Does anyone else think it is laughable at how large some of the listing teams are at big brokerages?
[deleted]
[{"id": "gc2vmjv", "text": "Pretty accurate definition of most large brokerage shops, IMO.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "gc2xpqm", "text": "I've worked a number of MOB transactions like this recently where there were 3-4 Broker/Associates on the List side and myself on the buyside solely. Difference is with the big name firms they usually didn't have a Buyside Broker fee in place so they get a large enough share to split a ridiculous number of ways.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "gc2xvrw", "text": "Feels like a jab at the big shops from a little shop guy lol...big teams that do run sort of like an mlm however, everyone gets their stop at the top making serious bank. When you get corporate inbound deals from simply being at shop like CB/JLL/CW it makes all the difference. Having a corporate real estate name behind you helps a lot with winning business! Tons more volume = ability to feed a lot of mouths", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "gc2y2ar", "text": "It's because of the way the teams are usually structured. Producer starts and just splits with the house. Hires an associate and gets a piece of everything associate does. That associate does well, starts his own team within the team, and gets a piece of all of the new folks' earnings. Etc. Etc. Usually the split for the originator is always the same and the remainder gets broken up the chain by whatever terms of the agreement are. So ya, the main producer that started the team may be only getting 10% of the deal but at that point he is getting it from 6 deals a month without lifting a finger on top of those that he isn't having to split with anyone. Building a massive team is how you make money by falling out of bed at the big firms. Ask Glen Kunofsky. \n\nIDK about at other shops but at M&amp;M the hangers on who didn't produce got driven out pretty fast. The exceptions were guy who weren't great producers but were excellent deal managers who would partner with someone lacking that skill. So not really a hanger on as the team would fall apart without them. You also usually have to maintain levels of annual income and closing volume to keep those titles. Hell at my office you had to be clearing close to $300k take home just to get into an office. I watched multiple guys land an office and title just to have it stripped the following year.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "gc3ig8y", "text": "10% of the brokers do 90% of the deals. Everyone in that 90% is trying to ramp up to be in the 10%. It takes years to build a book. The top 10% get a point where they\u2019re just managing relationships/pitching, and their team does everything else.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "gc3j4z5", "text": "Funny that you say that as a few of the big brokerages in my market just cut brokers from their big listing teams.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "gc3jq3e", "text": "I think it's also a good way for the top dog to keep the underlings in check. Top dog throws them enough bones to be happy and fearful about leaving. \nTakes a strong-willed, entrepreneurial, and aggressive agent to go it alone or break from the pack. Funny how many salespeople in this business are insecure or content to effectively work for someone else and limit their potential.", "replies": [{"id": "gc3l6bf", "text": "exactly my point.", "replies": [], "depth": 2}], "depth": 1}, {"id": "gc3zexv", "text": "Would be sad if all they were doing was splitting the 5K deal. My sense is they're into wayyyy more than you seem to realize.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "gc47j4h", "text": "Part of nothing is still nothing. Sometimes it takes that many contacts to get a deal together. I\u2019ve never seen more than 4 splits on a deal but I\u2019ve only done it for 4 years.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}]