exclusives?

While she MAY be inclined to show you HER OWN PERSONAL LISTINGS first, in essence she's co-broking everything else, even within her own firm. While I'm not on top of all the company's in-house splits today, I think in most companies there isn't much monetary advantage to sell an exclusive which is held by another agent within your firm vs an exclusive held by an agent from another firm (except that it mat be easier to force someone in your firm to make a more accommodating appointment schedule). I may be wrong on this, but I think at one time in the past WM B MAY had a different split for in house exclusives than outside, and WAY back when exclusives were just starting, many firms didn't treat an in house sale like it was 2 transactions (buyer's broker/buyer; seller's broker/seller), but i don't know of anyone who currently still does that.

Back to "her own personal exclusives": aside from some brokers who are "Queens of the Building" for certain Coops, I don't see too many brokers who would have enough personal exclusives which were similar enough to show you only those and not have you looking for other sources fairly quickly.

As far as "access to everything", we had a discussion just yesterday which may be an indication of an erosion of this (which was probably very true up till now). *IF* less and less Sellers are willing to give exclusives, less and less brokers will have 'access to everything' because they won't even be aware of the existence of listings which the brokers can't put on their websites, share with other brokers, etc.

While I don't think this is happening yet, if Sellers as a group feel that they can give open listings to the brokers of their choice at 3% rather than one broker at 6%, it might cause a sea change in how business gets done.

I will add a caveat that I'm sure that at least some of the above is very different at some "new projects".

David Goldsmith
DG Neary Realty