30-Day Listings

I am always interested in the articles written by Robert J. Bruss. I have found them informative and accurate, and my opinion is based on almost 50 years of handling real estate transactions in California.

Therefore, I feel that I should support him in the recent “bashing” (Heather Simms, Feb. 4) he received on his recommendation that no more than a 30-day listing should be given to a realtor.

As an example, a friend recently put his house up for sale as he had bought a new house in a retirement center. He first listed it himself for two weeks in the local newspaper and the Los Angeles Times. His ads provided a call approximately every two hours, about eight calls a day.

Of these, a few were from brokers looking for a listing, a few “lookie-loos” and the rest were house buyers. My friend was not a salesman and therefore was not able to successfully close any of the deals presented to him.

He then listed with a national agency for 120 days, against my recommendation (and Mr. Bruss). His first offer came 120 days later, when his house was sold for 15% less than the appraised value. This put him in a financial bind as he needed a loan to carry his new house.

The problem was that not over a dozen buyers looked at the house due to the realtor not advertising, outside of the “open house” signs installed at local corners. A 30-day listing would have allowed my friend to contract with another realtor.

In addition, Ms. Simms stated that “ . . . myself and my company can spend $4,000 to $5,000 to promote each listing.” That means that her company could spend approximately 50% of its gross income on sales promotion, which, in my opinion would not be a good business practice.

F.G. GORMAN

Lomita