While there are some potential negative issues with procuring cause (whose buyer is whose?), certain administrative hassles, and the fact that the buyer’s agent has no listing professional to deal with (the seller is unrepresented), the concept does and can work in many instances.
Buyer's agents will sometimes search for FSBO properties where the seller is willing to “co-op,” just as they search the MLS for properties where the listing agent will co-op. The problem is there is no one place where all the FSBO co-ops in an area are displayed and promoted. Many agents remain unaware of such possibilities for their buyer clients.
Some MLS's have allowed FSBO co-ops to be listed, where for a flat fee, a listing agent will post the property with a 2.8 or 3% co-op to the selling agent, but participate minimally in its marketing and sale, and earn no commission at closing.
The downside to offering a co-op without a full service listing contract in force is that the seller still does not have a broker actively working to find a buyer. The marketing responsibility is left totally to the seller.
Then with no professional assistance, the seller must negotiate with a buyer's broker . It's the seller versus the broker who represents the buyer.
The Colorado Real Estate Commission has now come down on these kind of "discount" listings, insisting that listing brokers not just enter properties in their MLS, but also provide full service as described in the standard listing agreement (see the May 2011 issue of the Commission's newsletter, p. 12.). But it is also true that there is no law or regulation that forces a property to be listed in any MLS.