←back to thread

New York City Council Votes to End Broker Fees Squeezing Renters

(www.bloomberg.com)
258 points JumpCrisscross | 1 comments | 13 Nov 24 21:38 UTC | HN request time: 0.209s | source
Show context
kelnos ◴[14 Nov 24 01:51 UTC] No.42132344[source]▶
I never understood why landlord brokers are even a thing in a market like NYC. I live in SF and I've never heard of such a thing here, and we probably have a similar market when it comes to landlords getting to take advantage of high demand when it comes to listing visibility and negotiation.

Why do landlords think they need a broker in order to rent out their units in NYC? I would think demand is so high there that listings on all the regular-suspect listing sites would be more than sufficient to get their units rented quickly and at a price they're happy with.

No-fee listings seem to be a thing in NYC, but appear to be for a small minority of units.

replies(5): >>42132390 #>>42132783 #>>42132956 #>>42133149 #>>42133355 #
1. fsckboy ◴[14 Nov 24 04:22 UTC] No.42133149[source]▶
my assumption has been that the landlords noticed how much money the brokers were making and they figured why not bring it in-house and get a cut; i.e. the brokers are sharing the commissions with the landlords, and helping ensure there is no competition. My theory is if the landlords cannot make money doing this, they revert back to independent brokers. I don't have proof, but I'm pretty sure something like this is going on, and this law will do nothing. I think broker fees should be banned, and the rents should reflect the costs; if landlords want to hire broker/agents they can.