Mark Nadel‘s ground-breaking paper on traditional real estate commission models has been published in an abbreviated form in the Cornell Real Estate Review.
Nota bene: I embedded the wrong link for the Cornell version of the paper. It’s fixed now.
Technorati Tags: compensation for buyer representation, disintermediation, real estate, real estate marketing
Tom Johnson says:
I think that those of us here in the kennel would agree that the current system does neither us nor the consumer any favors, but in light of the DOJ vs NAR and ever present anti trust considerations, how does Mark Nadel propose that 50 states uniformly toss their sovereignty in favor of a Federal statute inevitably written by Real Estate Industrial Complex lobbyists? Reminds me of a shaggy dog story. “Yup, that sure is the shaggiest dog I have ever seen.” We agree it sure is a shaggy dog, but, who is going to trim it (to stretch the metaphor) and how does that make us more effective serving our clients?
June 11, 2007 — 8:05 pm
Will Farnsworth says:
Thank you for posting the link to Nadel’s paper; I would not have found it otherwise.
This is truly a fascinating read. It is exhaustingly researched/cited and written in an enlightening verse. I found that Nadal’s arguements are very similar to the chapter devoted to real estate in Freakonomics by Stephen Levitt.
Anyone who frequents this website ought to give it a read, if not the full text then the condensed version (yes, this includes YOU John/Jane Q. Realtor).
June 12, 2007 — 3:28 pm
Agent Scoreboard says:
Nadel’s take on the real estate commission is not new, and I think a bit misguided. He was my inspiration to post a series on my blog the “Commission Paradox” http://www.agentscoreboard.com/blog/2007/06/14/the-commission-paradox-part-2/ where I break down real estate transaction into its element parts and explain why the current commission structure may not be pretty but it may be the best model until we can thin the troops and educate consumers
June 15, 2007 — 8:10 am