Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Buyer brokerage: Experimental evidence

Contents:

Author Info

  • Sahin, M. Abdullah
  • Sirmans, C.F.
  • Yavas, Abdullah

Abstract

This paper offers an experimental investigation of two commission structures for buyer brokerage. One commission structure is the currently used structure in the industry where both the seller’s broker and the buyer’s broker each receive a percentage of the sales price as their compensation from the seller. In an alternative commission structure, while the seller’s broker still receives a percentage of the sales price from the seller, the buyer’s broker is compensated by the buyer and the compensation is inversely related to the sales price. We find that how the buyer’s broker gets compensated has significant implications. While both commission structures yield a similar probability of reaching an agreement, the alternative commission structure yields a lower price and a longer time to reach an agreement. Furthermore, the alternative commission structure achieves a better alignment of the interests of the buyer and the buyer’s broker without affecting the earnings of the players in the transaction. We also find that the improvement in the alignment of interests is more significant for female buyers than for male buyers. Furthermore, a higher listing price by the seller and a higher initial bid price by the buyer each lead to a significant increase in the negotiated price.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105113771300048X
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Housing Economics.

Volume (Year): 22 (2013)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Pages: 265-277

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:jhouse:v:22:y:2013:i:4:p:265-277

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622881

Related research

Keywords: Buyer’s broker; Negotiation; Agency problems; Experiments;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Steven D. Levitt & Chad Syverson, 2005. "Market Distortions when Agents are Better Informed: The Value of Information in Real Estate Transactions," NBER Working Papers 11053, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Harold W. Elder & Leonard V. Zumpano & Edward A. Baryla, 2000. "Buyer Brokers: Do They Make a Difference? Their Influence on Selling Price and Search Duration," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 28(2), pages 337-362.
  3. Rutherford, R.C. & Springer, T.M. & Yavas, A., 2005. "Conflicts between principals and agents: evidence from residential brokerage," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 627-665, June.
  4. Ashenfelter, Orley, et al, 1992. "An Experimental Comparison of Dispute Rates in Alternative Arbitration Systems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(6), pages 1407-33, November.
  5. Thomas Miceli & Katherine Pancak & C. Sirmans, 2007. "Is the Compensation Model for Real Estate Brokers Obsolete?," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 7-22, July.
  6. Curran, Christopher & Schrag, Joel, 2000. "Does It Matter Whom an Agent Serves? Evidence from Recent Changes in Real Estate Agency Law," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(1), pages 265-84, April.
  7. Donald L. Harnett & G. David Hughes & Larry L. Cummings, 1968. "Bilateral Monopolistic Bargaining Through an Intermediary," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41, pages 251.
  8. Yavas, Abdullah & Colwell, Peter, 1999. "Buyer Brokerage: Incentive and Efficiency Implications," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 259-77, May.
  9. Schotter, Andrew & Zheng, Wei & Snyder, Blaine, 2000. "Bargaining Through Agents: An Experimental Study of Delegation and Commitment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 248-292, February.
  10. Abdullah Yavas & Thomas J. Miceli & C.F. Sirmans, 2001. "An Experimental Analysis of the Impact of Intermediaries on the Outcome of Bargaining Games," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 29(2), pages 251-276.
  11. Roy T. Black & Hugh O. Nourse, 1995. "The Effect of Different Brokerage Modes on Closing Costs and House Prices," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 10(1), pages 87-98.
  12. Joy T. Black & Julian Diaz, III & Marvin L. Wolverton, 1997. "Examination of the Effect of Buyer Agency on the Distribution of Closing Costs," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 14(1), pages 43-54.
  13. Abdullah Yavaş, 1992. "A Simple Search and Bargaining Model of Real Estate Markets," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 20(4), pages 533-548.
  14. Abdullah Yavas, 1996. "Matching of Buyers and Sellers by Brokers: A Comparison of Alternative Commission Structures," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 97-112.
  15. Croson, Rachel & Mnookin, Robert H, 1997. "Does Disputing through Agents Enhance Cooperation? Experimental Evidence," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 331-45, June.
  16. Anglin, Paul M., 1997. "The Contribution of Buyer Brokers," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 277-292, September.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jhouse:v:22:y:2013:i:4:p:265-277. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.