By Richard Robbins

When dealing with a seller, one of the most difficult conversations you are going to have will be setting the price of their home. You’ve shown them comparables of homes that are for sale and that have sold, but have you shown them the percentage of their chance of selling? Let me show you what I mean in this brief video.

Richard Robbins is co-founder and CEO of Richard Robbins International, a global sales and business coaching organization that amassed over $50 million dollars in revenue worldwide in its first 10 years alone. The organization’s explosive 3,000 per cent growth is attributed largely to the transformational impact Richard Robbins’ unique methodologies have had, and continue to have, on the businesses and lives of thousands of sales professionals, entrepreneurs and leaders at all levels worldwide.


    For those who happen to work in Peel Region you might find providing this sort of information as a follow-up email to be worthwhile; or you might want to include it by leaving a copy with your would-be sellers:

    (Article says:)
    About the Peel Regional Emergency Program (PREP) – Region of Peel is called REM


    We had a local agent who became super successful using TREB stats of the day that reported as a bungalow in the whole giant GTA, example being 1200-1500 sq feet, average sold at a certain price. Likewise a multi/level sold on average for such and such a price.

    What those numbers produced did not apply to all subdivisions in our tight local GTA area, and agents accused him of underpricing listings that naturally sold nearly overnight in most instances, by the dozen back in the 80s. He was an instant sensation using that system, selling houses by the dozens; often sellers who hadn’t sold a house in years; so, he had all the proof-support needed to convince the seller to list less than TMV. After all, he had proof-positive pricing, supported in writing by the Board stats.

    The sad part is that those sold price stats used averaging numbers, spread out over the whole Board area. Just because square footages were the same didn’t mean the houses were anything like one another in reality. So much “other” necessary “local” information was not taken into consideration.

    Buyers certainly got some very good deals buying his listings that sold quickly sometimes overnight before the listing even hit the MLS system, even in slow markets. But once other sellers cottoned on to how he convinced sellers to sometimes list below true market value, one family told another and they told another, and eventually his methods caught up to him.

    Sometimes I would be called to do a CMA not knowing he had been there. And the stats I used were tight to location-only, directly from less than a two-mile radius, that showed proper sale price comparables netted me the listings time and again, and I could prove my exact comps because I kept my comps tight up location-wise to the subject property.

    I didn’t believe in using whole GTA stats. Not ever. And for anyone who pulled my own personal stats it was easy to see why my listings also sold in a reasonable amount of time for remarkably higher prices. I’ve often said that sold signs have babies.

    Here’s an interesting true-life situation: I listed a house using tight comps, not knowing the subject agent had been there ahead of me and had actually left his marketing and CMA info with the seller to review. I didn’t know this.

    After I provided my “range” suggested list price and likely selling price, having used the information as Richard showed in his current REM video, we signed up the listing on the spot. It showed me I was being hired by a serious seller.

    THEN the seller showed me what numbers the other agent had provided. WOW! Substantially less. And how he had arrived at his proof-positive pricing strategy, his comps included. That’s how I discovered his “system” of not TMV (supported by Board stats). The live alone woman was moving out of town and was a serious seller. And the so-called high list price I had no problem supporting.

    Here’s the ending of that sale story: that agent had an out of town buyer and they brought an offer on my listing, of course using his would-be suggested asking price as their offer price. Substantially less than listed asking price. And with his comps attached to the file as proof to the seller that my listing was overpriced. He begged me to help convince my seller that I had taken an overpriced listing. And that he was proud to bring his offer at a “proper” price.

    Of course he didn’t know what comps I had presented. So now I showed him and suggested he show his buyers, in order to substantiate the seller sign back.

    He was quite adamant of course. And wanted to haggle. The seller was serious but wondered why he thought she should accept his offer. The house showed well, a medium-size that would appeal to a large segment of the buyer market, in a desirable location.

    His buyers paid full list price. He was not about to lose that sale. Reverse psychology perhaps. Or a little crow pie because now he had proper comps to support my seller sign back.

    It’s an odd business at times. And whatever method an agent uses in presentations can be supported depending on the system used to arrive at numbers that mostly the public has no way to rebut the authenticity.

    Excellent REM video. I couldn’t believe my eyes when I first saw such material then saying that often less than 60% of listings sold. And that was in 1980. I never encountered that statistic tied to my own personal career, but Richard’s video info was definitely true market-provable year after year; market stats say Richard is a 100% correct, when agents use a not tight to location system, creating a nuisance no-sale for their clients.

    Carolyne L 🍁

Leave a Reply