The type and amount of training required for those two fields isn't even remotely similar.

Does that matter? You're not hiring them because there is a high bar of training.

Heck, programming is literally done by schoolchildren for entertainment, myself included, yet people are quite happy to hire us because they understand the value of delegation.

That is true. But the value added by a good realtor can produce as much value add to a transaction. I've talked to enough people who had bad realtors that I know they can literally be useless. But I've also worked with a buyer's agent who got 3% knocked off the price of the home I was buying. This is in the city of Boston, where most houses go for over asking, so I might have viewed this move as risky without my realtor's experience backing me up. And I had none of the issues people complain about online (no pushing a particular home inspector or lender, etc.) Additionally, I've done enough deals involving lawyers to know there are some incredibly crappy lawyers, despite all their training.

On the other hand, is it possible you could have gotten a lower price by not having a realtor? Since the seller wouldn't have to give up a percentage of their earnings to you realtor, they might have been happy to lower the price.

It doesn't take a lot of time to learn how to change your oil, but i still pay a guy to do it.

But would you pay him $1,000 to do it? At some point, you would do it yourself. I think when people say they add no value, what they mean is, they don't add $35k of value on a $500k home purchase.

yeah and it takes longer to become a doctor than a lawyer but I doubt you'd argue against hiring a lawyer for that reason

>> "... hire a realtor I trust."

To a first approximation, 0% of real estate people are trustworthy.

Doubly true in hot markets.

If they are selling your house, they are looking for the highest sale price they can get which benefits both of you. Only the buyer should be worried about a scummy or just inexperienced realtor.

Most lawyers, however, are acting in your best interest. Most realtors are out to make a quick sale (at whatever price, they don't care as long as they get their commission)

That's fair. You can certainly make some big mistakes when buying/selling a house. E.g. neglect to have it inspected by due diligence deadline.

I used a realtor (with a discounted fee) for my first house. Now I'm buying the second by owner, because I know how the circus operates.

If you get a lawyer for your house transactions, you will pay a flat fee of less than $1000 and still get the advice to always have it inspected.

A lawyer? Geez, why a lawyer? They are highly qualified and expensive.

Hire a flat-rate agent/broker. They'll technically be your agent, but you do all the leg work.

Because you could hire a lawyer for a flat thousand bucks easily. Real estate agent is going to take 7 percent of the sale. So you get more qualified for way less money on most cases.

At least in my state, you have to hire a lawyer to do the transaction. They will make sure you did all the required steps, and charge a flat fee.

I pay less than $1000 for a lawyer and get 10x the value I get out of an agent for which I'd pay several thousands of dollars.

Here in North Carolina the buyers realtor fees are entirely paid by the seller so there's really no reason not to get one. Ours was really helpful in getting things lined up and providing checklists and support when we had questions.

If the seller stands to pay your agent 3% of the sale proceeds, the seller will typically be happy to reduce the price by 3% if you don't have an agent.

I just sold a condo in Minneapolis using a flat fee company -- fantastic experience and will never use a realtor again, save for maybe if looking internationally in a very unfamiliar area perhaps.

I just use flat-fee agent in Utah. $95. Same experience.

If you want an industry ripe for disruption, consumer real estate is HUGE. Got a couple start ups in my area trying to do that.

area where it concerns overhead due to law seems does seem ripe for disruption. But my concern is that this isn't a technical challenge, but rather political/legal one.

I mean that the buying/selling process is rather backward in technology and there's a lot of misunderstanding. The difficulties are less political and more inertial.

A primarily digital brokerage would be (is) a huge improvement.

This is generally not true. The seller of the home has a contract with the listing realtor. If there is no second realtor the listing realtor will usually get 5% or 5.5% instead of just 3%.

Depends. If that's the situation, you find a realtor who will sign and give you most all of their commission.

That is typical across the US.

The price is 6% higher than the actual value, so that the buying and selling realtors get their cut.

But if you don't have a buying realtor, any offer you make it looks 3% higher to the seller, and you can recoup most or all of that.

> I don't know anything about buying a house so I hire a realtor I trust.

You can hire a lawyer for exactly the same purpose. You will still need to hire inspectors, title companies regardless.