Comments on: Since When Is Offering A Cooperating Broker Fee A Selling Point?

By: Triple Net Lease

Triple Net Lease — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 22:54:10 +0000

I agree, this is not in the best interest of your clients. I realize most Companies want the entire fee but most of the time, a property sells faster if you allow others to participate.

By: Douglas

Douglas — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 06:59:31 +0000

I've never come across an M&M broker that has refused to cooperate with regards to fee, although I have come across dozens of CB brokers who have. To echo what others have said, I find it amazing that there are sellers out there that would agree to listing with a broker who wont share commission…especially in today's market where deals are hard enough to get done as it is

By: Joshua

Joshua — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:43:40 +0000

M&M has a totally different culture than CBRE. at cbre management is much more organized and things are more regimented. at M&M each manager does business in a different way. on some deals they tell you that you cant co-op. on some they demand you do. most of the sales managers have less than 5 years in the business and are worthless for transaction issues. they simply tell agents to "make more calls" and "find more deals" and "meet with more investors". they suck. and they only hire green agents that they can flog to death telling them to make 500 calls a week. so a lot of the bullshit you see is cause the guys dont know any better, dont have the experience and simply do what they see other people doing. the training is excellent though, and they get people to work their asses off. but the boiler room mentality instead of offering good splits to senior agents to bring their books is plain stupid. anyway, ignorance is no excuse.

i personally think the 30 day internal marketing thing is smart business for a broker. why not take a couple weeks to try and double end it before you go and advertise to every broker? yeah, fiduciary duty, blah, blah, blah… haha.

By: Square Feet

Square Feet — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:35:11 +0000

This is exactly right. M&M are far worse offenders than CBRE in my opinion.

By: Doug

Doug — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:28:16 +0000

Quiet? Can you say understatement?

*crickets chirping*

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:21:07 +0000

Although I'm a former CBRE broker from years gone by (they surely taught me some bad habits) you also need to include Marcus & Millichap. I've never seen so many emails from their brokers offering fee's now. The other little trick was to market internally for 30 days to their "preferred" buyers.

The comment about broadcasting non-exclusive listings is spot on too! It's not all the brokers fault though, because at the peak of the market, owners & developers didn't have to offer exclusives because their phones where ringing off the hook. I’ve heard it’s been pretty quite out there the past years…ya, think??

By: Doug

Doug — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:30:02 +0000

I've seen a lot of this kind of thing over the last few years as the market heated up. It was exacerbated by easy access to more and more online forums to advertise listing information. Don't get me wrong, using any and all online channels to advertise on behalf of your client is a good thing. What was happening here in Ontario far too often, was that agents were getting permission to advertise unlisted properties and then stating that they would only deal with buyers directly (I can only assume because they weren't able to negotiate a full service commission for their paltry service offerings). "Principals only please" has become the bane of my existence.

I agree with the other posters here too, it tends to be some of the larger firms that abuse this more often.

Who are these guys serving, their clients or themselves?

By: Joshua

Joshua — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 22:23:46 +0000

not to say that not offering a co-op is the way to go, but the value prop is less exposure (a lot of sellers want the exposure minimized for various reasons) and that if the buyer is working with the listing broker the listing broker has improved control and better probability of closing, and that due diligence wont be spread around willy-nilly. there are more reasons and there is a good value prop for it, its just not the right way to market every property. and cbre is stingy anyway, offering 0.75%-1.5% fees to co-op and then being lazy bums. not every cbre broker is that way, as i am always reminded by them, but theres a handful that really abuse that system (im looking at you, pcgnb).

By: Steve

Steve — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 07:51:02 +0000

I receive the same e-mails. You're absolutely correct, they do have a reputation of not offering a commission to a co-op broker. Many times I have seen these same e-mails tell brokers to get their commission from their client, the buyer. I haven't had the honor of earning one of their commissions, but it seems to me it would be awkward to ask my buyer to pay me…How much do I ask for? Not offering a commission to co-op brokers definitely puts co-op brokers at a disadvantage.

I understand wanting to get both sides of the deal, we can all use double the money. Isn't it every seller's goal to get the highest possible price for their property? What owner will knowingly sacrifice sale price so their broker can make more money? Sure, they have a network of investors that may purchase the property just as quickly as my buyer, but shouldn't marketing efforts include sharing the property with as many people as possible? Only then will you be certain the highest price was achieved at that given time.

By: Chris Rodriguez

Chris Rodriguez — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:36:09 +0000

If I were offering a prize, you would be a winner!