←back to thread

258 points JumpCrisscross | 6 comments | | HN request time: 0.843s | source | bottom
Show context
beisner ◴[] No.42131018[source]
This is a win for price competition - the "broker fee" paid by the renter is a classic example of principal agent problems / information asymmetry.

First, the service is being provided to the landlord (listing, tours, etc.), not the client, for all listings these days (I don't know any young person who has ever used a renter's agent, except maybe if it's provided in a relocation package). The renter has no choice in which broker to use to find/transact w/ the property, so there's very little price pressure for these broker fees.

Second the information asymmetry - the terms of the fee are completely opaque in the listings, and are not disclosed basically until signing unless you press brokers earlier. So there's basically no competitive pressure pushing these fees down, since it's basically a "junk fee" from a user experience perspective tacked on at the very end (and not listed on listings), and the landlord - who IS in a position to negotiate on price - doesn't care.

I don't buy the argument that there will be some long-term price hike in rents as a result of this decision - people who rent for 1-5 years already are paying a MASSIVE "net effective" premium for having an additional month's rent tacked on up front - but also it strongly incentivizes tenant retention (e.g. by being more responsive, keeping prices lower, etc.), because the landlord does not want to have to eat a broker's fee next listing.

replies(8): >>42131597 #>>42131717 #>>42131902 #>>42132134 #>>42132652 #>>42133534 #>>42133749 #>>42134407 #
1. bko ◴[] No.42132134[source]
Of course there's competitive pressure to reduce or get rid of these fees. Plenty of people avoid buildings with brokers fee. Its even a filter in most real estate sites. I personally only looked at no fee brokers in the apartments or amortized the broker into the monthly payments. And for me, only no-fee apartments got my rent.

People aren't dumb and look at an apartment and get quoted $4k a month and when they go sign they realize its an extra $6k broker fee and just open up their wallets like "whoops". It's definitely factored into the price and affects who gets in to the door

replies(4): >>42132217 #>>42132228 #>>42132252 #>>42132352 #
2. BolexNOLA ◴[] No.42132217[source]
We should avoid “caveat emptor” as the status quo when possible, shouldn’t we?
replies(1): >>42145053 #
3. beisner ◴[] No.42132228[source]
Wonks and experienced New Yorkers aren’t dumb. I too refused any apartment that wasn’t “No Fee”. But only a tiny fraction of the housing stock - especially very few “cheaper” places - are No Fee. And it is genuinely hard to not price anchor on the listed price - especially if you don’t know how long you’re going to live there (aka how much to amortize vs a No Fee)
4. crazygringo ◴[] No.42132252[source]
> Plenty of people avoid buildings with brokers fee.

Very few units/buildings are no fee. And because so few are, there isn't much competitive pressure to reduce or remove the fees, because it's really hard to find a no-fee apartment that meets your other criteria. Hence, the new law.

5. rKarpinski ◴[] No.42132352[source]
Plenty of people are surprised by the junk fee and end up eating it.
6. shiroiushi ◴[] No.42145053[source]
That's a matter of opinion, of course. American society is largely based on figuring out how to screw over as many people as you can so you can maximize your personal profit, so as a result many, many Americans think "caveat emptor" is a great way to run a society.