I still work my share of buyers, and find it is a good balance. Being out with buyers sheds light on what they want, how they think and how they respond. You can’t get that type of knowledge without being out with the buyer.

Bawld Guy- I still think its a load of crap. BTW I did exclude your Dad in my post, but I think he is an anomaly. That is really more of a discussion about MLS vs no MLS. The buyer’s agents on his team were still critically necessary to his success.

This may be like splitting hairs, but it is possible to sell homes without listing agents (how about FSBO’s, preforeclosures advertised in the legal journals, HUD homes, or when you get a buyer who has to live in a certain subdivision and you send a letter to all of the homeowners, or when you just happen to know someone who has a house that perfectly meets your buyer’s needs and you give them a call….) What I am saying is yes, obviously shoe salesmen need shoe manufactures in order to sell shoes, but shoe manufactures also could also not survive (for long) without shoe salesmen. It is a symbiotic relationship.

>>Russell, in a matter of a few minutes, can give you the names of dozens of listing teams across the nation doing equal or far more business than he does. He can’t, however, do the same for buyer agent teams.

Correct. I am in the top 25 agents in the U.S. again this year. But I am not “the” top. Last year (2006 stats) I was number 25 in the team “sides” category. There were a couple of people who beat me (in both volume and units) who only had one assistant. http://www.realestatejournal.c.....-intro.asp I don’t know of any high volume team who has lasted, long term, that *mainly* works buyers. This isn’t to say that some mega teams that mainly work buyers don’t do very very well.

>>Am I all wet, Russell?

No, BawldGuy, completely dry. As usual, I pretty much agree with everything that you and Bill Lublin have to say.

>>Listing agents don’t need buyer’s agents whatsoever? That’s the biggest load of crap I have heard for quite awhile. I am willing to bet that there aren’t any listing agents (with the possible exception of bawld guy’s dad) doing hundreds of transactions who wouldn’t crash and burn if buyer’s agents didn’t sell most of their listings.

Allan Domb from Philadelphia: http://www.allandomb.com for years did not bother to even put his listings in the MLS. He sold them without the MLS. Long term, he is still one of the most successful Realtors to have ever lived – he was doing over 1,000 deals a year 20 years ago. He does more than that today but doesn’t still enter “contests” (like me:-)

>>How many of your listings do you sell yourself Russell? I am sure you can give us an exact number.

Less than 15% To me, using MLS is *much* easier. That isn’t to say if the DOJ/FTC had managed to “change everything” I wasn’t fully prepared to withdraw from the MLS.

>>The thing that is tiresome is that a lot of the people doing mega listing business have this arrogant superiority complex that their way is the only way.

I am not one of those people. I have never claimed my way was the “only way”. It isn’t. There are lots of ways. None of them require my blessing. However, I am flatly stating that if an agent’s *primary emphasis* is on correctly working listings vs. working buyers, it is better, easier, more profitable, more conducive to being run like any other successful business (owner can be gone and still make just as much money), and there might actually be something to sell to someone when retirement time comes around.

>>There are plenty of people who make a great living working with buyers without investing 60 hours a week in the process. The trick is very similar to what it takes to be a good listing agent. Not working with just anyone, but learning how to generate enough buyer leads that you can afford pick and choose and only work with motivated buyers who are ready willing and able to make a decision.

No disagreement whatsoever with the above statement. But if you need to be gone for 6 – 9 months (like I did in 2001 when I had cancer) it is much much easier if the business is listings based to continue making money while not there.

>>A lot of people think the only way you can find buyers is by having listings. That is just simply not true.

Correct. Pay Per Click, SEO optimization, blogging – just to name a few. But the “thing” being offered as bait to the buyer is still a house. It makes no difference if that house is listed by you, your company or some other company. Buyers respond best to houses. Therefore – for optimum profit – it makes sense to have houses for them.

>>I don’t want to spell out exactly how it can be done, but trust me there are ways to advertise that will have your phone or email ringing off the hook. Then you can sift through the leads and find folks who have to move by a certain date, and have the money in hand.

>>I always do both. I generally have had between 10 and 20 good listings at all times for the last twenty years, and I am always working with at least 5 buyers.

I really don’t believe you and I have any real disagreement. You take and market listings and have lots of buyers that you sell homes. Your business is listings based. Even if you are currently selling more houses to buyers than you are listing. My point wasn’t “don’t sell houses to buyers” but take salable listings. Anyone who believes there is some downside to taking salable listings has a false idea. That was – and still is – the main point of my post.

Oh, and by the way Dan, Dad’s sales? 100% double ends without one single exception in the four year time span mentioned. Ever. There were all kinds of ‘Dans’ in his orbit too. Said he needed them. Time showed them to be walking/talking punch lines to the old joke. You know the one. ‘What came first, the listing or the buyer’s agent?’

I’m NOT denigrating buyer’s agents. I represent buyers all the time. In fact, ‘cuz of my local market, I haven’t listed a property since Bush’s first term. So since I are one, I like them.

I didn’t say what you said I said. I said listing agents don’t need you, an outside buyer’s agent.. And I stand by that. What I said was, buyer’s agents need listing agents to exist. Listing agents don’t need buyer’s agents whatsoever. Are you selling shoes or houses? Russell lists houses. These houses are then shown by other agents representing buyers. There’s a chronological order there that kinda sorta gives this whole debate a cartoonish feel about it, don’t ya think?

What that means is they don’t need you. They can opt to allow you to show their listings if they choose. A team whose foundation is listing, can sell all their listings without having to deal with you ever. Go ahead big guy, tell me I’m full of crap.

It was guys like you who tried in vain to force the most successful listing operation in town to cooperate with them. They needed that team’s inventory. He didn’t need their buyers though, so he told them to go fish. He had HIS OWN buyer’s agents on his team. Tuns out all those bully buyer’s agents were the ones full of crap.

So Dan, load of crap? I’m gonna print your comment, shred it, then spread it on my lawn tomorrow morning. I’m gonna water it a few days. This time next week I’ll have the greenest lawn in the neighborhood.

Buyer’s agents can’t even begin to make a living until the listing agent does his job.

Buyer’s agents survive at the listing agent’s pleasure. Nothing says they have to like it. They can even deny it. But until there’s a listing signed, there’s nothing for that buyer’s agent to do but tell listing agents what they’re saying is a load of crap.

Now, once Russell lists that house, THEN the buyer’s agent can show it and earn a living.

When escrow closes they can only hope Russell does it again — or they will indeed be sellin’ shoes

Load of crap my…..

Correct. I am in the top 25 agents in the U.S. again this year. But I am not “the” top. Last year (2006 stats) I was number 25 in the team “sides” category. There were a couple of people who beat me (in both volume and units) who only had one assistant. http://www.realestatejournal.c.....-intro.asp I don’t know of any high volume team who has lasted, long term, that *mainly* works buyers. This isn’t to say that some mega teams that mainly work buyers don’t do very very well.

>>Am I all wet, Russell?

No, BawldGuy, completely dry. As usual, I pretty much agree with everything that you and Bill Lublin have to say.

>>Listing agents don’t need buyer’s agents whatsoever? That’s the biggest load of crap I have heard for quite awhile. I am willing to bet that there aren’t any listing agents (with the possible exception of bawld guy’s dad) doing hundreds of transactions who wouldn’t crash and burn if buyer’s agents didn’t sell most of their listings.

Allan Domb from Philadelphia: http://www.allandomb.com for years did not bother to even put his listings in the MLS. He sold them without the MLS. Long term, he is still one of the most successful Realtors to have ever lived – he was doing over 1,000 deals a year 20 years ago. He does more than that today but doesn’t still enter “contests” (like me:-)

>>How many of your listings do you sell yourself Russell? I am sure you can give us an exact number.

Less than 15% To me, using MLS is *much* easier. That isn’t to say if the DOJ/FTC had managed to “change everything” I wasn’t fully prepared to withdraw from the MLS.

>>The thing that is tiresome is that a lot of the people doing mega listing business have this arrogant superiority complex that their way is the only way.

I am not one of those people. I have never claimed my way was the “only way”. It isn’t. There are lots of ways. None of them require my blessing. However, I am flatly stating that if an agent’s *primary emphasis* is on correctly working listings vs. working buyers, it is better, easier, more profitable, more conducive to being run like any other successful business (owner can be gone and still make just as much money), and there might actually be something to sell to someone when retirement time comes around.

>>There are plenty of people who make a great living working with buyers without investing 60 hours a week in the process. The trick is very similar to what it takes to be a good listing agent. Not working with just anyone, but learning how to generate enough buyer leads that you can afford pick and choose and only work with motivated buyers who are ready willing and able to make a decision.

No disagreement whatsoever with the above statement. But if you need to be gone for 6 – 9 months (like I did in 2001 when I had cancer) it is much much easier if the business is listings based to continue making money while not there.

>>A lot of people think the only way you can find buyers is by having listings. That is just simply not true.

Correct. Pay Per Click, SEO optimization, blogging – just to name a few. But the “thing” being offered as bait to the buyer is still a house. It makes no difference if that house is listed by you, your company or some other company. Buyers respond best to houses. Therefore – for optimum profit – it makes sense to have houses for them.

>>I don’t want to spell out exactly how it can be done, but trust me there are ways to advertise that will have your phone or email ringing off the hook. Then you can sift through the leads and find folks who have to move by a certain date, and have the money in hand.

>>I always do both. I generally have had between 10 and 20 good listings at all times for the last twenty years, and I am always working with at least 5 buyers.

I really don’t believe you and I have any real disagreement. You take and market listings and have lots of buyers that you sell homes. Your business is listings based. Even if you are currently selling more houses to buyers than you are listing. My point wasn’t “don’t sell houses to buyers” but take salable listings. Anyone who believes there is some downside to taking salable listings has a false idea. That was – and still is – the main point of my post.