Did anyone happen to catch the above named article in the Feb 2007 issue of readers digest? It is the "That's Outrageous" column by Michael Crowley on page 41.

The first few paragraphs of the article talk of a woman who chose to sell her investment home FSBO. She offered a Buyers' Agent 2.5% and held a Brokers Open to show off her home to all the local Agents. Very few Agents came to the OH. She joked with one of the Agents that she must have been "blacklisted" She goes on to say that she was informed that a local "Real Estate Executive" (what is that?) had been calling Brokers and urging them not to show her house. She states that it was an "organized boycott" . The writer then states it another way" it was a case of insiders rigging the system to protect their sweet deal."

This point alone has my blood boiling for a few reasons:

1) What is a "Real Estate Executive"? The are Agents, Salespeople, Associate Brokers, Brokers etc. There are no sources or names mentioned in the article, of course, as to where or how she obtained this information. But of course since it is written in a regular column, the story can be as biased as the writer wants.

2) What Broker, ABR, or Agent has time to be involved in such petty games. I am too busy working on a daily basis for my current clients and attracting new business. Why would I want to spend such negative energy on 1 FSBO?

3) She offers to pay a BA 2.5% of the deal-Good for her-She wants to represent herself AND pay for professional representation for the buyer. I always love this from FSBO-also a great selling point when doing a listing presentaion to an FSBO.

4) What insider is protecting who's sweet deal? What is there to protect? Noone has a contract to list but she offered to pay a BA. She is paying to insure the buyer is protected.

The article states the house was "priced to sell quickly" yet she pulled it from the market with "very few nibbles". There were "a few" agents that came to the OH, so why could they not have produced a buyer? Was the house NOT priced properly, was the condition of the property not as pristine as the seller thought?

New agents that are hungry for business would be trying to find a buyer for this property if it were "priced to sell". They would look at the commission offer and not care about the FSBO.

My very first deal when I got licensed was to sell an FSBO property offering me 3% as a BA. I produced a buyer and had a contract within 6 hours. I did not care that this was an FSBO-all I cared was that I found the perfect house for my client and was able to represent them to the closing of the deal. I have no doubt that there are new agents in her area as well that could have done the same thing if the property and price were right.

This is all in the first 4 paragraphs of the article. It is evident to me through the article that Mr Crowley is extremely biased and was just out to take a shot at the RE industry as a whole. Of course Mass Media is above reproach-there isn't even one bad journalist........

Just as any other industry-there are a few bad eggs in RE that feel the only way to get business is to be underhanded or say whatever people want to hear. Fortunately, I believe these are few and they usually weed out quickly.

Those of us that are in the business for the long haul know and understand that the Code of Ethics is not just a piece of paper, but a guide line to help us structure our business. My Father told me that my legacy was my name. Deal with everyone in everything, honestly and openly and never do anything to tarnish your name. That name will leave on with integrity through my children and grandchildren.

I will expand further in a later posting.