"JD" wrote
Caliban wrote
IMO, a listing agent (a.k.a. seller's agent) does not deserve the whole
commission just because he or she spent maybe at most an hour or two
with
the buyer showing him/er around the house. Nor from my experience with
two
home purchases (extensively researched) and one home sale would any
selling
agent expect what you propose.

Well, I guess you've never been an agent.

I am sharing my experience with agents. Readers can take it or leave it.

I agree there are sharks and some will pressure the buyer and try to compel
him/er to believe he/she "owes" the agent. Thus I should have said
"reasonable selling agent." And they do exist.

Georgia's laws, like many states now, do have provisions for buyer's
agents.
E.g. see web site
http://www.realpagessites.com/buyers...ion/page2.html
. Chances are, Georgia law also has provisions for "dual agency." This
sounds like something Dan might have to deal with, although I advise
against
it, as it's easily avoided. (Comments, anyone, on dual agency?) Dual
agency
occurs if the same real estate company that lists the property also
represents a potential buyer. It's allowed, and when a buyer signs a
contract for "dual agency," typically he or she will have explained to
him
that the company will do everything possible to get him/er (the buyer)
the
best price possible. (Meanwhile, some other agent for the same company
has
already signed a contract with the seller saying the same thing.) But
the
conflicts of interest (both agents since they work for the same company
want
to make the company as much money as possible) are present, which sucks
IMO.

Here we go with the "make most money" argument. All you need to do is work
up the numbers to see that the argument is bogus. How much of a gap have
you
seen in your vast experience? $2K? $5K? 10? How much commission is
involved
and what percentage of the total commission does it represent?

Are you saying dual agency for a buyer has less or the same risks as having
strictly a buyer's agent for the buyer?

Agents do fight over a thousand dollars. If you dispute this, then your
suggestion above that agents do expect compensation for merely spending an
hour with a potential buyer is bull****.

I see little advantage in dual agency, and many web sites strongly
discourage using it. The only possible advantage is getting some wiggle
room
on the negotiating price: Maybe the buyer and seller actually do use
dual
agency and also the exact same agent. Perhaps the agent will agree to a
commission of just 4% since if the buyer goes out and gets a buyer's
agent,
the first agent's commission will be less, at 3%, typically, for the
areas
where I have lived. But this is a lot of finagling. A buyer has enough
to
deal with just negotiating all the other minutiae of an offer. Plus, the
buyer just can't be as certain a dual agent will work hard for him/er to
get
the best price.

You may want to think it through a little more.

You may want to think.

Many internet sites say what I say.