All Forum Posts by: Sam Yin

@Jay Hinrichs

That's the likely outcome. Very well explained and a prime example.

The buyer is the general loser here when you weigh everyone out.

Time will tell and the industry will have to adjust and come up with new customary ways of doing business as this ruling begins to grow its own legs into the public that have little knowledge of the inner workings of real estate. Some people will be upset, others confused, and some will just plain never get it because of ego and expectations. Capitalism will work itself out.

@Sahil Rajput

There are deals everywhere. You just need to look. Every state has their high end and low end. Every state has OOS investors.

200,000 people on a facebook forum about a topic is less than 1% of the US population. That kind of number should not be a justification for an argument point. But I do respect people's sentiment, even though I do not think people took the time to understand CA.

I still buy in CA. It cash flows at COE. It is purchased with 20-30% DP and financed by local banks. That cash flow is generally 5% or higher at COE, factoring in vacancies, maintenance, management, and reserves.

Think about it... Seriously... If there were no deals here, how and why is the market so hot and still going? Why are investors still buying in CA? Are all the listings just sitting on the market and expiring or is it flying off the shelves before you can get your finances together. It's all relative and a matter of perspective. I do feel it's pretty even everywhere when you way out each locations pros and cons. It's just smarter to buy local when you start, but that's just my opinion.

@Jay Hinrichs

Totally agree. I know so many agents that are in the business of LISTING. Thank goodness there are Agents out there willing to take time and show them to buyers. If not, the listing Agent will go hungry, or will lose much of their free time.

I'm not a Broker nor an Agent. I'm just a new investor learning as I'm going. For what it's worth, my Agent has made about $1M in commission in the last couple of years of my investing. Half of it was from me buying and the other is from me selling. Every penny was worth it, especially the half I directly paid.

Great Agents are worth their weight. I would not have achieved what I did without these Agents involved. They take you to another level.

 I feel the ruling itself plants a sead of a more freelance approach in the business because it curtailed some major influence by NARs. This will not happen overnight. But I foresee it happening over time, within the next several decades. As society shifts and technology advances, a ruling like this, at a time where two distinct generations collide, it can seriously alter the future. 

As we know, Babyboomers are aging out. Gen X is not far behind. I am a young Gen Xer and I can tell you that there is major difference in perspective between me and many others that are born after 1980. Even some at the cutoff around my age that tried to be hip have diverged drastically in mindset and perspectives. The current generations of Millennials, Ys and Zers have grown up with the Internet and are often questioning the fundamentals of Capitalism. This translates into a kind of anti-established business practice mindset.

What I think will happen is Listing Agents will severely cut or almost eliminate their compensation to the Buyers Agent, basically forcing the buyer to go direct. This ruling saw to that. The less aggressive agents will likey find a different job. As technology evolves and social media expands to a larger pool of population, the decoupling from NARs could increase and Agents/Realtors may look to carve out their own platforms for their independent minds and social groups. In a decade or two, as Gen X age out and everyone left over with buying runway is of the Internet generation, NARs may loose even more influence, with or without other lawsuits/rulings, and the real estate landscape will change.

To be clear, I am not prophesizing a doom and gloom, it just the natural evolution of society, but it was accelerated by this ruling. Just as the current way of business was rooted from about 100 years ago and the MLS took center stage the last few decades, things will change. An accepted/established practice that is shaken up by government ruling/intervention during an age like this has the potential to be path altering. This ruling will affect newer buyers. Guys already in the business will like stick with what they know and are comfortable with. But give it some time ...

Just sayin... I could be wrong... But then I could be right. None of us have a crystal ball.

@Nathan Gesner

Exactly! Well said.

@Katie Miller

REI is the EQUALIZER!!! Anyone, from any class, can dramatically change the trajectory of their finances, wealth, and family legacy through REI. It does not require formal education, training, or a degree.

Where else can a person consistently start with little to no money or a meager job and end up a multimillionaire with great wealth? Real Estate is the constant investment vehicle. It's the Equalizer. It's time tested, tried and trued.

@Ben M.

I don't think the article explained the lawsuit comprehensively.

I agree with @Nathan Gesner on this. To top it off, if I were to play this out in my mind, the biggest loser will be the buyer, especially new ones who do not have experience in real estate transactions.

The selling agent is forbidden from listing their commission/compensation for the buyer agent. That alone will change the relationship/structure/agreements between buyers and their representative. But more importantly, the buyer will loose fiduciary benefits as well as have to shell out more money in a transaction. To top it all off, it will begin to erode reliance on MLS and can begin to take us back to the old days of real estate, prior to the Internet.

I do not foresee this directly/drastically affecting the prices of homes. It will likely continue in its natural trend without the ruling. I do foresee more first-time/newer buyers getting the short end of the stick. That saturates many new investors and BP members.

For those that may not remember or were in any real estate transactions prior to the Internet, let me tell you, it was way different. In the 90s, and into the very early 2000s, you would go to an office and hope that they got some leads. There would often be a large book, a handwritten ledger of what is for sale. Basically, information received by their agents via a landline phone or fax, from a sister office or friend. Agents can withhold listings and the seller would never know. Worse yet, the feeling you get when you locked in a deal, only to see a better deal written on the ledger an hour later by an agent that had been holding it back in order for you to lock in your deal because it was difficult to get that one off their books.

That was how it was. I was just a kid, but I remember it well. My first exposure was in the 90s when I was in highschool. Then, when I got out of the Army, it was still the same in 1999, 2000, and into 2001. It was archaic compared to now. It was not that long ago. The MLS changed it as more agents and brokers were forced to adopt it. It gave power to the buyer.

I believe there are many new investors on BP that will not get the benefits of how we transacted and invested these past years. They will not get the professional representation and will likely waste more time and lose out on more opportunities.

I hope I'm wrong about that, but it's how I see this play out with less incentive for buyer agents and more upfront costs to the buyer. Seller will want their net money from the sale. Inventory remains low. Demand will continue as Millennials grow their families and make more money because inflation caused them to make a higher dollar amount to buy less. That article was likely written by a non investor or person who probably never bought more than one or two homes, if any.

@Joseph O'Sullivan

You can lead them to water, but you can't make them drink.

Your kids are not a clone of you and will NEVER have the same ambitions. This is onlyy perspective from the experience of dealing with people... A lot of people! Probably much more than most, so I have seen the good, the bad, and the parents that were blind and disappointed.

With that said, I still try educate mine by taking them with me to get hands on experience. Just got home from 3 hours of clean up at a property today, in the cold and rain. They did most of the work. They earned a hamburger and fries from FarmerBoys. Then they went straight to Jujitsu. I'm sure they are exhausted and my baby girl is pist.

But they are kids and they do not have a choice. These are teens and tweens. At the very least, I hope a few things stick in their mind when they are older. If they show more interest, I would help them grow their own portfolio. If not, I did my best and I hope they do well enough in life. I'll just take some chips off the table periodically and enjoy without them.

@Christian Hutchinson

I think a different angle to look at this is that the entire thing is a business. Like any business, if the partners do not fit how you want your business to operate, then you need to cut them out. If you cannot survive without a certain partner and they have greater control over your business, then you need to adapt and conform to your partners demands.

In this case, either eliminate ABNB from your operation, or abide by requirements.

I think it's just easier that way and it eliminates all the stress from the vision of your business.