« Where Should the Brooklyn Brewery Set Up Shop? Avalon Myrtle Hit With Stop Work Order »

August 6, 2008

Spiking Broker Fees in Williamsburg

tollbros_williamsburg_08_08.jpg
One unforeseen outcome of the Manhattanization of Brooklyn: rising broker fees. The Real Deal reports that renters looking to cross the river for the luxury high rise lifestyle of Williamsburg are willing to pay a hefty sum to do so, and not just in rent. "Brokers at some of the higher-end rentals have realized that they no longer need to settle for a paltry commission of one month's rent (around 8.3 percent of an apartment's annual rent)," they say—now they may ask for 10, 12 or even 15 percent of the annual rent to help folks find a slot in a new building. Anybody had to shoulder such fees?
In Williamsburg, Upping Fees to Match Expectations [TRD]
Toll Bros., Williamsburg. Photo by zombotic.




Posted by lisa at 10:01 AM | Comments (22)
Categories: Brokers, Williamsburg

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/5767

Comments

I think Ken Firpo was charging at least 10% ten years ago, at least for stuff on the northside. I didn't rent through them, but I looked at some places.

Posted by: Heather at August 6, 2008 10:15 AM

I don't think firms have charged the 1 month fee since the '80s. At least not brownstone brooklyn realtors.

Posted by: Petebklyn at August 6, 2008 10:26 AM

Why exactly would such an increase be unforeseen after so much effort has gone into convincing people that former slums are hip and happening (which they cease to be once the hordes descend)? Got to pay up for the privilege of being here.

Posted by: giov38 at August 6, 2008 10:26 AM

I guess with the number of sales and sales prices going down they have to keep up their lifestyle somehow. If enough people balked, then perhaps they would lower their fees.

Posted by: Iknow at August 6, 2008 10:34 AM

about 3 years ago, i was using a broker on court street in cobble hill to find me a place in the nabe. i signed an agreement to pay them i think it was 15% annual rent. after i found a place i liked, i told them, i'll pay you one month fee in cash upfront or no deal. they took it those cheap sluts!

Posted by: bowl of dicks at August 6, 2008 10:41 AM

Just moved to Clinton Hill without a broker. In the 6 weeks I spent looking for a place, every broker I spoke with wanted 12% or more.

Posted by: nathanjr at August 6, 2008 10:41 AM

Standard in Brooklyn Heights/Cobble Hill/Carroll Gardens. Esp with the big firms like Prudential Elliman.

Posted by: Carol Gardens at August 6, 2008 10:47 AM

When I was looking to rent last summer, I was being told 10-12% fees by most brokers (park slope, cobble hill, brooklyn heights areas).

I was fortunate enough to find a place direct from owner and avoided paying thousands of dollars for someone to open a door and lie to me.

I was actually trying to decide between two places -- one from a broker and the one I eventually rented. The hefty fee definitely tipped the scales against the broker's apt.

Posted by: northsloperenter at August 6, 2008 10:59 AM

yeah, i don't think this is news. 12% of annual rent has been totally standard for at least the 6+ years i've lived in nyc. every broker i've encountered has charged at least that, and it's always been like "a good deal" cause they're not charging the 15% you half expect they will. this isn't remotely unique to williamsburg either.

Posted by: wompedy at August 6, 2008 11:02 AM

My most recent a move a year ago was 12% brokers in Park Slope. The last place I lived was through the owner so no fee, the place before (roughly 2003) that was in Bushwick was one months rent.

Posted by: Pragonetti at August 6, 2008 11:16 AM

the broker i used on court street is a local firm not one of the large chains. now that i think about it, yes they wanted only 12% not 15% like manhattan. When told them one month fee in cash, they agreed without hassle, which was a pleasant suprise. I now recommend their services to my friends, and have brought them other business.

Posted by: bowl of dicks at August 6, 2008 11:24 AM

If they were smart they would charge 50% in Wmsbrg, I'm sure the reatards would pay it. (yes i know i spelled retard wrong).

Posted by: werner at August 6, 2008 11:27 AM

If I owned an apartment building(s) my wife or child or parent or nephew would be the rental agent. Isn't that how it often works?

Posted by: Suburbandude at August 6, 2008 11:57 AM

Plenty of Greenpoint brokers charge 1 mo... Ula's, Proper, probably others.

Posted by: Zach at August 6, 2008 12:12 PM

Why is this even news? I remember paying 15% broker fee back in year 2000 to live in Forest Hills/Queens.

Posted by: newbie12222 at August 6, 2008 12:26 PM

Some brokers create the illusion that their listings can only be leased through them. Beware.

Posted by: DOW8000SP800 at August 6, 2008 12:55 PM

i borrowed a tripod and DSLR camera and took some good photos and put them on craigslist then showed a place on the weekend and it was rented, guess i saved someone %12, was easy

Posted by: 11211 at August 6, 2008 1:37 PM

The only problem tenant I ever had was the one I got through a broker, and the problem I had with him was he felt for the rent he was paying ($1200 for a large Clinton Hill 2-bedroom in 2000), I should wash his dishes and pay his phone bill. Luck of the draw, I suppose, but given how easy it is to find good tenants for a decent apartment these days, I'd think the amount of a broker's fee tends to buy some good will on the part of the tenant. Craigslist!

Posted by: MiceElfAgain at August 6, 2008 3:13 PM

Most Brooklyn brokers in "desirable" areas have always charged 12% -- it's only the "fringe" areas -- like Williamsburg, Greenpoint, etc., that charged one month. Now that the biggies (Corcoran and Elliman) have moved into Williamsburg, it's normal that the pricing should follow.

I paid a 12% broker's fee for my first apartment, in Brooklyn Heights in 1981 -- of course the rent was much lower then, so the actual dollar amount of the fee was as well.

And some listings can only be rented through certain brokers -- these are called exclusive listings. Even if an unscrupulous person tracks down the owner and tries to rent directly, the owner would then have to pay the fee to the broker, per a signed agreement. And these are becoming more and more common, as owners discover what a pain in the neck it is to deal with potential renters.

Posted by: babs at August 6, 2008 3:46 PM

When I was renting I'd never use a broker. Took a bit of leg work and patience, but it always worked out.

Posted by: dittoburg at August 6, 2008 4:33 PM

Always a trade off of time vs. money -- generally if you've got the money you don't have the time and vice versa. I always tell people, if you've got the time to go wading through all the cr*p on Craigslist, go for it. Mostly after three or four experiences in "East Williamsburg" or "South Slope" they get the idea.

Posted by: babs at August 6, 2008 4:57 PM

once I called a landlord who owns a building next to mine in park slope and pretended to be a potential tenant to find out what rent he was charging.

He said that he wants 2 months security, 1 month rent, and 1 month finders fee BECAUSE HE IS ALSO A BROKER!

Now that is greedy scum!

Posted by: landlord at August 6, 2008 8:51 PM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions