IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/9208.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Can Free Entry be Inefficient? Fixed Commissions and Social Waste in the Real Estate Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Chang-Tai Hsieh
  • Enrico Moretti

Abstract

Real estate agents in the US typically charge a 6 percent commission, regardless of the price of the house sold. As a consequence, the commission fee from selling a house will differ dramatically across cities depending on the average price of housing, although the effort necessary to match buyers and sellers may not be that different. We use a simple economic model and cross-city data to measure the effect of the fixed commission rate on market entry by real-estate agents. We show that if the commission rate does not vary and if there are low barriers to entry to the real-estate brokerage business, the entry of real-estate agents into cities with high housing prices is socially inefficient. Consistent with our model, we find that when the average price of land in a city increases, (1) the fraction of real-estate brokers in a city increases; (2) the productivity of an average real-estate agent (houses sold per hour worked) falls; and (3) the real wage of a typical real-estate agent remains unchanged. We can not completely rule out the alternative explanation that these results reflect unmeasured differences in the quality of broker services. However, we present evidence that as the average price of housing in a city increases, there is only a small increase in the amount of time a buyer spends searching for a house, and the average time a house for sale stays on the market falls.

Suggested Citation

  • Chang-Tai Hsieh & Enrico Moretti, 2002. "Can Free Entry be Inefficient? Fixed Commissions and Social Waste in the Real Estate Industry," NBER Working Papers 9208, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:9208
    Note: EFG IO
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w9208.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Spence, 1976. "Product Selection, Fixed Costs, and Monopolistic Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 43(2), pages 217-235.
    2. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    3. Jeremy C. Stein, 1995. "Prices and Trading Volume in the Housing Market: A Model with Down-Payment Effects," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(2), pages 379-406.
    4. Geoffrey K. Turnbull, 1996. "Real Estate Brokers, Nonprice Competition and the Housing Market," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 24(3), pages 293-316, September.
    5. Sirmans, C. F. & Turnbull, Geoffrey K., 1997. "Brokerage Pricing under Competition," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 102-117, January.
    6. Spence, Michael, 1976. "Product Differentiation and Welfare," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 407-414, May.
    7. Steven T. Berry & Joel Waldfogel, 2001. "Do Mergers Increase Product Variety? Evidence from Radio Broadcasting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(3), pages 1009-1025.
    8. H. Peyton Young & Mary A. Burke, 2001. "Competition and Custom in Economic Contracts: A Case Study of Illinois Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 559-573, June.
    9. John H. Crockett, 1982. "Competition and Efficiency in Transacting: The Case of Residential Real Estate Brokerage," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 10(2), pages 209-227, June.
    10. David Genesove & Christopher Mayer, 2001. "Loss Aversion and Seller Behavior: Evidence from the Housing Market," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(4), pages 1233-1260.
    11. Steven T. Berry & Joel Waldfogel, 1999. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency in Radio Broadcasting," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(3), pages 397-420, Autumn.
    12. Michael A. Arnold, 1992. "The Principal‐Agent Relationship in Real Estate Brokerage Services," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 20(1), pages 89-106, March.
    13. N. Gregory Mankiw & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 48-58, Spring.
    14. Bresnahan, Timothy F & Reiss, Peter C, 1991. "Entry and Competition in Concentrated Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(5), pages 977-1009, October.
    15. William C. Goolsby & Barbara J. Childs, 1988. "Brokerage Firm Competition in Real Estate Commission Rates," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 3(2), pages 79-85.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Frank R. Lichtenberg & Joel Waldfogel, 2003. "Does Misery Love Company? Evidence from pharmaceutical markets before and after the Orphan Drug Act," NBER Working Papers 9750, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Steven Berry & Alon Eizenberg & Joel Waldfogel, 2016. "Optimal product variety in radio markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(3), pages 463-497, August.
    3. Ferrari, Stijn & Verboven, Frank, 2010. "Empirical analysis of markets with free and restricted entry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 403-406, July.
    4. Yuk Ying Chang & Martin Young, 2015. "Dissipative Competition: Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 15(2), pages 169-198, June.
    5. Liu, An-Hsiang & Siebert, Ralph B., 2022. "The competitive effects of declining entry costs over time: Evidence from the static random access memory market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    6. Kory Kroft & René Leal-Vizcaíno & Matthew J. Notowidigdo & Ting Wang, 2022. "Parallel inverse aggregate demand curves in discrete choice models," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(3), pages 923-946, October.
    7. Steven Berry & Alon Eizenberg & Joel Waldfogel, 2016. "Fixed Costs and the Product Market Treatment of Preference Minorities," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 466-493, September.
    8. Tian Wu & Bohan Zeng & Yali He & Xin Tian & Xunmin Ou, 2017. "Sustainable Governance for the Opened Electric Vehicle Charging and Upgraded Facilities Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-22, November.
    9. Waldfogel, Joel, 2003. "Preference Externalities: An Empirical Study of Who Benefits Whom in Differentiated-Product Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(3), pages 557-568, Autumn.
    10. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    11. Han, Lu & Strange, William C., 2015. "The Microstructure of Housing Markets," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 813-886, Elsevier.
    12. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro & Michael Sinkinson, 2014. "Competition and Ideological Diversity: Historical Evidence from US Newspapers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(10), pages 3073-3114, October.
    13. Stijn Kelchtermans & Frank Verboven, 2007. "Reducing product diversity in higher education," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven ces0726, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    14. Keisuke Hattori & Takeshi Yoshikawa, 2016. "Free entry and social inefficiency under co-opetition," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 97-119, June.
    15. David M. Cutler & Robert S. Huckman & Jonathan T. Kolstad, 2010. "Input Constraints and the Efficiency of Entry: Lessons from Cardiac Surgery," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 51-76, February.
    16. Katja Seim & Joel Waldfogel, 2013. "Public Monopoly and Economic Efficiency: Evidence from the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board's Entry Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(2), pages 831-862, April.
    17. Gabrovski, Miroslav & Ortego-Marti, Victor, 2019. "The cyclical behavior of the Beveridge Curve in the housing market," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 361-381.
    18. John D. Benjamin & G. Donald Jud & G. Stacy Sirmans, 2000. "What Do We Know About Real Estate Brokerage?," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 20(1), pages 5-30.
    19. George, Lisa, 2007. "What's fit to print: The effect of ownership concentration on product variety in daily newspaper markets," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3-4), pages 285-303, October.
    20. John D. Benjamin & G. Donald Jud & G. Stacy Sirmans, 2000. "Real Estate Brokerage and the Hosting Market: An Annotated Bibliography," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 20(1), pages 217-278.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J0 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - General
    • J4 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:9208. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.