Comparing agent fees when the service lists are completely different (need advice) near Brisbane

[grain.brisk]

I have three proposals for selling a new-build flat in Brisbane, but the headline fees are not really comparable. One includes photography and negotiation; another starts cheaper but charges separately for almost everything after the listing goes live.

Before choosing, which questions best reveal actual value: recent comparable results, response times, buyer qualification, offer handling, fall-through support, or who manages the file after agreement? I would also welcome disagreement, provided the assumptions are clear for this property type.

 

[grain.brisk]

I’m thinking of putting each proposal into one table showing the fee basis, photography scope, separate marketing costs, named contact, negotiation work and post-agreement support. I’m less sure how to assess the softer promises. Is it reasonable to ask each agent who answers buyer enquiries when the main contact is unavailable, and what response time they aim for?

 

[loft.balanced]

Yes. I would put the named contact and offer process ahead of a polished service list. Ask who conducts inspections, who follows up each buyer, and whether offers are simply forwarded or tested for finance position, timing and conditions. Also get the total likely cost expressed on the same assumed sale price, including separate items and any tax treatment shown in the proposals.

 

[garden.careful]

What does “photography included” actually cover in the first proposal? Number of images, editing, floor-plan work and any later reshoot could all affect the comparison. I’d also ask whether the agent is marketing competing new-build flats or developer stock nearby, and how that conflict would be disclosed and managed. That may matter more than a modest fee gap.

 

[theo_cedar]

Before choosing among the three proposals, I would be careful about giving the fall-through figure too much weight. It looks objective, but an agent who avoids buyers with conditions may report a better rate than one who manages a wider range of credible offers.

The appointment itself is hard to reverse once a campaign is under way; asking for evidence now is easy. Have each agent explain one genuinely comparable campaign, including how enquiries were followed up, how buyers were assessed, why particular offer terms were accepted and what support continued until completion. That account may reveal more than either a single percentage or a polished list of recent results.

 

[kai.north]

Send all three agents the same short list of questions and request written answers. Then compare: total fee at two plausible sale prices; every optional or separate charge; exactly what photography includes; who handles enquiries and negotiations; buyer-qualification steps; support if an offer collapses; response arrangements when the named person is away; and any competing instructions or referral relationships.

I’d then call the proposed day-to-day contact, not just the person presenting the pitch. Differences in clarity and availability may make the fee decision much easier.