Part of the accepted process of purchasing real estate has been protecting a seller’s right to obtain the highest and best offer to sell their property.
As a buyer, you are informed when competing offers are submitted, but you don’t know what the other offer contains as far as price and terms.
One company thinks everyone would be better served by a more open process, where competing buyers have access to the information the sellers are presented with.
From the buyer point of view (and this writer recently was a competing buyer for a property!) a simple “yes, please” would appear all that is in order for this type of change.
And almost every seller and sellers agent would be quick to say a “no, thank you!”
The obvious reasons are that a seller might end up with lower offers than they may otherwise have received. Or with less advantageous terms, perhaps offering a higher asking price but also requesting more toward closing or repairs.
A good buyer’s agent, watching out for their clients best interest would most certainly suggest waiting until the last moment to sneak in an offer just a touch better than the last one received. Kind of along the lines of the secret auctions, where up to a certain point in time you see and have opportunity to outbid competitors for a prize.
At least one company agrees, contending that a more open style of transacting real estate would benefit all parties. According to Sarah Ham, general manager of Haus, “We think the openness will create a more efficient market and that the number of offers and price will ultimately be dependent on demand.”
Would an open platform for offers to purchase be beneficial to both sides of a transaction? Should that be only for residential purchases or should it include commercial transactions as well?
Or is this effort to be “fair” to one side of a transaction creating an unfair advantage over the other side?
You can read the article HERE. Your thoughtful, and respectful comments are welcome.