CEO of Greeff Christie’s International Real Estate, Mike Greeff, advises homeowners to make the smart decision when it comes to the decision of appointing an agent with a sole mandate or not.
“There are obviously many factors to consider and when home sellers are in this stage of the selling process, we understand why they may feel overwhelmed or even slightly unsure about which decision to make. We would like to urge these sellers to be aware of the true facts involved with this decision and not make a decision based on what they think they know,” says Greeff.
Sellers need to be acutely aware that by choosing to sell their properties on open mandates, they will not actually be increasing the interest in their properties, but, in fact, will be taking away from it.
Greeff elaborates on this:
1. Agents do not focus as much on open mandates
While real estate agents do their utmost for all the properties they are appointed to sell, it is true that properties for which they have signed a sole mandate will receive more of their time and attention as opposed to properties that are being sold on open mandates.
Open mandates are properties that are often seen as overexposed and can be marketed by as many agencies and agents as the owner wishes. This means that even if agents spend time and money advertising a property, they are not guaranteed a commission - another agent can make the sale. When agents do, however, have properties signed as sole mandates they are without a doubt more willing to focus their time, energy and marketing avenues on these properties and ensure that they are carefully targeted and advertised to appropriate prospective buyers and investors.
Agents are also aware of the fact that the chances of them being able to successfully sell a property on an open mandate will be extremely slim and tainted by the fact that they might run into some difficulty if and when they present an offer.
2. The issue of double commission arises
Sellers who are in the decision-making stage when it comes to mandates need to carefully consider the issue of having to possibly pay double commission. They might be in for a significant shock if they do choose to have the property on an open mandate and then discover that once the property has been sold that double commission is payable as two agents have played a role in the ultimate sale of the home.
In prior cases, sellers were held liable for the paying of both agents’ commissions due to unclear communication. Home sellers are therefore advised to be smart about the decisions they make concerning the sale of their properties, and to have clarity of thought when making the decision concerning the mandate. Sole mandates are in this case the smartest choice a homeowner can make while also guaranteeing the best exposure for their property.
3. Your home could be overexposed to too many people
Another possible downside to open mandates is the exposure of your property to too many people. Although most sellers may view this as beneficial, it is in actual fact not in the best interest of the client or their property for it to be exposed to that many people. Doing so causes interest to be low and enquiries to come to a standstill. It is in your best interest to ensure the home is on a sole mandate, and that all viewings and appointments of the property are scheduled ahead of time, fitting into their schedule.
“The benefits of sole mandates far outweigh the would-be negatives, and are certainly something to consider in terms of making that final decision and signing on the dotted line,” says Greeff.
Original article from: Property24.com