Comparing three very different agent fee proposals for a Tokyo country home

[BenFlint]

Each of the three agents says their proposal offers the better route to selling my country home in Tokyo, but I am hesitant because they are not pricing the same work. One bundles photography and negotiation into the main fee. Another lists many tasks as later extras.

I can compare the fee basis, but execution seems harder to judge and much harder to change after signing. Which questions would expose the important differences? I am thinking about results with similar properties, buyer qualification, response times, who presents and negotiates offers, and what happens if an agreement collapses. I also want to know whether the person making the pitch will remain my contact and how any conflict involving the buyer is disclosed.

For this type of home, which of those would you put ahead of the rest?

 

[BenFlint]

My next step is to put the three proposals into the same table rather than compare their headline fees. I’ll ask each agent to state the fee basis, what photography actually includes, which later tasks trigger extra charges, and whether the person pitching is also my day-to-day contact. Is there anything in that list that sounds less important than it appears?

 

[light_book]

The named contact and offer process would be near the top for me. Ask who receives an offer, how quickly it reaches you, what information is collected about the buyer, and who conducts negotiations. “Negotiation included” is vague unless you know who does it and whether they remain involved if the first agreement falls through.

For photography, pin down the deliverables rather than accepting the word “included.”

 

[light_book]

Also make sure the fee basis is genuinely comparable. A lower headline number can stop looking low once photography, listing changes, viewings, negotiation or post-agreement work are separate. I would ask each agent to rewrite the proposal as a likely total under the same ordinary sale scenario, while clearly identifying anything they cannot price in advance.

 

[emery_repairs]

An enquiry can go cold while everyone is deciding who should answer it. For that reason, I would not choose the agent for this country home by counting the number of services in the proposal. A shorter package may be fine if the response and offer process are strong; a long list is of little value when the handoffs are poor.

I would narrow the test to two things: ask what the agent personally did on a recent comparable sale, then ask who takes over when the named contact is unavailable. If that answer is clear, compare the likely total fee and photography details afterward.

 

[EasyEcho]

I’d request one final written answer from each agent covering four stages: preparation, live listing, offer negotiation and the period after agreement. Beside every task, have them identify the responsible person, expected response time, whether it is included, and any separate fee.

Add two direct questions: how they disclose conflicts if they are also dealing with the buyer, and what support continues after a deal falls through. That should expose differences which a headline percentage or service list hides. The choice then becomes a trade-off you can see: price certainty, quality of contact, or depth of support.