A few weeks ago I started a series of blogs on real estate consulting and the most common objections I hear as the newly annointed Commander and Chief of the Accredited Consultant in Real Estate (ACRE) program.
The first objection I addressed was: "... my broker will never go for it" - you can read that here.
The next objection I hear a lot is: "...it will never work in my market!"
The rationale behind this objection seems to be that if you work in a market with a low price point (e.g. the average price of homes is less than $100,000), there ain't no way you can charge people upfront or non-contingently for your service.
I don't get this argument. At all.
What is it about a lower average home price that would make people hesitate to pay a reasonable fee for real estate-related services if it's a good deal for them (which it must be for them to be willing to do it)?
Can a real estate consultant in a lower cost-of-living market charge the SAME fees as someone in a higher-cost-of-living market? Of course not, but they shouldn't need to... presumably an agent who works in a rural community in, let's say, Arkansas has a much lower cost-of-living him or herself than an agent who works in Washington DC.
So, maybe the DC agent charges $500 for Service X and that's considered fair and reasonable in her marketplace. Could the agent in Arkansas charge that? Probably not - maybe he can only charge $100 for the same service. But that $100 will go a whole lot further in his budget than it would in the DC agent's.
Am I missing something?