As I do more and more research on the different Brokerages it amazes me that no matter how much a company is more cutting edge in their methods, they still are doing business the traditional way. That is, they spend money, AGENT'S money, promoting THEIR brand and generating THEIR own leads ... which in turn are sold back to the agent or given to the top producers.
Let's examine their business model.
Recruit new agents - Take 50% from their sales and hopefully they will become good. If they get big, they will be rewarded with new business opportunities that were generated off of their split. They'll get perks, such as parking spaces, offices and key opportunities.
Worst case scenario, the prospect doesn't pan out and the company gets some free advertising while they were working.
Last time I checked, 100% of my clients wanted to work with me, not my Broker or my brand. When I switch companies, my clients come with me.
So who am I talking about? Let's call some of them out:
- Remax - Still on a traditional split - never caps, or if it does it's coupled with exorbinant "desk" fees. Recently they developed LEADSTREET where they generate leads and sell them back to the agents. They also came out with REMAX University. Sounds very familiar with another University.
- Coldwell Banker - This is a company that is owned by Cedant. In any case, the split is the same traditional one, 70/30 for most agents with no cap in site. All branding must be CB and not the SMITH TEAM.
- C-21 - Again, owned by Cedant. C-21 is becoming the red-headed step child of brokerages. On one page you'll see a recruting ad, proclaiming how successful people will be by joining. On the opposing page, there's an undermining ad of "SAVE OUR COMMISSION" explaing C-21 Flat Fee franchises. To me this is the bottom of the barrel for a company.
- Prudential - Works the traditional system as well. They would love for their agents to buy into their other products and sell them as well. Overall, they view agents as employees.
- ERA, Exit & GMAC - These companies are copying the KW model but getting it all wrong. Instead of actually sharing profits, they dip into agents pockets -- forever. At GMAC, people who recruit you will receive 1 to 2% of your total earning. This does not go levels deep and never caps out. ERA and Exit have similiar reward models.
In some cases, these brokerages will offer lockboxes, signs and other resources. The downside is that all of these items keep you dependent on them and, oh yeah, "would you like some JOHN SMITH with your Coldwell Banker sign?"
So who's not doing this?
- Keller Williams - Doesn't spend a dime on brand building or recruiting. Each agent caps out at a predetermined number, in Atlanta it's 18K. After that it's strictly 100%. This renews itself every year. This also creates equality and quality control. No agent is worth more than the 18K so unethical agents will be "dehired." That's unimaginable when brokerages would hire monkeys if allowed. It's more about YOU the agent. KW spends their money on training agents how to do the business. If you've ever met a KW agent, then you know it's about being professional and having a career worth having.
- Solid Source (Local) - A Per Transaction based company. Their "Christian" foundation makes them an interesting study.
- Flat Fee/100% Companies - They offer no training or support but you keep everything. Typically you can do what you want as well, even as far as creating a sub brand.
This was pretty down and dirty but it should give you some insight. What has your Broker done for you lately? My guess if they aren't teaching you how to fish, their causing you to be dependent on them. If that's the case, ask yourself this, "what happens when the market shifts and it's no long profitable for them to provide these things at this price?" Prices go up, ethics go down and you'll be looking elsewhere.
At the end of the day, when you look at your business, are you supporting YOUR brand of Real Estate or your BROKERS?
