Statistically agents are doing a good job of selling their own listings.

Statistically agents are doing a good job of selling their own listings.    As they are hired to do by the sellers.  

I like to give my buyers an example that illustrates why a buyer might prefer to hire an agent who works at a company that does not represent sellers. i.e. a Buyer's Broker.

Assumption: if a buyer were to be looking at properties with an agent who is not steering his buyer, particularly, to any of the company sellers, then the chance of finding his favorite property listed with his agents firm should equal the % of the listings held by that firm.  Right or not right???

So XYZ Company with 15 % of the inventory should be selling, statistically speaking,  15% "in office".  But that number in a real life example is close to double that number.  Some of the overage is sign calls or ad calls.   I can't prove it but, would it be a fair assumption that some of the buyers who hire Dual Agent Realtors, to find the best house, are being guided toward choosing a company listing - an acceptable house - but, statistically speaking, not the best house.

Next example: As of  the last  10 months  in Fargo Moorhead board of Realtors,  about 1 in 7  of transactions were involving the same firm handling both sides.     There are 80 firms on MLS.  It would seem to me that randomness would cause an in house transaction about 1 in 80 - not 1 in 7.     I don't know how many you throw out of the equation because they were direct sales from the sign or the advertising.  In fact the statistics compiled by the board of Realtors are saying that at the end  of the day, In-Office sales were running at 1 in 7, which means the vast majority of those deals, put a buyer, statistically speaking,  in the  wrong house.