Vacant land and nobody wants to show it to me

Running a small team, I'll say the plain version: a $1,500 gross commission splits with the brokerage before the agent sees it, so at a 70/30 that's $1,050, and that's before the 40 minutes each way, twice, plus the county calls. Nobody's being cute with you @arbor. Land at your price point is a flat fee business or it's a favor.

$3,000 flat on a $60k parcel is 5%. That's the number I'd sit with before deciding it's fair, because it lands very differently than 2.5% does even though the dollars are smaller than a house deal.

@thicket's percentage framing is the wrong denominator for this decision. The question is what the alternative costs. If you buy that parcel unrepresented, you'll pay the same price and do the diligence yourself, so the real comparison is $3,000 against your own time plus the odds you miss something. On raw land the misses are expensive and hard to reverse. A parcel with no recorded legal access is worth a fraction of what the listing implies, and a survey and title search are what surface it, not the photos.

On the structure, @arbor, three things to pin down in the agreement. One, the fee in dollars, with an explicit statement that any seller contribution reduces what you owe rather than adding to the agent's take. Two, whether the fee is earned at close or on any purchase in a defined area during the term, since a land search running eight months across three counties can trip a broad exclusivity clause when you buy directly from a neighbor you met yourself. Three, what's actually included, because "I'll show you parcels" and "I'll order the survey, chase the perc test, and read the deed restrictions" are different jobs at different prices.

The risk you haven't raised is financing. Raw land loans typically want more down and run shorter than a mortgage, and terms move, so confirm in writing with a lender before you're under contract. An agent who's never closed a land deal will hand you a residential purchase contract with an appraisal contingency that doesn't fit and no contingency for the soil work. That's a bigger exposure than the fee spread you're arguing over.

The offset sentence is where I'd spend my attention. I've seen forms that say the seller's contribution is "credited toward" the fee and forms that say the agent is entitled to the stated amount "in addition to any compensation received from the seller." Same page, opposite meaning.

Add one more to @warrant's list: check whether the agreement makes the fee due at closing or due regardless of closing. Some forms have a clause making the flat fee payable if you walk away after inspection, which on land, where a bad perc test is a completely normal reason to walk, is a real number to lose. And ask whether the fee sits on the settlement statement or gets invoiced separately, because your lender may treat those differently.

Serious question for @cobalt, does anyone on the service side actually bill land buyers hourly? Feels like it would solve the mismatch better than a flat fee, since some searches are two showings and some are twenty.

Hourly exists but I've mostly seen it from consultants who don't take a commission at all, which puts you in a different arrangement than representation. What I'd want to know, @arbor, is whether your $40k to $120k range is where you'll stay. If you're going to buy four parcels, a flat fee agent who learns your criteria is worth negotiating a repeat rate with up front rather than paying full retail four times.