Hello all, I know it's been quite some time since I've posted.  I saw some posts today I thought I'd pass on.  Seattle based Redfin today came out with a study declaring a customer advantage in savings prices.  Ultimately however as I looked at the numbers and how the study was conducted, I found the results to be less conclusive than they are portrayed.

I'd give the company kudos for their customer satisfaction ratings.  If a company can create a consistent satisfactory experience in this business I think they are doing a good thing for the industry.

The main point that is being expressed however, is that the company can save customers money through the negotiated sales price.  My first thought however after reading the claim was how would they account for the negotiated concessions I'm used to?  The company claims a buyer's sales price advantage of .928%  This is not saying much.  It's not saying much because final sales price is not necessarily reflective of the ultimate results for the buyer and seller.

I've seen a lot of deals cross my desk as a sales person, a real estate broker, and a mortgage broker.   The deals I've seen take many forms.  In my experience The ultimate selling price, is NOT a reflection of how well either the buyer or the seller was served.  Most every deal involved some kind of negotiation and concessions that were worked on between the parties that involved any number of things, including property improvements, closing costs and loan fee arrangements.  The net sales price did not necessarily reflected net concessions to favoring either party.

I actually discussed this last March, in going over the impact the practice might have on comparable sales data.  My example deal was one where I was the sales person.  In addition to negotiating a final price it involved $20,000 to be refunded to the buyer to go toward "current and future updates" on the property.  The seller preferred to do it this way as he was a builder and did not want the reduced price to impact his future sales.  While there were other things negotiated into the deal, that $20,000 reduction would never have shown up under the analysis performed by the company.

Just a thought. Did I miss something?