Thank you for the help everyone. But there is confusion in this thread. (SteveinBsas did touch on it best though)
Let's clarify something:
There are two types of RE agents: those representing the seller and those representing the buyer. Here, the buyer ends up paying most of the seller's agent's fee -- that's just how things work here. The buyer does NOT, however, have to hire a buyer's agent. Such buyer's agents gather listings for the buyer, often help with negotiations, and then charge their own hefty percentage.
Most posters, by failing to distinguish between seller's and buyer's agents, are making it sound like it a buyer has to have a buyer's agent; they don't, but they have to pay for the seller's agent (unless find a rare property being sold directly by the owner). This is a huge difference that is getting glossed over -- 2-4% difference in purchase price.
So . . . let me rephrase my question: are the generic real estate offices functioning strictly in a capacity of seller's agents? Is this clear cut, or do I need to beware of them trying to claim they are due an additional cut as a buyer's agent?
Steveinbsas touches on the distinction I'm looking for between sellers' and buyers' agents here:
Steve makes it sound like buyer's agents (what he calls "independent buyer's agents) are not conventionally part of the process and, therefore, I should not encounter offices trying to convince me that I owe them for such services.
Let's clarify something:
There are two types of RE agents: those representing the seller and those representing the buyer. Here, the buyer ends up paying most of the seller's agent's fee -- that's just how things work here. The buyer does NOT, however, have to hire a buyer's agent. Such buyer's agents gather listings for the buyer, often help with negotiations, and then charge their own hefty percentage.
Most posters, by failing to distinguish between seller's and buyer's agents, are making it sound like it a buyer has to have a buyer's agent; they don't, but they have to pay for the seller's agent (unless find a rare property being sold directly by the owner). This is a huge difference that is getting glossed over -- 2-4% difference in purchase price.
So . . . let me rephrase my question: are the generic real estate offices functioning strictly in a capacity of seller's agents? Is this clear cut, or do I need to beware of them trying to claim they are due an additional cut as a buyer's agent?
Steveinbsas touches on the distinction I'm looking for between sellers' and buyers' agents here:
steveinbsas said:In Argentina, the buyer pays the commission (3% or 4%) to the real estate office/agent (the ones that have the listings in the window). Some of these agents or brokers (the individuals in the real estate offices) do not charge the seller any commission but others charge 1 or 2%. Independent buyer's agents usually charge an additional 2% but I've only know one expat who actually used one.
Steve makes it sound like buyer's agents (what he calls "independent buyer's agents) are not conventionally part of the process and, therefore, I should not encounter offices trying to convince me that I owe them for such services.