As I am sure you have heard in the news recently, last week on March 15, 2024, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) announced the resolution of a settlement with home sellers who alleged unfair commission practices and mandatory compensation for buyers' agents. This settlement follows an extensive and expensive legal dispute for the NAR, prompting inquiries from buyers and sellers regarding its implications for future real estate transactions. It is important to note that these changes are expected to take effect by mid-July 2024 and are still subject to court approval. Key Takeaway of the 2024 NAR settlement: The National Association of Realtors (NAR) will pay $418 million over the next four years to conclude legal disputes. This settlement addresses claims against the NAR, state and local Realtor associations, association-owned multiple listing services (MLS), brokerage firms with NAR member principals and sales volumes under $2 billion in 2022, and over a million individual NAR members, agents and brokers. The multiple listing service (MLS) system will no longer allow offers of broker compensation, shifting negotiations to occur privately between consumers and agents. Offers of compensation could continue to be an option consumers can pursue off-MLS through negotiation and consultation with real estate professionals. And sellers can offer buyer concessions on an MLS (for example—concessions for buyer closing costs). This change will go into effect in mid-July 2024. Requirement for all agents to have a written representation agreement or an Exclusive Buyer's Agency Agreement with their buyers, in states that allow, like New Jersey. This change will go into effect in mid-July 2024. How did we get here? The Sitzer-Burnett lawsuit, a class-action case initiated in Missouri federal court by a coalition of home sellers against the National Association of Realtors (NAR) and various defendants such as Anywhere, Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices, Keller Williams, and RE/MAX, alleged that real estate commission rates are excessive, buyer's agents are overcompensated, and NAR's Code of Ethics, MLS Handbook, and the defendants' practices contribute to inflated commission rates. During the October 2023 trial, the plaintiffs specifically contested cooperative compensation, where a listing broker offered compensation to the cooperating broker. While NAR presented evidence supporting the benefits of cooperative compensation for consumers and emphasized its rules against anticompetitive actions to promote a free market and competition, the jury ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. NAR believes this decision was influenced by legal errors in the judge's instructions that overlooked the procompetitive advantages of NAR's policies and cooperative compensation practices. How does the settlement affect home seller and home buyers? This settlement would preserve the choices consumers have regarding real estate services and compensation. After the new rule goes into effect, listing brokers and sellers could continue to offer compensation for buyer broker services, but such offers could not be communicated via the multiple listing service (MLS). How will buyer brokers get paid now? The types of compensation available for buyer brokers would continue to take multiple forms, depending on broker-consumer negotiations, including but not limited to: Fixed-fee commission paid directly by the buyer. Concession offered from the seller at closing to the buyer broker, if offered but not required. A portion (%) of the total listing broker’s compensation is paid by the seller at closing as it has been in the past and current structure, if offered but not required. Compensation would continue to be negotiable for both buyers and sellers and should always be negotiated between agents and the consumers they serve. What the National Association of Realtors Says The National Association of Realtors (NAR) asserts that although the settlement is deemed the most favorable course for consumers and real estate practitioners, it refutes any misconduct allegations. The organization underscores the customary practice of a collaborative commission split between sellers' and buyers' agents as a well-established industry norm. Despite maintaining innocence, securing agreeable settlement terms offers a constructive way forward to safeguard professional integrity and consumer options. Nykia Wright, the NAR's interim CEO, has articulated that prolonging litigation would adversely impact members and their small enterprises. Expected Impact on the Real Estate Industry While headlines may suggest that the recent developments could impact home affordability for buyers and the intention was to decrease home prices, these narratives are likely fleeting and sensational. It is essential to recognize that home values are primarily influenced by market fundamentals such as supply and demand, location, property condition, and recent sales data, among other factors, and agent commissions have no effect on determining property values but are an additional cost to home sellers. Some argue that the traditional commission structure has historically facilitated buyer representation by reducing upfront costs and broadening the pool of potential buyers. The seller typically bore the commission responsibility for both their listing agent and the buyer's agent, enabling buyers to consider properties at higher price points. Discussions on commission structures and buyer representation may evolve, potentially increasing awareness of the value of professional representation for buyers. However, the fundamental nature of the client-agent relationship and transaction processes is expected to remain largely unchanged and I feel this is a positive move that provides transparency to the industry as well as an opportunity for sellers to save money on the total sale. Conversely, it transfers additional costs to buyers who may now need to pay their agent an agreed-upon fee at closing if they choose to be represented by one. In the short term and with the current market conditions of high home prices, interest rates at or above 7%, and limited inventory this may create another layer of difficulty for home buyers to secure a home with the cost of representation now being an additional closing cost if a seller does not choose to offer a concession for that cost on behalf of the buyer. Commission fees have always been and will continue to be negotiable, despite a standard market-determined percentage guideline or what society has deemed to believe is a required "6% fee". These fees are typically agreed upon between sellers and their listing agent and a portion of that total is shared with the buyer side agent, rather than a fixed figure. While there are cost-effective options in the market and always will be, it's crucial to compare the level of service and knowledge provided as well as the value received for both parties. As with any service industry, quality often aligns with price. Buyers seeking representation when purchasing a home will now need to exercise some research, pros and cons comparison, and caution to ensure their needs are met effectively. Buyer's agency is a valuable asset in New Jersey, as not all states offer this representation, but as with any service, not all consumers need or will need agent representation both on the buying and selling side. For personalized insights on how the NAR settlement may affect you as a buyer or seller in New Jersey, feel free to reach out with any questions. I am here to address your concerns and provide clarity on what to anticipate in light of these changes when the time comes or when you are ready.

Reshare of an original article by Marni Mervis of Struktr Studios Wait a minute, there’s a difference between architectural and real estate photography? Yes. 100% TLDR:  Architectural photography and real estate photography are not the same. Architectural photography is a time-intensive process that tells a story, utilizes styling to showcase lifestyle, and showcases design. Real estate photography on the other hand uses wide-angle lenses to focus mostly on the size of rooms. Do Real Estate and Architectural Photography Look Different? So you might ask, is there a visual difference between Architectural photography and real estate photography? Yes.  Real Estate Photography: Typically real estate photography is shot with a wide-angle lens to emphasize the size of a space. This can sometimes lead to the distortion of objects and furniture, sometimes creating confusion of scale.  The green pillow in the foreground is distorted by a wide angle lens making it appear longer than its actual square shape. Architectural Photography: Architectural photography will often feature varied composition and depths; a shot of the entire room, vignettes, detail shots all of these are part of great architectural photography. Architectural photography focuses on design elements, how spaces flow into one another, the way light interacts with the space, the way the architecture communicates with or informs the environment around it, and the overall emotional pull of a space; all of which lend themselves to the wider array of compositions - and thus storytelling. This architectural photos utilizes a person (or ghost) to provide life and context in the space, as well as showcase how the room’s design highlights the Manhattan built environment and views. The Goal of Real Estate Photography vs Architectural Photography Let’s talk about the purpose of either type of photography.  Real Estate photography: Real estate photography is used to sell a home. Seems pretty straightforward, right? These photos show potential buyers how big rooms are and provide a general idea of the home’s floor plan. That said, the photos’ lifespan are only as long a as home remains on market. In a hot market that might only be a couple of days. In a slower market that could be a couple months. The goal of real estate photography is provide a general floor plan to get the house sold. Architectural Photography: On the other hand, as an architectural photographer, when I shoot for architects, interior designers, hotels, or restaurants the purpose these photos is 1) For their portfolios - to showcase to prospective clients, submit for future RFPs 2) Marketing and branding - through photos hospitality establishments can entice and connect with clientele and designers can showcase who they are, what principles define their designs, and what kind of lifestyle their work promotes  3) Publicity - designers and hospitality establishment will often seek to gain publicity in magazines (print or online), and with the right images that tell the right story architects and interior designers and hotels can earn press, getting their name and work out to expansive, new audiences. These types of images ideal for press are not only high-quality, they’re stylish, editorial in nature. They showcase lifestyle and elicit an emotional response from the viewer. Architectural photography typically has a lifespan of a year when it comes to something like publicity, and many more when it comes to portfolios and marketing purposes. Architectural photography can have multiple goals like branding. This hotel shoot showcases a lifestyle, giving travelers an idea of the hotel’s vibe. How Long Is Each Kind of Photoshoot? Real Estate Photography: I was recently speaking with a Los Angeles Realtor friend of mine who said she prefers no more than one, maybe two shots of a room. Otherwise the real estate listing gets too bloated. Real estate photos are concise and typically follow the same pattern, it’s for this reason real estate photoshoots usually happen within a 1 or 1.5 hour time frame. Going back to the idea of photo lifespan, because real estate photos are typically short-lived, they are more standardized in look and process, and thus less time devoted to their creation. Architectural Photography: Architectural photography goes back to the idea of storytelling. It’s important for the architectural photographer to be able to pinpoint the way light travels within the space throughout the day (e.g. the most ideal times to shoot each room). A detailed shot list will also help the architectural photographer develop the designer or architect’s visual story. Styling the space adds another time element to architectural photoshoots. The photographer, or photo stylist (depending on the size of the shoot), will move through the space reconfiguring furniture for the ideal composition, adding accessories to enliven the space, creating a lifestyle to reinforce the narrative. A restaurant can be a half day or full day shoot depending on scope of the project. A typical Los Angeles home will often be a full day photoshoot. A hotel will be a multiple day photoshoot. Are Real Estate and Architectural Photography Lit The Same? No, the two types of photography are lit in different ways. Real Estate Photography: Real estate photography will typically turn on all all the lights within a home when photographing a space. Again, this goes to the idea of selling the home and showcasing just how many light sources are in a house. Traditional lighting can often colorize photos in unwanted ways, create glare, or cast unwanted shadows. Architectural Photography: Architectural photography is traditionally shot with natural light or professional lighting in order to create a photo that’s evenly lit, or one that takes advantage of unique natural lighting moments intended by the architect. That means architectural photography is typically photographed with all artificial light sources in the space (light switches lamps, chandeliers, etc)  in space turned off.   

Selling your home can be an incredibly stressful experience, and as a seller, you want to ensure that you're getting the best possible price for your property but more importantly the best possible terms. After all, the terms are what will ultimately determine the probability of an actual closing happening, and time is of the essence. With cash offers, you can avoid the lengthy process that loan offers typically require due to lending guidelines, allowing you to enjoy a faster, more straightforward transaction. We'll delve into why accepting a cash offer can be so advantageous for home sellers, from reduced risk to faster closing times, and explore why it's a smart option to consider when selling your home.   Why are cash offers more advantageous for sellers?Cash offers are becoming increasingly popular in the real estate industry, but many sellers misunderstand why they're so advantageous. Contrary to popular belief, cash offers aren't necessarily more valuable or offer the best price. Instead, they typically provide sellers with more favorable terms in the sale, such as greater control over the process, more flexible timeframes, and fewer risks to navigate. In fact, the terms of an offer are often more critical to the success of a home sale than the price itself.   A potential buyer may offer an incredible price for your home, but if the terms of the offer are weak or unclear, the sale may not close, leaving you back at square one. It's essential for sellers to look beyond the asking price and consider the overall offer, terms being a priority, including the process required to bring it to a successful close. This can be challenging, especially if you're not familiar with the real estate process and its guidelines. Are there any instances where as a seller shouldn't accept a cash offer? When it comes to whether a cash offer is better for a home seller, there is no straightforward answer. It ultimately depends on the seller's goals and motivations for selling their property. If the seller is looking for the highest price possible, a cash offer may not be the best option. Cash buyers typically offer less than market value, but they can provide the seller with more favorable terms, such as quicker closing times and less risk due to not having to deal with financing from a third party. It's important for a seller considering a cash offer to be realistic about their expectations and understand the pros and cons of different types of offers. Cash buyers are often able to offer convenience and leverage because they don't have to abide by traditional loan guidelines. However, they may still choose to conduct inspections, appraisals, and underwriting.   The current market also plays a role in whether a cash offer is advantageous for a seller. In a market where there is a low supply and high demand for homes or a seller's market. The seller will have the advantage or leverage in the sale and be able to get market value or more due to buyer competition as well as being more flexible with accepting a home with some issues, taking on the work and time needed to fix the home or make it their own.    Are there other offer scenarios considered "as good as cash"? Absolutely. It's important to remember that regardless of the financing, all offers have the potential to fall through. Therefore, it's crucial to consider the overall strength of the offer to ensure the highest likelihood of closing. An offer with a healthy down payment of at least 20%, a buyer who can prove they have the funds available, realistic inspection terms, a price that aligns with local data and statistics for appraisal purposes, and a closing timeframe that works for the seller can be considered as good as cash.   In fact, such an offer may even be better than a cash offer, as it meets most of the seller's requirements and interests when it comes to selling their home. As an agent, it's essential to analyze offers from the seller's perspective and present them with the best options that align with their goals and needs. What are the benefits of making a cash offer on a home as a buyer?  When it comes to buying a home, making a cash offer can provide significant leverage for a buyer, especially in a seller's market where competition is high. While it's not a guarantee of acceptance, offering cash can increase the probability of closing the deal, as it eliminates the need for third-party financing approval. Sellers are the gatekeepers of the process, choosing which offers to accept based on the strength of the buyer's presentation. It's important to note that the acceptance of an offer is just the beginning of the negotiation process. Lending guidelines and due diligence play a significant role in determining the final sale price, and the outcome of these factors can sometimes be used to negotiate a better deal. However, offering a cash deal can limit or even eliminate this negotiation, giving sellers an advantage in the sale.   Is there any downside to paying for a home in cash?The decision to pay cash for a home purchase is influenced by the opportunity cost of the money being used. While some may consider a house a good investment, it's important to understand that a primary residence is not an investment but an asset. Therefore, paying cash for a home should be compared to the potential return that the money could yield elsewhere. If there's a better opportunity to get a higher return on the money, then paying cash for a home may not be the best option for the buyer.   On the other hand, if there's no better opportunity cost and the buyer is financially able to pay cash while maintaining their lifestyle and investing in other things, then it may be a wise decision. However, this is a situational decision that each buyer must consider carefully. It's also important to note that most buyers leverage financing in their home purchase, with only a small percentage being able to pay cash while maintaining their standard of living.   Banks understand this opportunity cost and lend money to make an interest over a certain time frame. As a buyer, it's crucial to have a mindset that considers the potential return on investment of the money being used to purchase a home.   If you aren't in a position to offer cash terms, what's the next best thing? When it comes to buying a home, there are various options available to buyers. It's essential to find the best fit for your needs and financial situation. If you cannot come up with cash for your home, don't be forced to go a particular route. Instead, be resourceful and wise with what you have available to you. The key is to avoid overleveraging yourself and to make sure you are financially prepared before making any decision.   It's crucial to work on being financially prepared so that you have access to the best loan options available to you. It's also important to buy within your means and budget, and not to overextend yourself both physically and financially. By getting as much out of your loan/budget as possible, you can explore different opportunities such as looking for homes that may need work or renovations that can add appreciation value.   While it requires more effort to buy a home that needs work, it can be a sound strategy in the long run. This approach can help you to buy a property under market value and increase its value over time. It's essential to consider your strengths and weaknesses, make a plan, and understand the financial pros and cons of any decision you make.   Ultimately, the best approach depends on your goals, needs, and financial situation. Whether you decide to buy a move-in-ready home or one that needs work, it's crucial to do what is best for you in the short and long term. By being financially prepared and understanding your options, you can make the best decision for yourself and your future.