While I do agree with the spirit of this, doesn't this mean that any fees that brokers require will be included in the rent?
replies(7):
Even now, when a landlord has a lot of available apartments they need to move or when the market is soft (for example during peak COVID), they’ll typically offer a “1 month OP.” Meaning the landlord pays the broker a 1 month’s rent fee, and the broker markets the apartment to renters as no fee. Even if the landlord just roles that into the rent, it’s a savings over the 12-15% fee standard today.
Also, landlords with larger buildings or geographic density are already figuring out that they can rent apartments cheaper with a few salaried leasing agents, instead of paying brokers. If more of them are forced to internalize the broker fee, more of them will figure that out.
Actually, we had these arcane things called "newspapers" that were filled with hundreds and hundreds of ads for apartment/house rentals, sales and even shares.
You figured out what you could afford and went through these arcane things and marked the ones that interested you. Then you gasp made a phone call to find out:
1. If the place is still available;
2. When can you come to look at it;
3. If you like it, snap it up (by writing a check[0]) before someone else does.
As for brokers, the ads generally noted that it was 'no fee' if the rental was direct with the landlord. Apartment shares were generally 'no fee' as well, since you were just moving in with roommates you didn't know.
I had some really weird experiences looking for both shares and apartments back in the 1980s and 90s. But it wasn't all that difficult or that much more time consuming than using the real estate websites these days. They're essentially the same thing, except with more photos.
Firstly, I was talking about goings on 30-40 years ago, and GP's (incorrect) assertion that "In the past, there was some informational benefit for average Joe/Jane. Without internet, finding apartments, knowing which neighborhoods, buildings, or landlords were good or not was quite difficult." It was not.
As far as checks are concerned, I've been paying by check. The last time was for this month's rent.
Regardless, and I'll say it a second time in this message as you, apparently, missed it in the first message, my previous message was replying to the assertion that back in the 1980s/90s, it was much harder to find/get an apartment than now. It ain't true. I was there. I did it repeatedly.
The only real difference is that I don't have to go out and get the Village Voice or Sunday papers for the expanded classified ad pages. Oh, and more photos on the websites.
Edit: I went and checked and you, ics, were the GP to whom I referred. Please re-read my initial reply to you -- you obviously misunderstood.
"In the past, there was some informational benefit for average Joe/Jane. Without internet, finding apartments, knowing which neighborhoods, buildings, or landlords were good or not was quite difficult."
Which I helpfully quoted at the beginning of my reply. I then (at the end of my comment) clarified that I was talking about 30-40 years ago.
I suppose if GGP has just as poor reading comprehension as you appear to have, they might have gotten confused. Which would be a shame.
That said, I assume at least a modicum of English proficiency and reading comprehension skills when posting here. Perhaps I should reevaluate that assumption.