We are NOT participating in Broker to Broker compensation, BUT we welcome it from home sellers…

Anthony Lamacchia: We will not be participating in brokerage-to-brokerage compensation here at Lamacchia Realty. Hang on, not so fast. Hear me out. I’ve talked about this in prior videos, and I’m going to show you that video in a minute. What we are still proponents of is the compensation either being offered from seller or being requested from seller, paid from seller, but we have made the decision at my companies three months ago, and we said it in prior videos that I’m going to show you in a minute, that we are not going to be participating in paying co-brokes directly from Lamacchia Realty to other brokerages.

When we are representing buyers, we will not be accepting cooperating brokerage compensation, but instead saying, “Thanks but no thanks. We instead would like to request it from seller.” That is how we are doing that. Now, I said that in a video 12, 13 days ago, back at the beginning of July or middle of July. Take a look at the 22-second clip. Even though under the NAR settlement, they say it is okay to continue to share broker-to-broker compensation, we as a company have decided we’re not taking part in that.

It’s pretty darn clear that’s where the industry is headed. It’s pretty darn clear to us that that was somewhat of the impetus of the lawsuits to begin with. Truth be told, it really isn’t necessary. If a seller wants to offer compensation out to a buyer’s agent’s brokerage or a buyer representative’s brokerage, they’re free to do that. Now, you can see I said it there, and I also said it in an Instagram video where I did it quickly just last week. As you can see, I was very clear about it at that time, but what I have noticed is the media is still making noise about it and taking some of this out of context.

I have other friends at other companies that are saying the same thing, but the only part the media and some realtors are hearing is, “They’re not going to pay co-brokes. If I represent a buyer on one of their listings, I don’t get paid?” No. That is not what Leo Pareja at eXp said. That is not what James Dwiggins said. That is not what I said. Now, I am not here to defend them. I know I mentioned them in a video last week on Instagram, and I’m mentioning them again, but the reason I am is it is still being taken out of context.

I’m here to tell you what we are doing with my companies. Once again, we’re not offering it broker-to-broker. We’re not participating broker-to-broker. When we have a listing, we’re not going to offer it from our brokerage to the buyer brokerage. Instead, when sellers want to, and we’re going to give them the choice, “Hey, Mr. and Mrs. Seller, do you want to offer compensation out? Do you want to do it proactively, perhaps via email, via text, give me the listing agent permission to verbally mention it, or do you just want to say, ‘I’m not offering it proactively, but I understand that it may come in and offers, and I’ll consider it at that time.’?”

Those are the kinds of conversations that we are recommending our agents have with sellers. We’re also recommending that they continue to do and continue to recommend what is best for sellers. I’ve been talking about this since last October. In May, in particular, we got deep into the weeds in this because a couple of people that don’t know what they’re talking about made some comments and said that I was promoting steering. I’ve never promoted steering. What I promote is realtors adhering to their fiduciary duties. Realtors adhering to doing what’s best for their buyers and their sellers.

Well, when representing a seller, you’ve got a duty, and in some states, it’s a law to explain to that seller that, “Hey, Mr. and Mrs. Seller, if you don’t have any willingness to pay compensation, there are likely going to be some buyers that will be deterred from seeing your home and perhaps deterred from buying your home.” I’ve said that in many videos for several months, and I stand behind it because there are no buyers, or at least very few buyers– I’ve certainly never seen one that say to their agent, “Hey, agent, please take me to the homes where I have to pay out of pocket. I’m dying to pay out of pocket. I want to pay you out of pocket, and I want to pay my down payment, and I want to pay my closing cost credit. I’m dying to do that.”

Folks, I don’t know a buyer that’s ever said that. When you’re representing a seller or about to represent a seller, you need to explain those things to the seller. When you’re representing a buyer, you need to tell the buyer what costs could potentially be involved in them purchasing that home. In several videos for several months, I’ve given several examples. If a home had a failed septic, you’ve got an obligation to tell your buyer. Home has a failed well. In the Southern states, if it’s got mold all over it, and they can’t get a mortgage, you’ve got an obligation to tell your buyer.

If a home is not offering compensation or refuses to offer it, when you inquire, you’ve got an obligation to tell your buyer. I’ve explained all this for several months. Just to circle back to the beginning. We as a company will not be participating in, meaning we will not be offering, we will not be accepting broker-to-broker compensation, but we are still very much proponents of sellers either offering or agreeing to pay, or perhaps buyers requesting, or buyers maybe in some cases paying, or buyers requesting through a closing cost credit that some of it get paid. However, it may be. We understand that buyer brokerages need to get paid.

After all, more than 50% of our transactions at my company are buy-side transactions, and our agents, and we, and I expect to be paid when representing clients. The good news, folks, is the average consumer understands that. The average consumer understands that practitioners, regardless of business, don’t work for free. They don’t say, “Geez, I want to work for free in my career.” No one does that. Okay?

The consumers get that. So far, these conversations that our realtors are having with buyers, with sellers have been going quite well. People get it. People understand that a lot of the things that have been pushed in the media by the plaintiff side, and in some cases, even the Department of Justice, aren’t quite accurate with the real, practical world. They get that. That’s why we’re training our agents to do that.

At some point here in the next few weeks, we will be releasing a course on how we recommend going about that. Stay tuned for that. In the meantime, watch my videos in between on Instagram, including the one I did last week from a beautiful river in New Hampshire, where I also hit some of my adversaries in the business who have disagreed with me on things or some who have taken victory laps and actually thought that we copied them. That’s fascinating to me that some people thought that.

Go back in our videos on recases.com. You’ll see endless videos of me preaching the same things for months on end. Our general counsel, my senior advisor, our heads of sales, our chief operating officer, we made these decisions that I just told you by May, and all the other things weren’t even decisions, like fiduciary duties, because we’ve stuck to those all along. Stay tuned in, more to come, but I wanted to get that message out because there’s a lot of confusion. Thank you, everyone.

Learn more about Anthony Lamacchia