by infrawhispers on 10/3/23, 1:17 AM with 366 comments
by Xcelerate on 10/3/23, 1:54 AM
by goalonetwo on 10/3/23, 2:08 AM
They take 6% out of most housing transactions and add very little value. They managed to put themselves in the critical path by lobbying and regulatory capture. You don't get access to the listings and MLS open houses unless you go with a realtor. They also made the process artificially complex.
Most other countries seem to rely on direct customer to customer for most transactions, with a notary making sure the contracts are binding. Why can we not do that in the US?
by woeirua on 10/3/23, 4:18 AM
Let me be clear. Redfin is only breaking ties now because the NAR is fatally wounded. Redfin now thinks they can scoop up a lot of market share in the chaos that is going to happen in the next year. They’re not doing this for altruistic reasons.
[1] https://www.housingwire.com/articles/re-max-settles-buyer-br...
by caseysoftware on 10/3/23, 2:06 AM
This sounds like they're making a case for cartel behavior.
With the general unaffordability of housing, realtors are a good target right now. Not that they have anything to do with interest rates or have more than minimal impact on asking price, most people aren't going to think that far.
That said, if Redfin can open up access better (and still securely!), this could work out in the long term too.
by ajhurliman on 10/3/23, 2:07 AM
Wow, they’re really pulling out the big guns. I applaud their efforts to decouple MLS access from NAR, that seems to be the biggest hurdle in advancing the industry.
by ultrasaurus on 10/3/23, 2:59 AM
Technologically it's a market that's ripe for disruption, but socially as well: there just isn't enough boom left in the market to fund 1.5MM people working in it full time.
by nocoiner on 10/3/23, 2:32 AM
Possibly I’m a cynic but I suspect Redfin’s endgame here is not to reduce transaction costs but to capture those for themselves instead. Perhaps part of my cynicism is looking at transaction expenses in jurisdictions without realtors - usually there’s some middleman who tends to capture a single-digit percentage of transaction value (either a notary or the government or both or others). Funny how that pattern seems to repeat itself.
by bentt on 10/3/23, 2:30 AM
That said, I don't think consolidating the fees in a tech company is necessarily a win for the greater society.
by brightball on 10/3/23, 2:51 AM
I briefly had my license and the entire industry is like a giant pyramid scheme with fees on top of fees on top of fees.
I’m half tempted to reopen my license just to get involved with Redfin because I have no real estate relationships to lose.
by poulsbohemian on 10/3/23, 6:42 PM
All that said - Redfin can also go pound sand. They exploit information asymmetry where the public doesn't understand real estate services and think Redfin et al are somehow standing up to big bad exploitative realtors. Look man - the new boss is the same as the old boss and Redfin et al are not doing you any good. Find a good agent you trust in your local market, or go your own way if you think you can do better.
by user3939382 on 10/3/23, 2:38 AM
by happytiger on 10/3/23, 2:05 AM
If they pull this off they will crack open innovation and some long overdue lower cost options into the real estate markets.
by aabajian on 10/3/23, 1:52 AM
by xnx on 10/3/23, 3:08 AM
by elteto on 10/3/23, 2:18 AM
by rainyguy on 10/3/23, 3:34 AM
Of course, this probably comes at a cost to realtors who get their margins squeezed even more.
by blindriver on 10/3/23, 2:34 AM
We sold and bought our house in 2021. We bought for $1 million and sold for almost $3 million over 8 years. When it came time to selling the house, my realtor was able to extract an extra $100k from the buyers as well as make it an all-cash offer with no contingencies.
When we bought our new house later that year, the house we were looking at was on the market for about a month. We were going to give an offer at list price, but she could tell the selling agent was a bit desperate, so she was able to get it $100k below list price, something that is unheard of in the SF Bay Area.
Overall she netted us $200k over both transactions, and she was singlehandedly the reason for this. That's what you get when you have a really good agent.
by ccvannorman on 10/3/23, 6:07 AM
As a buyer and seller of multiple homes, I've not had success with RedFin and I've had varied success with realtors.
That said, a good realtor is absolutely worth 6%. A bad realtor (of which there are plenty) is actually worse than DIY / RedFin.
I say this because I want everyone with the position that "Realtors are never 6% value" to consider that they may have simply not worked with a good realtor yet.
by gedy on 10/3/23, 2:26 AM
First home so had no idea how this was supposed to work, but seemed other real estate agents didn't treat Redfin as a "real" realtor in any case.
by midnitewarrior on 10/3/23, 2:26 AM
by jackcosgrove on 10/3/23, 3:17 AM
On one end is a traditional realtor arrangement, with the 5% commission divided between the two agents. On the other end is for sale by owner, with potentially no commissions. Adjacent to that is a flat fee listing service, which costs about 2.5% in buyer's agent commission. If you sell through Redfin, your total commission is reduced to 4% from the industry standard 5%, with 1.5% going to your agent. If you buy through Redfin within twelve months of selling through them, you get an additional 0.5% off the commission for a grand total of 3.5%.
Not bad. It can save you $10k or more at jumbo mortgage house prices. Redfin has already done well by doing good and offering a differentiated product in the middle of two other offerings.
I have sold two properties, one using a flat fee listing service and one using Redfin. The former was a fair amount of work, while the latter was way less, comparable to a traditional realtor in the level of service offered. I would recommend Redfin to anyone.
by outside1234 on 10/3/23, 2:14 AM
by etchalon on 10/3/23, 2:23 AM
It's a grift.
by QuadrupleA on 10/3/23, 2:24 AM
by el_benhameen on 10/3/23, 2:03 AM
by chasd00 on 10/3/23, 2:40 AM
by thebiglebrewski on 10/3/23, 4:17 PM
by yalogin on 10/3/23, 3:49 AM
by zaps on 10/3/23, 11:23 AM
That escalated quickly.
by Tempest1981 on 10/3/23, 3:48 PM
by ancorevard on 10/3/23, 3:13 AM
It is incredibly user hostile.
by respectthepeace on 10/3/23, 3:00 AM
by nojvek on 10/3/23, 1:34 PM
In general the best markets are have low transaction fees, efficient, trustworthy, maintain minimum quality bar, and many balanced players on both ends.
In this scenario NAR has created an inefficient market.
Same with most states having a very hefty permitting processes that takes more than half a year for new construction.
Not saying we abolish permits, but Americas solution to housing crisis is making the permitting process faster and transparent.
We can’t call ourselves capitalists when the markets are rigged.
Gotta let the builders build, the sellers sell and the buyers buy.
by yieldcrv on 10/3/23, 3:29 AM
do they have processes in place to not just become another NAR?
by mmaunder on 10/3/23, 2:44 AM