The entire thing is a bit of a racket.

It's only a conflict of interest if either the seller or the buyer expect their agents to negotiate price for them.

Generally agents steer well clean of that, for legal and time reasons.

A realtor is there to put properties in front of you / put your properties in front of others, and then close the deal when you tell them which property you're interested in.

Volume pays realtors, not price-over/under-replacement.

>It's only a conflict of interest if either the seller or the buyer expect their agents to negotiate price for them.

There are other details that come up through a transaction that many people wouldn't even think about. Are appliances included? Window treatments? Leftover paint? What year the transaction closes could impact taxes or incentives for either party. Inspections (what types of inspections are permitted, their timeline, what will be repaired prior to sale).

If there are disagreements about any of those, or if the property was materially misrepresented by the selling agent, it's way more messy than if another agent is involved and it's clear who represents who.

It’s a conflict regardless of negotiating price.

Your realtor (as the seller) is now going to give preferential treatment to one buyer for their own personal gain.

The realtor doesn't care which side of the party "wins", as long as the deal goes through.

So they're only preferring whoever is bitching the loudest?

It will be presented to both parties. It's not a hidden conflict.

Hidden or not it still is one.

I guess my point was, if it’s transparent the seller can easy take that into consideration when evaluating the offers. I’ve never given much thought to an agents opinion once I’m at that stage. I can evaluate the offers, their job is get bring them to me.

If people are out there just doing what their agents say with no questions asked, well, then yeah probably insist your agent doesn’t represent the other party too.