping him beat out the crowd. Unfortunately, his euphoria may not last long.

What happens when this buyer realizes that, in order to ostensibly improve the bid, his agent’s advice to not include an inspection contingency in the contract eliminated an essential protection for him? Now, three months later, the buyer has expensive estimates for problems he never knew were so serious. At this point, his agent may no longer be viewed in the same positive light.

And worse, when the market shifts from favoring sellers to buyers, as it inevitably does, how will the buyer feel about the fact his agent never explained that his price was a new high for a two-bedroom home in that neighborhood? The point is that consumers commonly do not comprehend the value of excellent representation until something goes wrong.

A 2014 survey for a well-known real estate firm found that, nationally, 25% of homeowners would not buy their home again if given a “do-over.” Although there are many possible reasons for this “buyer’s remorse,” how many of these buyers would still recommend their agent?

The wrong survey questions

How long a home takes to sell is market-dependent and, therefore not a very useful rating question. In our market, homes sell almost immediately unless they are overpriced.

A similarly poor question is how much over or under asking was the sales price. A better question would be if the asking price allowed the seller to maximize his return.

What is the sales-to-listing ratio for a particular agent? This is an irrelevant question in any market. It does not provide any information about exceptional representation.

How many sales has an agent closed with buyers in a defined location? Not useful for the same reasons as above.

A rarely asked question is how long you worked with your agent before you purchased your home. In this case, a long period, sometimes over a year, can be an indication of an agent who was discouraging his buyer from homes that were overpriced, had condition problems, and/or were in a questionable area. In other words, he was protecting his client, not his commission. This might be someone you want as your agent.

Final thoughts

Companies rank agents to bring in business for themselves and make money, not necessarily to help buyers and sellers make the most informed choices.

Referrals from friends, relatives, neighbors or other agents and repeat business with previous clients are still the predominant way most home buyers and sellers find their agent. Committing to the right agent is one of the most important real estate decisions you can make. Choose wisely.

Related Articles:

The Changing World of Choosing an Agent

 

 

Copyright 2014 Don Dunning (Bureau of Real Estate Lic. #00768985)
Permission is given to freely copy any or all articles for personal and
noncommercial use provided they are copied in full without
modification and that proper attribution is given.
These articles may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, nor linked to from another site.

Tags: Choosing an agent, Newspaper article, Real Estate Advice

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Categories


  • Adding Value – Gardening/Landscaping/Renovations (29)
  • Alameda (2)
  • Around the House (20)
  • Carmel (1)
  • Community (43)
  • Condos (2)
  • Environment (27)
  • Events (13)
  • Expert Witness (7)
  • General Information (23)
  • Going Green (14)
  • History (13)
  • Home Maintenance (15)
  • Homeless (1)
  • Homes for Sale (8)
  • Hourly Consulting (10)
  • Local Attractions (24)
  • Mortgages-Loans (9)
  • New Orleans (1)
  • Oakland Neighborhoods (27)
  • Oh, Please (7)
  • Parks (1)
  • Pets (4)
  • Real Estate (285)
  • Real Estate Advice (109)
  • Real Estate in the News (77)
  • Real Estate Newspaper Articles (164)
  • Restaurants (3)
  • Rockridge (1)
  • Shops (6)
  • Technology (1)
  • The Economy (48)
  • Travel (3)

Tags


Buying Buying a home California unemployment Choosing an agent City Ordinance Cohousing Communal Housing construction data mining Dimond East Bay Events Expert Witness gardening green living Historical Sites home inspections Home Loans home maintenance lead paint legislation Mortgages multiple offers Newspaper article Oakland Oaktoberfest Oktoberfest Online real estate organic Pets Points of Interest Real Estate Advice Real Estate Law real estate news renovation Rockridge schools Selling a Home shopping social networking Tax Credit Technology termites The Economy Travel

Archives


  • May 2017
  • February 2017
  • November 2016
  • September 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • January 2016
  • October 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • May 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • August 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • January 2008
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • October 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003
  • November 2002
  • October 2002
  • September 2002
  • August 2002
  • July 2002
  • June 2002
  • May 2002
  • April 2002
  • January 2002
  • November 2001
  • October 2001
  • September 2001
  • August 2001
  • July 2001
  • June 2001
  • May 2001
  • April 2001
  • February 2001
  • January 2001
  • November 2000
  • October 2000
  • September 2000
  • August 2000
  • July 2000
  • June 2000
  • May 2000
  • March 2000
  • February 2000
  • January 2000
  • November 1999
  • August 1999
  • July 1999
  • May 1999
  • April 1999
  • March 1999
  • January 1999
  • October 1998
  • September 1998
  • July 1998
  • June 1998
  • February 1998
  • November 1997
  • October 1996
  • May 1996
  • August 1995
  • July 1995

Copyright © 2018 Don Dunning - Bureau of Real Estate Lic. #00768985

Theme created by PWT. Powered by WordPress.org