Real Estate Investing in the Real World
Real Estate Blog
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13, 2007

Three academics from Northwestern University have just published a study comparing for-sale-by-owner sellers with sellers who used a Realtor. The researchers started with the hypothesis that a good Realtor might make up some of the commission that he or she is paid by helping the seller to get a better outcome – either in terms of higher price or a quicker sale.

They tested this by evaluating sales in Madison Wisconsin from 1998 to 2004. The dominance of a single local FSBO website makes Madison an ideal location to compare results – working with the local MLS and www.fsbomadison.com the authors of the study were able to access nearly every sale that occurred during the period.

The results are surprising: the average sale price of FSBO homes is higher than the average price of homes sold by a Realtor.

This directly contradicts a claim made by the National Association of Realtors that using a Realtor results in a 16 percent increase in average sales price. The NAR does not detail their methodology or the assumptions that they used to reach this number.

The Northwestern University study, however, is meticulous and transparent. The authors discuss the consistency of their data sets, study methodology, and their approach to resolving biases in the data sets.

But…the gig isn’t up for Realtors…yet.

1. The study was conducted in a relatively special place – Madison, Wisconsin – a region which has, for reasons not discussed in the study, developed a special culture in which FSBO sales have captured a significant percentage of the market. This fact, in itself, might skew the results. FSBO penetration hasn’t reached these levels in most other markets, and an FSBO seller is more likely to be viewed as an oddball, and that matters.

2. There’s a self-selecting factor which the study doesn’t adequately address. Negotiating a sale isn’t for everyone. Logic dictates that a) sellers who are good negotiators are more likely to get a higher price whether or not they use a Realtor and, b) sellers who are good negotiations are more likely, on average, to sell FSBO. The study addresses this, but not to my satisfaction (if anyone cares about this you can ask in the comments…)

FSBO conditions haven’t spread nationwide, and FSBO isn’t for everyone. The later condition won’t change, but the first one will.

So…who cares? What does this mean to me?

You’re an investor and this trend will impact you. Thoughtful studies like this one will continue to demonstrate that paying a Realtor $18,000 to sell your $300,000 house isn’t good value. FSBO listings will proliferate, and that’s a good thing for the investor market. A commission is a classic transaction cost, and transaction costs decrease liquidity and pull profit out of every trade, both for the buyer and the seller.

Realtors, however, will continue to be an important part of your business as a real estate investor. To respond to market pressures the real estate industry will have to start offering a suite of products that meet your needs and price them accordingly. As an investor you don’t need help finding your dream home, you don’t need a negotiator, and you don’t need to have your hand held through the transaction. What you do need is a competent business partner to supervise the paperwork drill and help make sure the deal closes efficiently.

That’s not $18 thousand worth of service that you’re asking for. Realtors who understand this and tailor their offerings and pricing will have investors beating a path to their doors

Tags: , ,
Add to:
Add to Technorati Favorites
Add to Digg
Add to del.icio.us
Add to Reddit
Comments(12)
posted by: Chris Smith
Comments
June 16, 2007
07:42 AM
Chris,

Your last paragraph was good. I would say that a professional real estate agent that knows IPs would also be able to:

- be an independent set of eyes (I sometimes see investors get "gold fever"

- keep you out of legal trouble. Sometimes my job is to remind the investor that there are human beings on the other side of the transaction, as well

- be a negotiation counselor. Sometimes you get too focused on one strategy when another voice may open the door to getting the job done

Real estate agents that work with investors MUST have the flexibility to adapt and to offer services not expected of most agents. Or to offer less services than most agents. My clients needs can vary greatly, and therefore my involvement and fees vary greatly.

That is one of the reasons I carefully selected my current broker. I have the freedom to do as I please, so long as I am contributing to the bottom line. So many agents out there are both unwilling to learn or change but in addition are barred from their broker from being able to adapt.

Just my $.02.
June 17, 2007
12:36 PM
Good comments, Chris. Real Estate, like all industries, is a moving playing field. Real Estate professionals who adopt new business models and focus on the needs of the client will remain relevant.
June 21, 2007
08:00 AM
I think my questions on this was that any study is flawed. I'd want to know if the FSBO study removed sellers who eventually had to list with a REALTOR. Perhaps some of the folks they talked to were more well-versed in sales, but most unrepresented sellers aren't.
June 21, 2007
11:28 AM
Dee: I agree that no study is perfect, but some are more rigorous than others – and this one appears to handle the uncertainties and controls very well (unlike similar NAR studies, which don’t reveal their statistical methodology at all.)

The study covers virtually all of the home sales during the study period – over 15 thousand transactions - so this isn’t an anecdotal study, it’s based on a statistically significant data set. Homes that were listed FSBO then subsequently sold via a Realtor are counted as Realtor sales.

As you point outnot everyone is cut out to sell their own home – and I think that is the factor that is difficult to quantify (as I noted in my post.) The study does a rigorous job of converting the large data set into a like-for-like comparison of Realtors sales vs FSBO sales, but the one factor that is difficult to account for is the fact that individuals who have general negotiating skills are more likely to go FSBO.

But to their credit the researchers don’t reach their conclusion by talking to a few FSBOs, included all of them: 20% of the total sales, or 2,140 homes. I agree that no study is perfect, but the methodology of this one appears to be pretty sound and the results are clear: the 20% of sellers who went FSBO on average did as well or better than the 80% who went with a Realtor.

The challenge to sellers and investors: does your competence and skill set match the 20% who went FSBO, or are you better off paying a realtor for some help?
June 25, 2007
12:53 PM
Wholeheartedly agree that the key to future success is the ability to offer consumers a "suite of products". Even FSBOs could use help with marketing, open houses, staging.
June 26, 2007
02:49 PM
Chris,

I agree with your post. That is why the Redfin paradigm is so intriguing. The current transactional cost of selling a home is way to high for the value you receive. And to take it a step further, if the bulk of realtors because mere "paper pushers and deal organizers" we could eventually move those those tasks online or to India with the right business model. With the market correcting itself right now, I am curious to see what type of services realtors offer to maintain and attract new business.
June 26, 2007
06:28 PM
Sellsius: A suite of products. Flexibility. Let the customer buy what he or she needs. Adapt and thrive. What a concept...maybe you can get the word out - you've got a big megaphone in this community!

Garrett: Offshoring to India? You'll have Realtors throwing bricks through your window. But...you're right. And that's exactly the reason that the real estate industry is fighting tooth and nail to keep the banks out of real estate (with a lot of help from capital hill). Throw an efficient business process at this opaque, inefficient industry and you'll create a lot of value for the end consumer - at the expense of the middlemen who stick to yesterday's business model.
June 26, 2007
08:20 PM
I know the India comment was a bit harsh but you understand my point. Anything that can be done electronically with low barriers to entry can ultimately be shipped somewhere else on the cheap. No one ever thought we would be shipping US tax returns to India but every one of the big four accounting firms do it.

If you are selling a home and trying to maximize net proceeds, its hard to choke down, much less justify, a 6% commission paid to agents that don't do anything outside of calling to remind you that your deadline to lock-up financing is coming up...sorry but my blackberry can do that. 60 minutes actually did a great story on Redfin a couple weeks ago. It was definitely interesting. It exposed how vulnerable real estate agents are in their own industry.
July 10, 2007
12:50 PM
Chris - Whether 6% is too much or not is not rocket science, as you'll surely agree. There are enough discount brokerages out there to offer ample choice to sellers. The public pays 6% because they didn't get results hiring brokers charging less. When a biz model offering lower fees works on a global basis, the market will follow. I've been waiting for that to happen since Nixon was in office. :)

I charge my clients 6%. But my value proposition isn't just getting their property sold, but to increase their net worth. If they thought they could do as well or better without me, they'd do it. I realize this is wholly unavailable to the house agent, but it's the main point for an investor client.

You, because you're such a knowledgeable investor, perceive no need for a guy like me, which I understand. If I can't make you wealthier than you can make yourself, where's the value? Regular folk though, who wish to get the same results you do, need experts to get them there.

Every now and then, I have a client who thinks her or she can do what I've been doing for them, and go off on their own. I never try to stop them, but instead, wish them well, and ask them to please keep in touch. The last one to do this found themselves mired in investment properties causing them endless losses, wasted time, and a stalled portfolio. They came back, as 80% of them do, asking me to 'fix it'. Right. :) This particular couple has now racked up losses of seven figures, no lie.

And that's why my cliens pay me 6%, and smile while doing it. Those who started a decade ago with less than $100K and are now retired with five figure monthly incomes, usually don't complain about my fees. They refer their friends. Can I get those results every 10 years? Of course not, because I'm not responsible for cartoonish appreciation. But how many took that kind of money and retired with a six figure annual income over the last decade?

It's all about the value proposition.

I like your stuff Chris, and read it daily. You're one of the quality guys out there. Keep it up.
July 10, 2007
11:57 PM
Thanks Jeff. And I know you're a discriminating reader since I've seen your reaction when you've read something that you *don't* like, so I don't take a compliment from you lightly!

Thanks for stopping by...
September 12, 2007
05:58 AM
Chris, Nice title you have selected. Really it is true now a days FSBO is increasing rapidly. <
October 23, 2007
09:51 PM
I used to live in Madison, Wisconsin. It has a very progressive population. It is no surpise they have tried new things.

The book "Freakanomics" also has an interesting on this. I guess it depends on individual situations as well.
Leave a Comment
Enter Name
Enter Email - will not be published
Enter Website Address
Enter Your Comment
email a friend
print this page
About Me
Chris Smith
Email Sign Up
Enter Your Email Address

Add Email
Delivered by FeedBurner
Archives
My Blog Log