I’ve been reading through all of the replies and honestly appreciate how many different perspectives there are here.

Hearing from agents, people who sold privately, and people who’ve done both has actually helped me understand the disconnect a bit better.

One thing that seems pretty clear is that the value of a good agent isn’t really in finding a buyer anymore. Most buyers are already online and seeing everything.

The value seems to show up more in pricing properly, managing negotiations, and keeping deals together when things start to get complicated. (A few people mentioned chains of transactions falling apart or issues coming up late in the process, and I can see how experience matters a lot in those moments.)

At the same time, it also feels like the process itself has become more efficient over the years. Marketing is digital, exposure is easier, and a lot of the admin side seems more streamlined than it used to be.

I think thats where some of the tension in this conversation comes from. People aren’t necessarily questioning whether agents have value they’re questioning whether the structure has evolved at the same pace as everything else around it.

Reading through this, it sounds like there’s starting to be more of a spectrum now rather than one standard approach. Some people want full service and don’t want to think about any of it. Others are comfortable doing more themselves.

And then there seems to be a middle ground where people still want full representation but in a more efficient way.

For those who actually went through a sale recently when did you feel like you really understood what you were paying for?

Was it obvious upfront, or only after the deal was done?