Choosing a Discount Listing Agent
This may sound self serving and or like a solicitation, but hear me out. In these tighter economic conditions, many sellers choose their listing agent based on the commission their listing agent charges. There is no “Standard” commission and it varies greatly between companies, and even agents within the same company. However, negotiating is one of the main functions of your realtor/real estate agent. How quickly did they decide to come down in their commission? If their job is to get you the highest price for your home and that agent is willing to give up their money that quickly, how fast would they be willing to give up YOUR money in the negotiation? For example, if he/she went from 3% to 2% that is 33% discount – is that really who you want negotiating for you?
How to Avoid It – Hire an agent who is an expert negotiator and don’t choose your agent based on cost alone. Evaluate their entire business proposal, marketing plan, experience, etc. Often an agent can charge slightly more but you still walk away with more money because they can negotiate a higher price and terms for your home.
Please visit my website to see how well I will market your Boulder property for sale
720-771-9401
Search all Boulder homes for sale





After running up record debt-to-income ratios during the bubble economy of the 2000s, young adults shed substantially more debt than older adults did during the Great Recession and its immediate aftermath—mainly by virtue of owning fewer houses and cars, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of Federal Reserve Board and other government data.
From 2007 to 2010, the median debt of households headed by an adult younger than 35 fell by 29%, compared with a decline of just 8% among households headed by adults ages 35 and older. Also, the share of younger households holding debt of any kind fell to 78%, the lowest level since the government began collecting such data in 1983.
One way to measure a household’s financial well-being is its debt-to-income ratio, which compares total outstanding debt to annual income. As the figure to the right indicates, the debt-to-income ratio of younger adult households more than doubled from 1983 to 2007, when it peaked at 1.63. By 2010 it had fallen back to 1.46. By contrast, the ratio among older households continued rise through this entire period. As of 2010 it has risen to 1.22, still below that of younger households.
With regard to other types of debt, older households have shed less than younger households. The prevalence of vehicle debt fell from 32% in 2007 to 30% in 2010 among older households, compared with a 12 percentage point drop among younger households. The share of older households carrying a credit card balance declined from 45% in 2007 to 40% in 2010, while the share among younger households dropped by 10 percentage points.
Younger and older adults both saw their median household assets – which includes homes, cars and other durable goods, plus all financial assets such as savings accounts and stock holding — decline from 2007 to 2010. Older adults have many times more assets overall than younger adults, and they suffered steeper asset declines during this period – a 22% drop, compared with 14% among younger adults. One reason for the difference is that older adults have more of their assets in financial holdings, and stock market valuations took a steep downturn from 2007 to 2010. Since then, the stock market has regained virtually of all its losses, while the housing market in most of the country has remained well below its historic peak.