Nosoccermom,
I can't force them to close. I can only get them through the process if they are willing.

I've got a market solution for looky-loos: buyer's agents should charge buyers a "showing fee" of, say, $10-20 per house. When the buyer actually buys a home, those funds are returned (read: applied to the purchase). That way buyers will probably be more selective in picking homes to look at, saving the agent time and the sellers grief, looky-loos would be discouraged--or at least pay for their tours, and serious buyers wouldn't limit their looking pool at all because they know they're going to buy something.

There is a lot of economic good that would come from buyers (instead of sellers) paying buyer's agents.

On another note, this thread has caused me to think a bit on our own situation and wonder how our agent is viewing us. We're closing on our home sale in 2 weeks, have a small house in our new area as temporary accommodation, and will be buying something larger/more suitable when we find the right house.

So while I've been browsing online listings for a couple years, I've been looking at houses in person for just a couple months, once we got in range of potential for a real purchase.

First I looked at half a dozen modestly priced houses in middle-class neighborhoods and from that determined they're too much of a downsize after walking through and "feeling" them.

Then I looked at another half dozen in the next price range up, with at least 2000 sf and 2-car garages. Two were possibilities in my mind, so I took Mr. Weedy back. He vetoed one, and liked the other, a fixer on 7 acres that is really rough and (IMO) overpriced for said roughness. So I looked at another half dozen houses in the next price range up, in more move-in-ready condition (the idea being we can buy a fixer and put money into it or we can spend an equivalent amount buying something already done, so let's see what that gets us). We haven't had time to bring Mr. Weedy back to look at the 3 with the most potential, and it's been 3 weeks since I saw them.

And in the meantime, because work schedules are busy, we have to seriously consider whether we can fit another fixer into our lives and actually enjoy it, instead of be frustrated by it. So maybe we'll consider that fixer we saw, maybe not. We need to finish our little transitional home first and see what life is like when we don't live in 2 places 100 miles apart.

So do we look like serious buyers to our agent? If we saw the perfect house, and it was well-priced, we'd jump on it. But we don't appear to be in a hurry to buy (we're not, and quite frankly, keeping up with the business is a higher priority than having a nicer house).

If you were an agent, what category would you put us in? BTW, I've been up front with our agent about our position and desires.

@ncrealestateguy: Sorry, I didn't read this carefully. I thought you were the seller's agent. Still, I don't get it: Are you saying that this person was just looking for fun and then pulled the plug the day before closing? Isn't there something like earnest money?

Nosoccermom,
I was his buyers agent, and I felt from the beginning that he was a flaky buyer. IMO, he was laundering money. He would show me deposits made and then the next day it was gone. When asked where the money is, so that we could show the seller some sort of proof, he would give me some hogwash about this and that. I should have kicked his butt to the curb right then. But sometimes even us experienced agents get caught up in it all. Another clue that he was not legit was that when he found out that the closing attorney would only accept wired funds to close the deal, he demanded that she accept a certified check. (Ever since the Patriot Act, anything over about $10,000, needs to be wired). I believe he did not want an electronic trail of this transaction.
Anyhow, he lost his Earnest Money Deposit and Due Diligence Fee, he never paid the soil engineer nor the attorney.
My point was that there are a lot of people willing to waste their time along with the sellers and their agents. I don't really think they are out looking for fun, I think that they really do envision themselves coming into a lot of money, and they can not wait until they do to start looking. In my experience, these dreams of hitting it rich never pan out.
I run into these people all the time. And the funny thing is, is that most of them are rich in material items but have no on hand money at all to be applying towards a RE transaction.

weedyacres, pay your agent $210-420 in showing fees, and you may be taken more seriously. ;) I take it your idea was a throw out, not a well thought out solution. Correct?

You are an unmotivated buyer. You said you have been up front with the agent about your current frame of mind, so I don't see a problem. Understandably, the agent may choose to not spend as much time and effort looking for houses for you as a result. But if they see one that has a higher likelihood of fitting your desires, would bring it to your attention. If you expected them to work as hard for you at this time, while your are not all that interested in buying, that would be unrealistic.

Actually, gyr falcon, my proposal is completely serious. It would solve the problem of looky-loos, would it not?

I also think that buyers should pay their agent's commission, as it makes the whole transaction more transparent, economically efficient, and aligns incentives. Agents would then show FSBOs as well as realtor listings, because they're paid either way. And that's better for the buyer.

Keep in mind that sellers would then just pay their agent 3% (or whatever they negotiated), so prices should be lower, no?

We're serious enough buyers that I'd pay the "looking fee," because I know we'll buy something, just not sure on the exact timing. But I'd sure do a lot more research on the front end to make sure I liked my agent.

Actually, no it would not. First it addresses a non-problem. Many agents LIKE lookie loos--they are viewed as future customers. Open houses are for selling agents to meet new people more than selling the house in many cases.

And if fees are only for houses that the buyers agent takes you to, there is a host of problems. Who regulates this money? Who pays for the people needed to oversee this process? What if you want to switch agents after the contract period; is your money now forfeit? Good luck getting it back if the relationship goes sour. New legal actions now take up more time than weeding out the few buyers that are not serious.

My buyer's agent took me on a 12 house viewing run one day. Six of those houses ended up being the same model--and it was not going to work for us. Yes they should have been checked more closely. As it was, I just shrugged it off because it wasn't really a problem. Forking over $100 for the experience would have made me furious! Is the agent going to limit the list of houses to show because buyers is getting angry over the fees? You bet. Lowers the chance of a sale, that. Agent shooting foot now.

Agents that charge the fees will lose business to those that choose not to. What happens if I view a house one day, pay the fee, then there is a "free" open house a day or few later? Do we get a credit? I decide not to view many of the houses because the fees are adding up--lowering the chance of a purchase, and extending the time it takes for me to find a house to purchase. More work for the agent. What if I want to view the house two times, or more? Is there a discount?

Do I wait for fee-free open houses to look without my agent--taking away their opportunity to fine-tune details of our likes and dislikes? Going solo until we find a house and purchase without a buyer's agent is looking more and more attractive. The fees will cause mistrust where a partnership should exist. I predict a host of misunderstandings. And I have listed only a quick-minute thought run.

All for a problem that isn't. Sellers may not like lookie loos and buyer's agents may not like the few that end up wasting their time. But it is a part of doing business; and I don't mean just the real estate business.

"But it is a part of doing business; and I don't mean just the real estate business. "

Exactly. Looky-looing is the great American pastime (also known as "shopping.")

Nope, sorry, gotta run a credit check on you before you can try on those shoes!

There is one good reason for having an open house ... it lets all the lookie-lous in the neighborhood run over and check the place out.

They may have friends or co-workers who want to move into the area.

Just to throw this in: In parts of Europe, it's the buyer or renter who pays the commission.

How many people are lookie loos or just out shopping and end up falling in love and buying it? I ended up buying a brand new motorcycle once that way. I went to the dealer for parts and just happened to sit on one of the bikes. Well that was it. Just make sure all the buyers are pre qualified.

The only way I'd paid a fee to be shown a house is if there were much more information available prior to the showing than there currently is for the average house.

I'd need a detailed floor plan and much, much better photos than I see these days. The main reason I want to look at a house is to see the floor plan and how the rooms flow from one to another. Nothing I see on the MLS or Zillow or Realtor.com shows that.

Would the extra work and time be worth the showing fee to the agent? I have no idea.

But I can tell you that I've looked at houses that looked absolutely perfect when viewing photos and descriptions online, and that were absolutely horrible when I saw the actual house. Or that were simply not what I wanted at all.

There was a time when I charged an up-front $500 refundable fee when showing properties to questionable buyers.

LazyGardens Wrote:
"There is one good reason for having an open house ... it lets all the lookie-lous in the neighborhood run over and check the place out.
They may have friends or co-workers who want to move into the area"

IMO, if these friends and coworkers are serious buyers, they would find out about the home.
DebraK, buying a motorcycle is not a good example to illustrate your point. You buy a bike and take it home...done. And you can liquify the bike fairly easily and quickly if you get buyers remorse. Not so with RE. I have over 1000 prospects in my database to whom I send listings and communication to. The average time from when they register on the website to when they "pop" is over two years! Hardly an impulse purchase!
Kasha Kat, Lookey - Loos are not shopping... that is the entire point of this thread.

Lookie-loos are not necessarily not shopping--they just may not be intending to buy immediately.

We signed up for Listing Book and looked for two years (mainly weekends), developing a feel for what was available in our target area, likes and dislikes for both my husband and myself, learning what our price range would get us, etc. When we decided to purchase, we found an agent, started making offers and went into escrow after six weeks. Wouldn't it have been a waste of an agent's time to take us through all of that learning process?

Ncrealestateguy, do you honestly prefer qualified buyers to walk in without knowing what they are looking for? Let's spend two months dragging around the client before they realize they need to up their range $25,000. Another month to discover a 3-car garage is not a must-have. Have them waffle on making an offer on the perfect house, because there might be another "better" house out there. I would imagine that would be frustrating.

In my area, buyers often gather information from multiple sources--not just go blindy by what agents and listing sites are telling us. Both school districts in our area were highly rated; yet I still went to the parks and talked to local parents. Traffic patterns? (I live in SoCal) You are much better off talking to the people that live there. I know of someone that purchased what they thought was a 40 minute drive to work home; too bad their rush hours commute in reality was 1.5-2 hours each way. Yeah. A real talk to the folks there lesson.

Now, if during our two year lookie-loo period we had found something that we really wanted, you bet we would have stepped up our timeline and become serious buyers instantly!

So, in those two years of looking, you never saw a single home that you really liked? I doubt that.
Sellers want people to look at their homes who are ready, able and willing to purchase NOW, not a possible two years from now.

We looked for 2 years as well. And didn't see a single one we liked enough to buy that was also offered at a price we deemed reasonable. It's great that sellers want someone who will purchase now, but life doesn't always work to fit other people's preferred timelines. When we finally found "the one," we made an offer 5 minutes after seeing it. If you don't have to buy immediately, you can afford to be picky. That's true of any purchase.

Opps. Another post snuck in between.This one was for ncrealestateguy.
---------------------------------------------

I already said that several posts ago: Sellers may not like lookie loos and buyer's agents may not like the few that end up wasting their time.

In our two years of looking, yes we did see houses we liked. Unfortunately, the way of open houses here at that time was to not list those that would be open on sites or in the newspapers. You had to just drive around the neighborhood and follow signs. Often is was a huge waste of time, as the signs would end up at condos or houses outside out price or size range. The bank owned ones, and pre-foreclosures, often were at very unrealistic prices (up to several hundred thousand over current market for condition). So we were going to have to wait for the banks and underwater sellers to get real. That took several years--just beginning about the time our non-agent period ended. We didn't really want to purchase while the market was still tanking--and we were wise to have waited.

I noticed you didn't bother answering my question about if you would prefer buyers to sign up without knowing what they wanted or having any idea what their money would buy.

This post was edited by Gyr_Falcon on Fri, Oct 25, 13 at 21:45

Most of my buyers have been receiving listings that match their stated criteria for a long time. I am speaking of over a year to 3 years. I have over 1000 prospects that are receiving listings. Whenever something new comes on the market or when there are status changes or when there are price changes, it notifies them via email. By the time they reach out to me, they are mini experts as to what the marketplace has to offer them.
I suppose I just don't understand your question.
Please remember this: RE agents do not get paid a dime unless we go to a closing. Hauling someone around who you know is probably not going to buy for up to two years is a bad business decision. For every day I spend with someone like this, is a day that I am not spending with someone that is going to generate me an income. We try to make educated guesses every day on who to spend time with and who not to. I am sure over the years I have missed out on some long term buyers that I gave up on that eventually bought. But hopefully, I found one or two more "Now" buyers that made up for it.

Which was my point. You don't want to waste time showing homes before people are ready to buy. But people who have never purchased before won't know what they want, need and can afford without seeing homes. You cannot learn (become mini-experts, as you say) from looking at listing information and pictures alone--it is necessary to view homes in person and compare them with the other information.

To save the buyer's agent time, we were lookie-loos to gain information. Then, when we had a strong idea of what we needed and could afford, we found an agent. We then quickly found houses and made offers.

You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say people can't view homes as lookie loos without an agent because they are not ready to buy and expect people to walk into your office knowing exactly the house they need and can afford to save you time.

Well, you can say that... but... ;)

Incorrect... There is a huge difference between people that are ready, able and willing buyers, but who need to see a few homes to determine for real, what their wants and needs are. These people are not lookie - loos. Lookie - loos are are people that like looking at homes that do not know if they can be pre qualified, Lookie - Loos are people that just like to see interior of homes while killing a Saturday afternoon, or even someone who knows that they will be buyers in two years while they wait out the market downturn, just like you did. You even admitted that during those two years you had the intentions of not buying until the banks and sellers became real with their prices.
And that's fine that you found an agent that runs their business in this way. Just do not get upset if you run into sellers, just like the OP, who refuse to waste their time by showing you their home.

I like Weedy's idea.

I never understand why realtors do not provide a menu of services and charge fees accordingly. The services including sending buyer the updated listings, listing house for sale, performing market analysis, checking out/viewing a house, providing advice on price and term of the offer, negotiation, and closing...etc. Buyers and sellers pay for the service they choose/use. There is no conflict interest, everything is clean cut. Real estate commission rate could be much less than the current commonly used 6-8%, because I bet it has factored in the free service for the transactions that do not materialized.

The current commission system leaves plenty chances for conflicts. I am not sure how/why people believe a buyer's agent is loyal to the buyer when the same buyer agentâÂÂs commission is paid by the seller? I think the 'pay for service' system would prevent buyers/sellers from taking advantage of realtors and home sellers, such as getting free services and then wiggles out of paying for commission. It reduces the chance of realtors stealing buyers from each other.

When I sold my first house and moved 2000 miles away, I seriously thought for situation like ours a seller's agent would be loyal to the buyer. Since the seller would be gone, the potential future business would be with the buyer. Yes, I digressed....

I am not sure why the problems that Gyr_Falcon listed are problems. If a buyer wants to âÂÂeducateâ him/herself by touring houses to develop a feel, pay for it but not at the expense of realtors and home sellers' time, money and effort. Why the service fee needs to be regulated? Who regulates service fees from other service providers, such as physicians, attorneys, general contractors, plumbers, car mechanics, hair dressers, yard guysâ¦etc.

If the service is paid and delivered, why should worry about getting refund later? Why a buyer is entitled for a refund if pays to see a house then it has an open house later. We donâÂÂt ask for refund purchasing an item at regular price, then later the same item goes on sale.

Of course, there will be competition among agents such as offering free services. But the 'fee charge for service' agents also could entice with lower commission rate or no commission. In a free market, it is up to the service providers and buyers to make decisions.

"Our house is in the million dollar range so I know the buyer pool is smaller but I dont want to waste my time on lookie loos"

I would have said you were being picky until you mentioned what price range your house is in.

If my house were in this price range, I'd be hesitant to allow just anyone in while I was still living there. I've read about people who go to open houses with the sole intention of stealing valuables, meds. Gotta watch out for copper thieves as well.

Is it possible for you to put your nicer furniture and other valuables in storage so there is nothing to steal or damage? Also, do you have to live there while it is being sold? If you have a security system, are you able to review the traffic that has come through? Do you have a security sign posted so people with ill intentions will know they are on camera? That might tell you a little more about the quality of buyers you are attracting.

The house we eventually purchased was on the market for at least 6 months. The owner was a flipper so he wasn't living in it. It took him two months to fix it up and then it sat from August until Dec. I'm not sure why because it was in a great location. After the holidays he dropped the price 20k and started holding back to back open houses.

We weren't interested at the original price, but our interest picked up once the price dropped. It was also very helpful to be able to look at it without having to make an appointment with the seller. We weren't using a buyer's agent and didn't want to take up the sellers agents time.

The open houses attracted plenty of people including lookie lou's. I went to many of these open houses and purposely hung around so I could hear what they liked/didn't like about it. I also appreciated that the owner was there so I could speak directly to him instead of the agent who didn't have a clue what had been repaired, etc.

At the 5th open house (his agent on vacation) we hashed out a price and had our attorney send his agent our contract. Cash deal with only a inspection contingency. It closed at the end of the month. If he'd only had people over by appointment it would probably still be for sale.

Why on Earth would you limit your future home to those that only held open houses? That is just strange.

"Please remember this: RE agents do not get paid a dime unless we go to a closing. Hauling someone around who you know is probably not going to buy for up to two years is a bad business decision. For every day I spend with someone like this, is a day that I am not spending with someone that is going to generate me an income."

If I were a RE agent I would not like to cart someone around that had no intention of buying.

When we were looking (without a buyer's agent), I once gave a seller's agent $10.00 for gas for meeting me at a house that was 25 miles away.

I felt it was the least I could do to make up for the time and money she was spending to show me this house by appointment.

I might consider weeding out the casual lookers by charging them to see each property, with the condition that they would get this money back ($10.00?) after the sale closes. ;)

There is a difference between people looking to buy even if it takes 2 years just because they havent found that special home instead of people looking who have no intention of buy now or maybe ever.

This last showing we had is what has frustrated me the most. The couple who showed up in an expensive sports car, definately looked like they could afford our home, spent almost an hour looking around, (we walked around the neighbourhood while the showing took place), we had a chance to talk to them before they left. He a dentist was looking to maybe retire in 5 years so they were looking to see what a million dollars would buy them. WTF! This is what I mean by people wasting my time.

Don't want to haul people around all day.... So don't! You decide how to best spend your time. A new agent may however want to do just that some dull February day with nothing else going on.

You're conflating a bunch of different people in your neat little categorizations - all I've needed the past few years while in lookie loo status is OCCASIONALLY (1-2 times per year) to open the door for me and wait about 20 minutes while I poke around. The listing agents often have assistants who can do this.

At the time I get serious (like about now) is when I sign a contract with my buyers agent. Part of our discussion was about how we will work together - how I can be picky and take two years if that's how long it takes ... but without her wasting her time. She understands I will be doing my own looking at the pics and exteriors before calling her.

Anyone in any service industry will have their own personal hells that they have to deal with. As an administrative support staff person don't get me started on the particular headaches incurred by the nervous nellies and micromanaging control freaks I've had to work for- LOL! What can I say - people can be a royal PITA in any profession. You can wish all you want that people weren't PITA's or think they should be more organized with their lives - but good luck with that.

You make your own business decisions - no one is telling you otherwise. And yes if a seller with high sales price is so overwhelmed with qualified AND unqualified lookers that she wants to filter out the unqualified for her own sanity, OK, that makes a certain amount of sense.

But to question peoples motives and intentions who you don't know and haven't even met, and pigeonhole them as "desireable" or not desireable or suggest that they are somehow in the wrong for daring to want to look at a house without a preapproval letter is really uncalled for. YOU may not want to serve them in YOUR particular capacity, according to your criteria re: which market you want to serve, but you can't fault people for wanting or asking for a particular service. A simple "no, sorry" will suffice!

I really don't like the idea of charging people for the honor of viewing the property. Maybe the OP can put a tipping jar out on her countertop.

This post was edited by kashka_kat on Sat, Oct 26, 13 at 14:17

I stated multiple times that we did not contact an agent until we were ready to buy, so we didn't waste their time. We viewed open houses; we did not have any private showings.

The market 3-5 years ago, when we were looking, was very different animal in SoCal. The listing prices were for the amount owed to the banks, even though the houses were often trashed and the market had crumbled. And the few equity sellers were using those listing prices as comps. NO ONE in their right mind was buying them.

The house we bought was on the market then, but not on our radar, for almost 34 percent more than we paid for it. It had reentered the listings during our active search, and had sat there for over 100 days before we saw it and made an offer. We didn't wait for the bottom of the market, which was still another 1-1.5 years away, because our goal was simply not to end up under water if we needed to sell in five years. They were happy to find a buyer. We were happy to find a house that would not ruin us financially. So many people were devastated financially by the housing bubble pop--has everyone forgotten that already? (Considering the recent house prices here, sadly, I suspect so. One million worth of house here would probably shock out-of-state buyers speechless.)
-----------------

lol @ tipping jar. What happened? We used to get brownies just for showing up! :-)

edit: Inserting a forgotten ingredient into brownies ;)

This post was edited by Gyr_Falcon on Sat, Oct 26, 13 at 15:43

Sellers want people to look at their homes who are ready, able and willing to purchase NOW, not a possible two years from now.

Of course they do - but even if I'm "ready, able, and willing to purchase NOW" ... I'm still going to hold out for the right house for me, not buy one just because I'm financially able and its seller is anxious.

There are two groups of buyers - those that MUST buy fairly soon and those that have the luxury of holding out for the house they really want.

We looked at bare lots and houses for a period of about 2 years ... always being clear that we were planning to move and build, in no rush to move, but willing to buy either a lot or house if it was the right one.

* One agent told us to call her when we were 'ready'. She didn't bother to find out what we were looking for.

* Another said that the market was small, sporadic and "quirky" and that it took patience to wait for the right place at the right price, then decision speed to nab it before someone else did. She took some notes on location and pricing and said she'd keep us in mind.

And we kept in touch: Sometimes it would just be a phone call, if there was anything new or interesting on the market - she took us through three houses one weekend that were light-years out of our price range because they were totally awesome and she had the time. She showed us a few derelicts because they were in the target area and she wasn't sure how much renovating we were willing to do.

The weekend we actually made an offer ... we waded through shin-deep snow and looked at 8 houses, which was a surprising number in our target area and price range ... 5 looked OK on the net and on paper but not in person (poor traffic flow, bad "updates", didn't "feel right").

Of the other three, the most desirable one was not-quite under contract, but the wanna-be buyer was being incredibly nit-picky about flaws (on a house built in 1880-something) and driving the seller nuts with the demands to have things done at no extra cost in her counteroffers. We made an offer at listing price, with a few "this must be fixed" clauses (leaking plumbing) but weren't asking for the moon.

Bingo ... a "quick sale" that only took 2 years to make happen.

What's amusing is that the house was originally listed by the first agent, and she couldn't be bothered to get the keys to agent 2 a year before we bought it. Annoyed at the lack of success, the owner listed it with agent 2 a month before we looked at it.

'Hauling someone around who you know is probably not going to buy for up to two years is a bad business decision. For every day I spend with someone like this, is a day that I am not spending with someone that is going to generate me an income.'

exactly.

& it doesn't matter if the agent is a busy, experienced practitioner or a newbie or a fabulously successful team leader with 'assistants who can show the house'.

Busy agents must use their work time for producing business.

New agents, especially, must use their work time for building connections & producing business.

Agents who have assistants *pay* those assistants, so they must spend their work time producing business.

Look-loos look at houses because they like looking at h houses, & if they aren't planning on buying within a reasonable amount of time, *they do not constitute a good use of time *.

"Planning" to buy a home in 2 years means...
not planning to buy.

Nothing will be the same in 2 years time, not the market, not prices, not financing options, not popular styles.

Looking at homes with the idea of buying in 2 years is like dreaming about winning the lottery:
fun, but it doesn't translate well into reality.

This doesn't mean you shouldn't look at houses if you want to, but you need to be fair to the sellers & to the agent who is showing these houses to you.

If you can get a seller to let you in once he knows that you just want to look at his house, then you need to pay that agent (& here's where a newbie might be willing to go along with you).

Call a limo company & find out what you'd have to pay to be driven around the city all afternoon, & then add maybe $100 to it for entry into those houses you want to look at.

"For every day I spend with someone like this, is a day that I am not spending with someone that is going to generate me an income.

Why on Earth would you limit your future home to those that only held open houses? That is just strange."

Ncrealestateguy, we did not limit our search to just open houses.

If we saw a place that looked promising, of course we called to see the house.

But we would never think of asking an agent to drive us around all day, looking at places we aren't really interested in, on their dime/gas. That would be unethical.

We respect other people's time.

If people want to play games, then perhaps some enterprising person should figure out a way to charge those who purposely waste your time.

WOW! I want 25 clients per year like you DreamGarden.
It took me almost two years in the business to realize that there were so many time wasters out there.
Lazygardens wrote:
"Of course they do - but even if I'm "ready, able, and willing to purchase NOW" ... I'm still going to hold out for the right house for me, not buy one just because I'm financially able and its seller is anxious.
There are two groups of buyers - those that MUST buy fairly soon and those that have the luxury of holding out for the house they really want."

Lazy, just because most buyers find their home in an average of three trips out, does not mean they settled for something less, as you hint at.
Unless you are looking for something truly unique, it does not take two years to locate a suitable home, if you are a ready, able and willing buyer.
KashKatWrote:
"But to question peoples motives and intentions who you don't know and haven't even met, and pigeonhole them as "desireable" or not desireable or suggest that they are somehow in the wrong for daring to want to look at a house without a preapproval letter is really uncalled for. YOU may not want to serve them in YOUR particular capacity, according to your criteria re: which market you want to serve, but you can't fault people for wanting or asking for a particular service. A simple "no, sorry" will suffice!"

WOW Kasha! Why you so offended?
I never suggested you or other lookie - loos were "in the wrong" for being so. And you are very wrong to suggest that it is uncalled for me or any other agent to question people's motives and intentions before I decide if I want to take them on as clients. Totally wrong. If I did not do just this, I would have been forced out of this business a long time ago. It is just a common sense business decision. Don't take it so personally.

kashka_kat,

You said "all I've needed the past few years while in lookie loo status is OCCASIONALLY (1-2 times per year) to open the door for me and wait about 20 minutes while I poke around. The listing agents often have assistants who can do this. " -

Are you saying you wasted these agents' time for 1 -2 times PER YEAR, for a FEW YEARS while knowing that you had no intention to buy?

Did it ever occur to you that agents might have to drive long distance and switch their work and family schedules to accommodate your requests of "poke around for 20 minutes" yet no intention to buy? How about the time and effort you wasted these sellers in preparing for the showings, and the false hope you misled them?

The thinking and behavior are self centered yet you rationalize that are acceptable as agents' "paying cost of doing business".

You are incredibly disrespectful to OP with your remark of "Maybe the OP can put a tipping jar out on her countertop.".

This post was edited by azmom on Mon, Oct 28, 13 at 9:24

NCrealestateguy Unless you are looking for something truly unique, it does not take two years to locate a suitable home, if you are a ready, able and willing buyer.

Two years? Easily done.

* Small college town.
* 800-mile round trip to small town, therefore limited viewing trips.
* Limited desired area, even within that small town.
* Specific minimum bdr/ba count to allow for an office and guests
* Limited inventory of that size within that area, of any kind, much of it used as rentals to students and unlikely to come on the market.

When you add those factors, it's a matter of waiting for the natural turnover to take its course and waiting to get lucky and see a house that's a good fit.

I just checked and there are three listings now that would have fit our criteria on paper. One is next to an auto repair shop (nice shop, good mechanics, but I don't wanna live next to them), and the other two I've already seen and rejected. One was remuddled beyond economical fixing at its price point (stove on island with about 2.5 feet on all sides of island cleverly photographed to make it look OK), and the other is a lovely Victorian money pit with way too much overdue maintenance.

It's not as though we were taking up hours of her time every weekend, and consuming gallons of her gas. We drove. It was drive past the possibles, pick up the agent at her office, buy her lunch and look at the possibles on paper, catch up on local gossip, and maybe drive a few blocks to look at a house if one had passed the drive-by test. Drop her back at her office.

We only had one lengthy house crawl, the last one. It took about 4 hours to see all 8 houses, and then it was all paperwork and emails.

Unless you are looking for something truly unique, it does not take two years to locate a suitable home, if you are a ready, able and willing buyer.

In our situation, we were looking right after the housing boom in the NYC suburbs, when every homeowner seemed to be looking to get more for their house than they paid/or wish they were paid during the peak. It was a nightmare process, and housing at "reasonable" prices seemed to trickle onto the market. People who weren't desperate to sell were holding onto their properties waiting for them to rise again, and most of what was on the market that wasn't wildly overpriced was awful.

So I'm not sure a blanket statement can be made about serious buyers, time to purchase, number of houses viewed, etc. It's all so dependent on local market conditions. Probably way different in NC than in metro NYC.

And that is why I clarified my statement by saying "unless you are looking for a truly unique property." You Lazy, are looking for unique properties. And that is fine. You sound like a ready, able and willing buyer. I would not consider you a lookie - loo.
Sas95 wrote:
"In our situation, we were looking right after the housing boom in the NYC suburbs, when every homeowner seemed to be looking to get more for their house than they paid/or wish they were paid during the peak. It was a nightmare process, and housing at "reasonable" prices seemed to trickle onto the market. People who weren't desperate to sell were holding onto their properties waiting for them to rise again, and most of what was on the market that wasn't wildly overpriced was awful."
I will go out on a limb after reading this and say that you were not a ready, able and willing buyer. Maybe you were ready and able, but you were not willing to pay what the market was dictating. You can not tell me that most of those "overpriced" homes did not end up selling. They just did not sell to you, because you were not quite willing at the time. And that is fine. But it is nice when buyers can recognize this themselves.

I can tell you that some of these overpriced homes are still on the market today, three years after we bought. One across the street from us started in 2007 at over $4 million, and is now priced at $1 million and it still isn't selling. Most that did sell sold for considerably less than the asking price, many sitting for months and years on end. Some were just pulled off the market. Virtually nothing sold at these prices. The market wasn't "dictating" these prices-- the sellers were "wishing" for these prices. There is a difference. Things that were priced at real market value sold immediately, some with bidding wars. It's just that there was precious little for a while at real market value, and nothing we wished to make an offer on.

Again, ncrealestateguy, with all due respect, I think things were/are different in your neck of the woods. But please don't make assumptions about what kind of buyers we were, when you really have no idea.

I am not knocking anyone on this thread... just trying to explain from a RE agent's perspective why we choose to work with some persons and not others.
There is a difference between a picky buyer and an unreasonable one.

I appreciate that. I will tell you that our RE agent chose to stick with us during that time. She sent us only listings that were not at a "pie in the sky" price point. And we didn't waste her time. If we saw something that we thought was possibly overpriced, we would go to an open house-- we certainly wouldn't make her drive all over town for nothing.

But she knew what market conditions were and she herself found them ridiculous. And she never doubted our intent; she knew that when the right thing came, we'd buy. So she continued to keep in touch and look on our behalf.

Would some, like you, have written us off? I'm sure many would, and I certainly wouldn't hold that against anyone. But in exchange for her work, when we did find a house we wanted, we made sure she was brought into the deal even though she didn't play a part in finding the house. (And in our area, there are no buyer's agent contracts, etc., so we had no obligation to do this.) And we've sent several buyers her way who have ended up buying with her. So sometimes there are long term benefits for RE agents for their perseverance that extend beyond the quick sale.

One poster made a comment about being hesitant to show a million dollar house to just anyone. Again, like sas95 said, you can't make assumptions when our markets are so different. For those of us in many areas of the coasts, one million barely gets you a 1950, 1400sq.ft ranch, on a tiny lot, that needs to be gutted. Based on my market, I imagine a teardown and wonder why you would want to limit who looks at it! Someone else sees a beautiful large new home, because that is what a million will get you in their market. Stating a location would really make a difference in these conversations.

'sometimes there are long term benefits for RE agents for their perseverance that extend beyond the quick sale.'

I think you're doing Realtors a disservice by assuming that limiting our services to people who are serious buyers means that we're out for 'the quick sale'.

Evalluating a potential buyer's likelihood of actually buying doesn't mean that we toss out the 'hard' ones & snap up the easy ones.

My experience is that often it's harder for an older couple or family to find a workable house than for a first-time buyer.

They have more stuff, they have more hobbies, school district may be more critical, they may want a big garden or no land at all...while a first-time homebuyer sometimes can toss their futon on the living room floor in any house that fits their budget!

I once spent a very intense 2 weeks with a just-retired couple looking for a home:
their house was under contract,
they were moving 2 counties north to be closer to the grandchildren,
he needed a place to park his boat...
& they had a round curio cabinet that she had inherited from her grandmother that didn't fit in many of the houses we could find in their price range.

& I once made 9, count 'em *9*, trips to the mid-cities area to help a couple find a home, & they were the most easy-going people in the world!

The point is, as ncreguy says, that we serve our clients when they *buy* or *sell* a home.

chipsa, again you missed information I had posted;

I said "the buyer pool would be smaller for our home being in the million dollar range" so obviously that means it is in the high end and definately not a tear down. That being said, what does location or even dollar value have anything to do with my original post about denying showings to people who are not in the market to buy, only to look. Doesnt matter whether house is in the lower end or higher end,definate lookie loos should not be wasting anyone's time.

'whether house is in the lower end or higher end,definate lookie loos should not be wasting anyone's time. '

yep, & another thing to consider is the safety, or even just the 'ick', factor.

You do *not* want somebody looking at your house/stuff/photos unless that person is looking to buy a house like yours.

Obviously, many of us feel that one does what needs to be done to sell a house, even put up with lookie-loos that might turn out to be real buyers. Different opinions.

Roseabbey, this is your house, your schedule, your decisions - you can place any restrictions you like on the showings of your house. Tell your realtor and have the appropriate notes/instructions placed on the MLS. Problem solved.

NC - Why am I so offended (you ask)? Oh, I dunno - guess I was reacting to negative put-down labels applied to me and being lumped in with the sociopaths who stiff you at closing.

I will trust that in person you are businesslike and have a more nuanced way of saying "this is what my practice is and how I would want to work with you", rather than "don't waste my time, you looky loo timewaster."

Fortunately this is America and we have many choices about where and from whom to get goods and services. I like my agent exactly because she's communicated clearly what her boundaries are and what our process should be so it works as well for her as it does for me, IF it should end up taking 2 years to get the type of historic house I want. Dont need some passive aggressive type who says yeah sure I'll work with you, but then doesnt have her heart in it.

AZ - did I waste those agents time 1-2 x per year? Perhaps, but you'll really have to ask them. There was one who wanted to see the inside as much as I did and seemed quite happy to talk to me for a half an hour about the market in general.

I fully disclosed my status of being in a fact-finding phase to see what my money could buy and if I needed to adjust my budget and expectations accordingly. My current house was a fixer upper and it was only after seeing a few I realized I realllly didn't want to do that again. With that type of house you really do need to get in to see it - such things as bad smells and quality of workmanship (or lack of) don't always convey well in photos. ( And please note that in many of the more rural areas - at least in this corner of the US - there isnt much on the internet and you're lucky if they've posted one or 2 pictures that are blurry or hilariously incompetent.)

I will say that I was not aware that being shown a house without credentials was such an imposition and will modify expectations accordingly. Since all the ones Ive seen (except possibly one) were empty and obviously not lived in, I hadn't considered the impact on people who may be living in theirs.

Re: tip jar comment, I should not have addressed this to the OP (sorry) but to those who feel their usual compensation is not adequate. Why else would you charge money to see a house IMHO. If your intent is to dissuade people from looking who you believe won't, or can't buy, then simple communication to that effect is all that's needed. Otherwise you may end up dissuading people who CAN buy but are frugal. They may want to see your house, but not THAT much.

This post was edited by kashka_kat on Tue, Oct 29, 13 at 16:48

This: "Most people don't waste their time randomly looking at property if they aren't going to buy something."

and this: "I am considering telling our agent to only bring buyers who have sold their house or have conditional offers on theirs and are seriously looking to buy. Am I being unreasonable?"

roseabbey, if you're still living in the house and not in a hurry to sell, I don't think you're at all being unreasonable by discussing with your agent whether to limit showings to buyers who are pre-qualified. I would, however, suggest that you allow your agent some greater flexibility as to what it means to be a qualified buyer, otherwise you might be screening out too much of your buyer pool.

When we purchased our last two properties, we did not have offers on our existing house (and had not even listed). During our most recent search, our agent suggested that we look at a home that was "outside" our price range -- we easily could afford the payments but had not yet made all of our financing arrangements at that level. We really liked that home, and when it was still on the market 30 days later (quite a long time in our area) we were able to make an offer slightly less than asking (another 30 days and our financial situation would have been much better). We didn't get the house but our offer acted as a stalking horse for another offer the sellers got at MOL list price. My point is, had we been screened out, the sellers very well might not have gotten such a good price for their property. Just something to think about.

oaktown, thanks for your post. We have not yet talked to our agent about this because posts like yours do give us something to think about. DH and I have decided for now to leave it status quo. Thanks again.

roseabbey,

It sounds as though you are suffering from the typical seller's frustration-lookers but no bites. Then you find out that the buyers aren't even making any attempt to get ready for a purchase. I hear ya. Same happened to me. I was ready to scream....but I didn't. Patience is not my virtue.

I sold a few years ago when the market was tanking. People were afraid to pull the trigger. One in particular Lookie-Loo burned my butt when they came with their realtor and said that the driveway was too long and steep. This came from a couple who sat in front of the house the night before for a long time. Don't you think that they could have figured that out while sitting in their car the day before the showing?
We ran around like crazy and got a 3300 sqft house ready to show in 1 hour just so that the Lookie Loos said that the driveway didn't meet their needs.

Nonetheless, I swallowed my anger and frustration realizing that we were at the buyers' whim because the market was not so good. We even had people and realtors come and look at the house so they knew what to list their property for....I found out later. Many of the showings seemed odd. We had the house listed with one of those FSBO agencies but paid the buyer realtor 3%.

Bottom line: I felt like I was being used, abused, disrespected....and then I showed the house MYSELF to a couple who "pretended" to be broke, did not have their house for sale, nor were pre-qualified. They did say that they drove by our house over the years and admired it. They looked at it and I heard nothing. A month later they called and purchased the house with CASH! Be patient. Selling a house is an extreme inconvenience.

Unfortunately, the buyers are in the drivers seat. All you can do is be flexible with your showings. The right buyer may be a Lookie-Loo initially.

I hate, hate, the lookie loos. Maybe I am evil. I had one guy who brought in booze in a foam coffee cup, while his "wife" complained about the stairs. I could smell it and kept thinking "don't spill that on the new carpet buddy" Also why complain about stairs? It is a two story colonial- there are stairs.

Next I had the lookie loo who complained about the black tile in the bathroom. He must have meant grey slate floor in the kitchen. He also hated the color of one wall and gave a paragraph critic of that on his feedback. All while I am selling under market price.

The good thing about his brutal critic was it led me to believe the kitchen must have been too dark or he would not have mistaken the floor. So I painted the doors and trim white, and I took out the expensive stained glass ceiling light and put in a cheap clear one. It did lighten the room up quite a bit. I got a full price offer next showing.

Honestly- I feel the frustration. It is like you want to stop them at the door. But I tried to be positive and think "this might be my buyer". The only stipulation I had was that I would not accept offers without a pre-approval letter.

House is under contract so I hope it sells. Inspection was done and the buyers are fine with the condition of the house. If I have to show the house again I think I will need sedatives.

'If I have to show the house again I think I will need sedatives.'

I bet we've all been there, Acadia!