Real Estate Brokerages - do they matter to you? and how would you rank them?

[irvinerealtor]

Opening this poll to the board, to see what people's opinions are here.

I bring this up because I constantly re-evaluate where I hang my license. This year has caused me to take an especially-close look as my office location is changing and it's a natural question that all of my officemates are facing. Many of the other brokerages are heavily recruiting and although I have my own opinion, it would be valuable to listen to what people here have to say. As is the case for all RE licensees, I can hang my license with any broker I choose and want to see what people's impressions are of the different brands that are out there. Thanks in advance for your input.

-IR2

 

[rkp]

Your first choice should not mention sole-proprietor.  Brokerage isn't important at all to me but that doesnt mean I favor sole-proprietors.  I just don't favor any brokerage model and rather look for the agent.

In our hood, the most popular agent seems to be Jenny and if she changed brokerages, I don't think anyone would notice. 

 

[irvinehomeowner]

I think it depends. I sold/bought with both a large firm and an independent firm and the experience on the surface seemed similar but the main difference was the agent and then the security of knowing that there was a large broker behind the scenes if things went sideways.

Most times, things don't go south, so you may not need the brand recognition and backing but it is nice to have your home listed with WeHaveLotsOfHelpRealty so you get good coverage rather than OneManShowAgent where you have to fight for their time. You also get other perks like Broker Tours where all that agents in that office see your home before it goes public (side story: we bought our first house from one of these tours, our agent saw another agent's listing (same office) before it went live and we started negotiating even before the first Open House).

So from a sell side, I would go with a local brand (although not as much needed in Irvine) with an agent I know personally.

From a buy side, the brokerage doesn't matter as much as the agent and here I would go with the one I trust and have a relationship with.

To maybe answer IR2's question on what his decision would be, if you've built up enough clientele and reputation, you can probably go with a smaller broker so that your revenue is higher, but not knowing the ins/outs of what a large brokerage does for you in sending you leads, that may not be the right answer.

TalkIrvineRealty.com? I can work part-time as an associate if I don't have to go back to school for anything.

 

[homer_simpson]

I'm thinking in Irvine it doesn't really matter as the the homes pretty much sell themselves..

But if you venture out to Tustin Ranch, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa etc... you kind of need that big brand recognition.  When I think of Tustin Ranch or surrounding areas of Tustin I immediately think Seven Gables or First Team.. It's that type of recognition that helps drive business to you..

People "feel" more confident working with someone under a recognizable brand over someone like "IHO, broker"....

 

[irvinehomeowner]

People "feel" more confident working with someone under a recognizable brand over someone like "IHO, broker"....

What?!? That hurts. I think you meant IrvineRenter.

#OhSnap

 

[homer_simpson]

Would pay big bucks to see you vs. Irvine Renter in a bball match..

 

[rkp]

But if you venture out to Tustin Ranch, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa etc... you kind of need that big brand recognition.  When I think of Tustin Ranch or surrounding areas of Tustin I immediately think Seven Gables or First Team.. It's that type of recognition that helps drive business to you..

I see it differently.  Even in Irvine, there are certain agents that dominate a neighborhood.  Jenny for Woodbury.  Mike Dunn for Northwood. 

Our friends tried to sell their WB home and it got no action.  As soon as they hired Jenny, it had offers.  If they hired some random from First Team where Jenny hangs her license, I don't think they would have gotten the same reception.

Same in other areas.  Each neighborhood has a certain agent that is really familiar with it. 

 

[rkp]

Also as IHO noted, buying and selling is different.  For us, we didn't use any one agent for buying and we made nearly 50 offers over 10 years.  Buying is all about price and negotiation which we were comfortable with. 

To clarify, this makes sense in homogeneous areas like Irvine and surrounding.  Its not like an agent will have some deep insight on a property.  Everything is fairly new and you can easily find the floorplans.  In my parents hood in Mar Vista, an agent can help a lot as simple search tools won't help when there are 100 year old houses that look new and 10 year old houses that look ancient.  Also depending on how they remodeled it, the sq ft might not reflect the actual sq ft.  In those areas, a buyers agent can be really helpful.

On the selling side, I don't think its the brokerage but rather the marketing power of the agent or brokerage that really helps.  Professional staging and pics, glossy handouts, advertising on door hangers, open houses, etc. 

 

[usctrojancpa]

Scott, if you'd like I can give you the contact information to my broker (has over 500 agents and is licensed in 5 states) so you can speak to him.

 

[notTHEoc]

If you are getting 70%+ of your biz from referrals, I would strongly consider a smaller broker where you don't have to split as much of the commission and have more room to offer rebates.

Big name means nothing to me. The argument I have heard is if SHTF, a big name will back me up. First off, I'm not that confident a big name will truly back me up when SHTF, but second, I'm trusting my agent is good enough to greatly reduce the odds I get in a situation where SHTF in the first place.

It's more risk, but you have a good reputation so I would go to a small broker where you can deliver more value for both yourself and your clients. If it doesn't work out in a few years, I'm sure you can go back to a big broker again.

 

[eyephone]

Undercut the competition - Offer a low commission rate or offer a flat rebate, $100 plus gift card when the deal goes through only.

You can create a website, with the tag, rebate irvine real estate, sell, buy

 

[qwerty]

Money talks. Clients that are selling want to pay the agent a lower commission. Clients that buy want a bigger rebate. If a broker like USCs allows you to do that and get more volume while taking home the same pay per transaction then it's something you should strongly consider. You probably have an established client list that is going to go with u regardless of the broker. And you are in the best position to know what benefit the big broker name actually provides if the $hit does hit the fan.

 

[Paris167]

Money talks. Clients that are selling want to pay the agent a lower commission. Clients that buy want a bigger rebate. If a broker like USCs allows you to do that and get more volume while taking home the same pay per transaction then it's something you should strongly consider. You probably have an established client list that is going to go with u regardless of the broker. And you are in the best position to know what benefit the big broker name actually provides if the $hit does hit the fan.

very true

From the recent buy side the Suterre Properties agent told me that 50% of their co-op goes to the brokerage firm and then the big sob story as to why they didn't want to give me a rebate on the purchase. Had I gone with someone that is not paying out so much of the co-op to their large fancy brokerage firm, I as the buyer would have gotten back more $$ (and had I gone with a different agent - lesson learned, never make that mistake again)

big brokers are overrated

 

[barton]

Experienced agents make 80 to 90 percent of sales at Suterre Properties. New agents make 50 percent of sales.

 

[usctrojancpa]

Money talks. Clients that are selling want to pay the agent a lower commission. Clients that buy want a bigger rebate. If a broker like USCs allows you to do that and get more volume while taking home the same pay per transaction then it's something you should strongly consider. You probably have an established client list that is going to go with u regardless of the broker. And you are in the best position to know what benefit the big broker name actually provides if the $hit does hit the fan.

very true

From the recent buy side the Suterre Properties agent told me that 50% of their co-op goes to the brokerage firm and then the big sob story as to why they didn't want to give me a rebate on the purchase. Had I gone with someone that is not paying out so much of the co-op to their large fancy brokerage firm, I as the buyer would have gotten back more $$ (and had I gone with a different agent - lesson learned, never make that mistake again)

big brokers are overrated

In my former life as an auditor, one of my bigger clients was Prudential Real Estate Affiliates (the franchisor for the Prudential Real Estate brokers).  Let's just say from what I saw the franchisors and the brokers made stupid money.  Sure they provided some marketing and other services but not even close to what they collected in commission splits and fees from the actual agents closing the deals. 

Lining the pockets of clients > lining the pockets of a broker and/or a franchisor

 

[usctrojancpa]

Experienced agents make 80 to 90 percent of sales at Suterre Properties. New agents make 50 percent of sales.

Yeah, once they made their broker a pile of money their commission split goes down.  No thanks.

 

[sgip]

Having worked both at a smaller market bank, a very large mortgage banker, a 5 person broker shop and now (once again) with a TBTF bank, I find there is terrific value in a brand behind you. For every 1 person who says "that brand XYZ123 screwed my Aunt Sally during her short sale, so I won't work with you" there are 100 people who are happy with the brand. That's a very favorable ratio to work with.

On the other hand there are great pitfalls with a brand that's not properly managed. Prudential was able to successfully re-name into Berkshire Hathaway Home Services (blehgh) but what about the Evergreen's, First Teams, or Tarbell if they come around to the point where they'd sell? I'd not worry about that as much relative to how being associated with a big brand can help open doors. Smaller shops - along with family run companies - tend to have bigger political battles which offers more hassle than value. I was with a family owned mortgage banker as well as at one time an in-house lender for a family owned chain of real estate offices. Avoid these whenever possible.

In the end, it's all about the negotiated contract with the broker. Some KW or Re/Max Realtors took the contract as presented, hook, line, and sinker  suffering the consequences of short sightedness. Other Realtors negotiated a pretty hard bargain based on personal volume and other factors. If I was facing a change to another employer, I'd want to be associated with a name brand, but unless the "standard deal" was modified, I'd not make the leap. Get a good contract with a name brand and see what comes of it.

My .02c

 

[irvinerealtor]

Thank you all for the feedback.

In looking at the responses, if I'd had better foresight I think it would have made sense to split this poll into two: buying side and selling side.

My initial question is really focused on the buyers' and sellers' impression of the brands from the end-client position. The answers (so far) have been that it is not really important to the buyer/seller as long as the agent is getting the work done effectively. Any more feedback of your impressions of the different brands is welcomed. Please keep it coming.

rkp - yes, the different brokers often supply their agents with the same tools, but different agents have better/worse proficiency with getting the best out of them, and get better/worse results.

USC - I appreciate the offer to speak with your broker, but my questions would be about how much support The Force offers to the buyers/sellers. What do they offer as far as office/meeting space, continuing education for agents, search placements, news ads, networking, etc?
Mrs. IR2 has her broker's license, so for clients that want to work with zero transfer cost paid out to a broker, we can do that for them, as we've done for several TI clients in the past. So for us it's not a matter of lowest-cost but what's the whole package being offered.

i1 - yes, the SHTF scenario is exactly what I talk about when giving people options on how they want to work (and deeper pockets to sue, if the stuff gets REALLY bad.) From my experience, given the choice between getting a bigger rebate with Mrs. IR2 or having the support of the big broker in working with me, buyers have been about 50:50 divided. Sellers have been 100% with the brand. On our own we can't compete with the advertising reach of the big boys, and when you're looking for the one best buyer they've felt it matters.

Qwerty - your response that "money talks" is accurate, well-received, and a lesson I've learned a long time ago. I don't try to fight the tape on these clients. As the sales argument goes for persuasion, "If you're talking, you're losing."

SGIP - I agree with you on the importance of brand but I am trying to get a heat-check from the end-users on this. I value your input as I know your experience of being the go-between for institution and clients is the same as mine, but I'm trying to see how much of the brand importance is merely the kool-aid that I've absorbed, and how much is actually "real" in the eyes of the people buying and selling. So far, I've stayed with the biggest global brand with the thought that if they can help me do a better job for clients, even at a slightly higher cost (to me) than I could get at a smaller firm, that it's the best way to build my business. But I'm open to being wrong, and open to making changes if I'm the minority in thinking this way...

-IR2

 

[rkp]

Sellers have been 100% with the brand. On our own we can't compete with the advertising reach of the big boys, and when you're looking for the one best buyer they've felt it matters.

 

With buyers searching for properties online, does the big brand advertising still have the same pull? 

Also, what were the options the seller was given?  Are they saving 2% or a few $100?  I am surprised they wouldn't want to test the lower commission model first before jumping to big brand.

Anecdotal but observing friends who have switched agents while selling, their biggest reasons have been with quality of agent.  Some agents have a sense for staging, pro pics, better description and multiple open houses while others put bad description and horrible pics. 

 

[irvinehomeowner]

Sellers have been 100% with the brand. On our own we can't compete with the advertising reach of the big boys, and when you're looking for the one best buyer they've felt it matters.

 

With buyers searching for properties online, does the big brand advertising still have the same pull? 

Also, what were the options the seller was given?  Are they saving 2% or a few $100?  I am surprised they wouldn't want to test the lower commission model first before jumping to big brand.

Anecdotal but observing friends who have switched agents while selling, their biggest reasons have been with quality of agent.  Some agents have a sense for staging, pro pics, better description and multiple open houses while others put bad description and horrible pics. 

Yes, this is when it comes down to the agent.

I don't know the details of the costs of the big brands and if for listings, if they help with the cost of the photographer, stager, website, flyers or whatever, but if it comes out of the agent's cut, I'm not too sure about value of a brand other than reach and peace of mind.

For a smaller brand (or no brand agent), if they provide a professional photographer and just as much sales materials as a big brand, then it hinges on the agent.

As an example, when we listed on of our homes with a no-brand agent, I had to do all the work of finding the stager, prepping the landscape and we even took the photos of the house ourselves (I don't think we had any of those "photographer in the mirror" photos ). Contrast that to Scott where he did all that legwork, had a professional photographer, his own stager and a dedicated website domain name when we listed a home with him (and to be fair, I do think USC provides a similar experience now).

Do the big brands provide any leads? Is it like Bell Tower Barber in Lake Forest where when a customer comes in (either by phone, email or in-person) and the next realtor in line gets to help them?