It doesn't sound like you negotiated well and is a sign you could use an agent :)
But seriously, imagine you and I are both bidding $1,000,000 on a house. You have an agent, so if your bid is accepted, your agent and the sellers agent each get $30,000.
I don't have an agent. In my offer, I write "the sellers agent gets the usual 3%, and I am allocating the 3% that the buyer's agent would get towards the seller instead." That means for the seller's agent there's no difference whether I use an agent or not, but to the seller themselves, my offer looks $30,000 better than yours because I am sweetening the deal using that $ I'd otherwise give my realtor.
All that said, I used a realtor on my house purchase despite being financially savvy and a good negotiator because they actually helped us find the right house, and they were well worth the fee.
The commission is spelled out in the listing contract between the seller and their agent. The buyer is not a party to that contract and can’t dictate changes to it.
FYI, here's what an example seller's contract from northeast FL MLS looks like:
>> Broker will cooperate with and compensate, as stated below, NEFMLS brokers and any broker who reciprocates with NEFMLS. For finding a buyer ready, willing and able to purchase the Property, SELLER will pay BROKER, no later than the date of closing, a broker transaction fee of 5% of the Purchase Price, whether a buyer is secured by BROKER, SELLER, or any other person. BROKER agrees to offer cooperating broker compensation of: 2.5% of the Purchase Price to a single agent for a buyer; or 2.5% of the Purchase Price to a transaction broker for a buyer; or 1% of the Purchase Price to a non-representative broker.
>> If no cooperating broker compensation is offered, the Property cannot be placed in NEFMLS. SELLER hereby directs closing attorney/settlement agent to disburse at closing all compensation to brokers payable hereunder
So in this case, the seller's broker is entitled to 5%, of which 2.5% is required to be shared with a buyer's broker, if existent.
In the event that no buyer's broker exists... it would be a conversation with the seller's broker as to how to dispose of the 2.5% (refund to the deal, etc.).
The contract between the seller and their broker/agent definitely reserves (typically) 3% for the buyer side broker/agent. What happens to that 3% is definitely under the influence of the buyer. We negotiated a 50/50 split of the 3% back to us as the buyer in the most recent house that we bought. I guess we could have instead offered it as an incremental incentive to the selling party to sweeten the deal.
Yeah totally it's the same thing. The bottom line is you now have an extra 3% to "play with" between you, the seller's agent, and the seller that would have previously gone to the buyer's agent. How you split up that 3% depends on who's got most of the leverage in the scenario.
Correct, but I can make the offer with that language and the seller can review that w their agent. If the agent is "just as well off" or even ahead of the game they can direct the ~3% I whatever way makes sense to get the deal done.
But seriously, imagine you and I are both bidding $1,000,000 on a house. You have an agent, so if your bid is accepted, your agent and the sellers agent each get $30,000.
I don't have an agent. In my offer, I write "the sellers agent gets the usual 3%, and I am allocating the 3% that the buyer's agent would get towards the seller instead." That means for the seller's agent there's no difference whether I use an agent or not, but to the seller themselves, my offer looks $30,000 better than yours because I am sweetening the deal using that $ I'd otherwise give my realtor.
All that said, I used a realtor on my house purchase despite being financially savvy and a good negotiator because they actually helped us find the right house, and they were well worth the fee.