[bko]

Of course there's competitive pressure to reduce or get rid of these fees. Plenty of people avoid buildings with brokers fee. Its even a filter in most real estate sites. I personally only looked at no fee brokers in the apartments or amortized the broker into the monthly payments. And for me, only no-fee apartments got my rent.

People aren't dumb and look at an apartment and get quoted $4k a month and when they go sign they realize its an extra $6k broker fee and just open up their wallets like "whoops". It's definitely factored into the price and affects who gets in to the door

[crazygringo]

> Plenty of people avoid buildings with brokers fee.

Very few units/buildings are no fee. And because so few are, there isn't much competitive pressure to reduce or remove the fees, because it's really hard to find a no-fee apartment that meets your other criteria. Hence, the new law.

[beisner]

Wonks and experienced New Yorkers aren’t dumb. I too refused any apartment that wasn’t “No Fee”. But only a tiny fraction of the housing stock - especially very few “cheaper” places - are No Fee. And it is genuinely hard to not price anchor on the listed price - especially if you don’t know how long you’re going to live there (aka how much to amortize vs a No Fee)

[Forgeties79]

We should avoid “caveat emptor” as the status quo when possible, shouldn’t we?

[shiroiushi]

That's a matter of opinion, of course. American society is largely based on figuring out how to screw over as many people as you can so you can maximize your personal profit, so as a result many, many Americans think "caveat emptor" is a great way to run a society.

[rKarpinski]

Plenty of people are surprised by the junk fee and end up eating it.