This is all part of the scam, and I'm surprised more people can't see through it. Five people walk into a room at closing. There are two agents, a title agent, the seller, and the buyer. Only the buyer brings any money - so it's pretty clear who is paying.
Put it another way - if the seller goes with a lower percentage agent, then the buyer keeps more of the offer price, and should therefore accept a slightly lower offer. This saves the buyer money too.
> Among some not so obvious valuable tidbits that the buyer's agent can provide: [...]
And you think that's worth 6% of a house that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars? I think that's insane.
This all sounds like a pitch from a realtor.
I was hoping perhaps someone from the industry could comment on why those agents haven't overtaken the market by storm.
But considering that in the US it's the seller who pays both agents, there are no immediate savings for potential buyers, and some, being new to the home-buying process in general or new to that zip code, would prefer some hand-holding and chit-chatting provided by their agent at no cost to them.
Among some not so obvious valuable tidbits that the buyer's agent can provide:
* general feel about the neighborhood, whether it's on the rise or in decline
* previous scandals and issues, like contaminated water, city attempting to pass an additional levy or tax, house being on the airport path, etc.
* potential future improvements, like a light rail station planned nearby
* referrals to various local professionals, like inspectors, surveyors, painters, or movers
* any other new developments in town or neighborhoods that the buyer might not have considered, especially when shopping remotely