Agents have long competed on service and reputation more than on fees, so build yours with the clients you already have

By Liv Saville, Head of Growth at Worthington

Relationship marketing·October 12, 2026·8 min read

A 2005 report from the US Government Accountability Office found that competition in residential brokerage appeared to rest more on reputation and level of service than on fees. My view is that past clients are where that reputation gets built, so how you look after them once a deal closes is part of how you compete for the next one.

GAO found brokers competing more on reputation and service than on price

In a 2005 report to the House Committee on Financial Services, the US Government Accountability Office looked at the factors that affect price competition in residential real estate brokerage. Its central finding was that the industry "has competitive attributes," and that its competition "appears to be based more on nonprice variables," such as quality, reputation or level of service, "than on brokerage fees."

Those competitive attributes are the ones economists usually link with active price competition. GAO cites the Association of Real Estate License Law Officials for a count of roughly 98,000 active firms and 1.9 million active brokers and agents in 2004, and it notes that getting a license is relatively easy and the capital requirements are relatively small. Even so, GAO reported that past analyses and anecdotal information suggest commission rates stayed in roughly the same range, about 5 to 7 percent of a property's selling price, over long periods and regardless of local market conditions, housing prices or the cost and effort of selling different properties. Many of the analysts and participants GAO interviewed said commissions still clustered around a common rate within most markets.

GAO built this picture from a review of the academic literature and from interviews with industry analysts, trade associations including the National Association of Realtors, state regulators, and the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission. It also interviewed officials of 10 brokerage firms and franchisors, and it says their views can't be read as representative of all such firms. It didn't collect original data on brokerage fees. Most of the report then looks at possible reasons prices varied so little, such as multiple listing services and state laws on rebates and minimum service, before turning to the internet and to banks in brokerage. I'm leaving that pricing debate aside. The part I think matters most for an individual agent is the starting observation, because if fees look much the same from one agent to the next, clients have to choose on something else.

Clients buy and sell rarely, so reputation does much of the work before they call you

GAO's background section notes that "real estate transactions are complex and infrequent for most people," and that many consumers benefit from a broker's specialized knowledge of the process and of local market conditions. My reading is that the word infrequent explains why reputation carries so much weight. Someone might go years between moves, so they can't judge agents the way they'd judge a coffee shop they visit every week. When the time comes to choose, they lean on what they remember about working with you, or on what someone they trust says about you.

GAO also describes how some economists think similar commission rates push brokers to compete on factors other than price. Brokers might hire more agents to win more listings, spend more on advertising, or offer higher levels of service to attract clients. The report adds that some economic literature sees parts of this as inefficient, since brokerage services could be provided by fewer agents or at a lower cost. Of those routes, service is the one an individual agent controls directly, and in my view it's also the one a past client actually experiences and can pass on.

The report also says the internet "has allowed buyers to perform much of the search and evaluation process independently, before contacting a broker," while some analysts and participants told GAO that, because transactions are complex, some buyers and sellers will always want a broker's help to navigate the process. I take that as one more reason to invest in reputation. By the time someone contacts you, they may have done a lot of their own looking, and a recommendation from a person who worked with you is one of the few things that can reach them before that first conversation.

This is a report on the US market as GAO found it in 2005. It's about firms and pricing across the industry, and it doesn't measure what individual clients value when they pick an agent. GAO framed its central finding as how competition "appears," and it reported that consumer pressure for lower fees seemed limited, "although it may be increasing." Applying all of this to how an agent looks after past clients is my own reading.

Treat the service a past client remembers as part of how you win the next listing

These are my applications of GAO's observation, and the report doesn't test any of them.

Decide what you want past clients to say about you. Quality and level of service are broad ideas. Pick the specific things you want to be known for, such as explaining each step before it happens or returning every call the same day, and check your work in each deal against them. Writing them down also gives you a way to notice when a busy month starts to cut corners.

Finish each deal with something useful. In the week after closing, send a short note that sets out what happened and what to hold on to: the key documents and dates, and the trades you'd recommend for the first repairs. It's often the last impression a client has of your service for a long time, and it's something concrete they can come back to.

Keep in touch on a rhythm that suits each person. Because clients move rarely, the years between deals are where your reputation either holds or fades. A short check-in every few months keeps the relationship current, and it doesn't need a special occasion. Write to the person, mentioning something they told you, so the note reads as yours.

Show your judgment as well as your availability. Service covers how you handle the hard calls too, such as telling a seller their price is high or advising a buyer to walk away from a house. Sellers who want a hand in their sale weigh your ethics when deciding whether to hire you again, so the moments when you put their interests first become part of what they tell people about you.

Answer fee questions directly when they come up. GAO reported that some brokers and analysts saw a growing number of consumers becoming aware that commission rates are negotiable. When a seller raises your fee, give a straight answer and then describe what your service includes, with specifics from the way you've worked with past clients. Agents I've spoken to have said they'd sooner win a listing on their track record than on a lower fee, and a track record is something you build with every client you already have.

Steady attention to past clients is easier to keep up when someone tracks it for you

My view is that keeping in touch with every past client for years is where good intentions slip, because live deals take the time first. Worthington is built for that part of the work. He suggests who's worth a note and why (a purchase anniversary, say, or that it's simply been a while), and drafts it in your voice for you to review and send. He also knows when to say nothing, so a past client hears from you when there's a reason they'd recognize.

GAO's report is more than twenty years old and was written about pricing, and I still find its opening observation the most useful way for an agent to think about competition. The people you've already helped are the ones who hold your reputation between moves, and steady, specific attention to them belongs near the top of your plan for next year.

Worthington draws on research like this to shape a nurturing strategy for each of your clients. Join the waitlist