CORE Marketing Group

VVerain: 9 days ago

Agree completely with Kyle

kylewest: 9 days ago

What difference does it make if there is an offer the agent has received? I may be missing something. You made an offer, it was rejected and you were so far apart that you chose not to revise the offer. I assume you thought your offer was reasonable and realistic. If it wasn't, why did you make it to begin with? The supposed arrival of someone else who is interested doesn't change that CORE didn't accept your terms. So now that someone else is claimed to be interested you are going to do what? Start bidding against yourself? Increase your offer without ever having received a counteroffer? Abandon the terms you felt strongly enough about to walk away a couple of days ago?

You need to breathe and take a step back. This is not how you negotiate effectively. If you are still interested, I would renew your offer (assuming it was one you believe was reasoned and realistic) from a few days ago and invite the agent to counteroffer. Otherwise this sounds silly.

newbie2008: 10 days ago

We made an offer on a unit in a development where Core Marketing Group is handling the sales. The offer was rejected and we walked away (they wouldn't concede to any of our requests). Now, a couple of days later, the broker from Core called and said that they now have someone interested in the same unit. Given market conditions, we thought it might be best to wait a little before making a final decision on the unit. I know brokers generally use this "scare" tactic to get buyers to act so I'm not sure if I should take this call seriously - esp given the chatter on this board? Any advice?

kylewest: about 8 weeks ago

Lie with dogs, wake up with ... no commissions.

VVerain: about 8 weeks ago

I enjoy this ... lying is fair game after all. But educated parties should reach contracts and do their diligence on all relevant facts. And when they don't, it is their problem as much as the other party's.

VVerain: about 8 weeks ago

From The Real Deal
On 05/08/08 at 02:32PM
Core sued by former broker Joseph Bongiovanni
By Lauren Elkies

A former Core Group Marketing agent is suing the company and its key players for allegedly cheating him out of more than $51 million in commissions.

Broker Joseph Bongiovanni filed a lawsuit in New York State Supreme Court March 7 against Core Group Marketing; Co-founder and CEO Shaun Osher; Co-founder Jack Cayre; Principal Joseph Cayre (owner of Midtown Equities); founding member Steven Ganz; and broker Jon Isaacs. Bongiovanni alleges that the defendants stole his clients and refuse to give him commissions on five development deals, including one for $200 million, and three residential sales.

In an eight-count complaint, Bongiovanni claimed that when he left the Corcoran Group for Core in August 2006, he and Osher reached a verbal agreement that Bongiovanni "had exclusive rights" to any client that he brought with him to Core. He claims that meant "no sales agent at the firm maintained a right to show properties to said clients other than the plaintiff."
He also claimed that Osher verbally agreed that "any client which plaintiff procured either prior or subsequent [to] his joining the defendant firm was his and his only with respect to the ability to earn commissions."

Osher said the claims are baseless.

He said in a statement: "We firmly believe that Joseph Bongiovanni's allegations against Core Group Marketing are without merit. We are saddened that Mr. Bongiovanni has chosen to take the actions he has. We are confident that our reputation among our clients and peers alike will not waver as we move through the litigation process as a result of Mr. Bongiovanni's unfounded claims."

Core, which has a staff of 42 people, is marketing 11 new developments, including William Beaver House, Jasper and 520 West Chelsea.

Bongiovanni left Core around this past Christmas after a year-and-a-half at the firm, and returned to the Corcoran Group. He has done several deals in the Onyx Chelsea at 261 West 28th Street, a project that he first marketed while at Core.

The Department of State, which licenses real estate agents, received a complaint about Bongiovanni on January 20, according to a spokesperson, who would not elaborate. The complaint is under investigation.

Another complaint was filed with the department against the defendants in Bongiovanni's lawsuit on March 12, another spokesperson said. That complaint over commissions was dismissed, she said, because it will be handled in court.

Bongiovanni, who has been an agent since January 2003, did not comment on the lawsuit.

Lisa Breier Urban, managing partner and co-founder of Breier Deutschmeister Urban & Fromme P.C., a Manhattan-based real estate law firm, said the lawsuit "seems pretty tenuous" and that compensation cases like Bongiovanni's are tough to win because they often rely on agreements that are only verbal, and aren't in writing.

In order to win the case, Urban said, the plaintiff "needs to show that he would have received an economic advantage — commission — but for the actions of the defendants and that these actions were motivated by malice or effected by unlawful means. He also will have to show that he suffered special damages — measurable damages actually sustained — which are required for establishing a cause of action for a tort.

"Further, for him to show loss of a commission, he will have to show that the claim for the commissions is not speculative — i.e. that the deals were real and closed."

Claims for commissions owed are nothing new.

"It's not highly unusual that an agent who has left a firm might have been disgruntled and may choose to pursue legal action for commissions they perceive to be owed," said Pamela Liebman, president and CEO of Corcoran, whose company has no involvement in the lawsuit.

verain: about 10 weeks ago

Not a seller

jmcbyr8: about 10 weeks ago

verain what would you call a seller presenting many intentional no transactions?

verain: about 10 weeks ago

There's no problem, just no transaction. Fundamental elements of a contract include offer and acceptance.

jmcbyr8: about 10 weeks ago

verain all im saying is if you have a willing buyer and not a willing seller for an available apartment it becomes a problem.

verain: about 10 weeks ago

ok now I'm confused

jmcbyr8: about 10 weeks ago

verain it would not be a pleasant expereince if a seller presents information in an unclear manner despite repeated requests for clarity-stonewall effect.

jmcbyr8: about 10 weeks ago

luciato if your good friend has reached a point in his life that enables him to purchase in manhattan its apparent that he posseses critical thinking skills. perhaps he is presented with a unique situation that is not conducive to reaching the intended goal.

verain: about 10 weeks ago

Here's a conclusion for you luciato, you big old douchebag you, approx. $2 psf in monthlies, wow you gotta be a real douche to buy with that monthly nut. Bless your heart.

verain: about 10 weeks ago

Whatever dude, I'm out. Not talking to douches like you anymore about other shady douches. Its just all just too much detail when I'm spending big $ and committing to a place to live for the next few years. I have a headache. Whatever.

luciato: about 10 weeks ago

Verain: whatever dude. i didn't actually read all of the posts. that's the point, this stuff just tends to be blah blah blah uninformative b.s. for the most part. i really do have better things to do than sit and post a million times on a silly board to defend my good name. :) p.s. my good friend (bless his heart) doesn't have the critical thinking skills to tell the difference between "ambiguity and inconclusive data" and anything that were more concrete. the worst part is that he *thinks* he does. whatever. you can post back, but i'm done.

back to my original question: can someone help a newbie? i'm currently looking at the Jasper, which is by Core. everyone i've met there has been nice and cordial. and in the end, i think i'm gonna buy there. but can someone tell me why, if i like a place, that i should have second thoughts because of this supposed shadiness of Core? ........ now i'm not denying that they may be shady or not, i'm just asking whether if they were in fact shady, that should change my decision on a place that i happen to like.

verain: about 10 weeks ago

Soon jmcbyr8 will be accused of being me or shilling for me.

But jmcbyr is exactly right - lots of ambiguity on this thread, vague, unsubstantiated, or foolish accusations, as well as questionable motives, and buyers who want to place all blame on the sellers when they should know the risks and are part of the problem by buying blind.

I'm not saying Core is honest or dishonest - I haven't had dealings with them - I know who they are as an observer of the Manhattan residential RE market. But, EYES WIDE OPEN, buyer beware when dealing with any real estate purchase from any firm, and then, if you've done your homework, had the right advice, made sure the contract said what you wanted, and you yourself have acted rationally and honestly and are reasonable with your own intentions (e.g. flippers are in the same game as the developers, seller agents and brokers to begin with, all trying to make a fast buck by asking as few questions as possible as long as the going is good and tides are rising), then you can go and call someone out if they have acted out of bounds.

jmcbyr8: about 10 weeks ago

luciato, what would your response be if your good friend is presented with ambiguity and inconclusive data in an untimely manner over a long period of time?

verain: about 10 weeks ago

So Luciato, your good friend is a douche because he can't make a clear point.
Let's take a look at you: you've managed to read, as Kyle counted, 90+ posts, so subtract mine and you have say 70-80 posts all about Core. Yet you still have no conclusion on your own about whether you want to deal with Core. Good luck.

luciato: about 10 weeks ago

yes it's been going back and forth via email. and we have a contract out, where some terms are being added as "riders". my attorney says it all looks legit. i'm just wondering why sales have slowed there a bit.

csn: about 10 weeks ago

make sure anything you ask is answered in writing.

luciato: about 10 weeks ago

now, with that said, can someone help a newbie? i'm currently looking at the Jasper, which is by Core. everyone i've met there has been nice and cordial. and in the end, i think i'm gonna buy there. but can someone tell me why, if i like a place, that i should have second thoughts because of this supposed shadiness of Core? ........ now i'm not denying that they may be shady, i'm just asking whether if they were in fact shady, that should change my decision on a place that i happen to like.

luciato: about 10 weeks ago

Verain: i have a good friend that reminds me of you. he's a total douche that never makes a clear point about anything, but he totally thinks he's on top of arguments and thinking logically about everything, and in the end, everyone just sorta gives up on him because he's annoying and so beyond logic.

kylewest: about 10 weeks ago

After 90+ posts little new is being said here. Fair to say the bottom line appears to be general consensus that Core either actively misleads or is cavalier or indifferent to the truth and accuracy. And for verrain and other IDs on here, his point seems to be anyone relying on Core's representations deserves what they get. Nice. Sounds like a company you just can't wait to do business with, huh? So nearly 100 posts later, we end where we began. Be wary of this company.

verain: about 10 weeks ago

What qualifies me as a troll vs. any other poster here?
My points are fourfold:
1 - I don't believe that the responsibility is solely on the broker / seller. I believe that buyers need to do their own diligence, and hire their own lawyers to carefuly review contracts. They should put promises in contracts. In absence of being able to do that, they should steer clear of buying pre-construction. Plenty of quality property exists in the market that isn't pre-construction. The risks are significantly higher and if you do sloppy buying, sloppy legal contracting, it should be the buyer's fault. And since it is pre-construction, the buyer should have KNOWN to be smarter about his actions. In fact, they are giving you a discount to buy early, in hopes that you won't ask all the questions. Yes, lying is fair game. And when I show up at your brokerage / sales office, I'm expecting you to be a liar, regardless if you are or aren't, regardless if you are Core or Corcoran (see above) and so I'm going to check out the details, check out the contract, etc. __before I spend my money__.... and not to make such a long point, when I show up to buy pre-construction at a discount, I'm assuming there is a price to pay for the discount.
2 - The posters here, with their claims which started out just plain whiney (Core said there were three listings but there were acutally four; they are oily or slick or sketchy, they had a water stained sign in their office) have few concrete claims. The only one that was meaningful was Frederic, but then he dumped it on someone else. The buying was done in a rising frenzy market (I believe 260 PAS was done in 2005?), where facts seemed to hardly matter, and the risks if the facts didn't work out were minimal because he could dump the property on someone else after he bought it at a discount. Seems like part of his bargain.
3 - Lots of further obfuscation for who knows what reason. We had a whole segment of this thread about a complaint about the brokerage industry hoarding property. Just plain silly. And then when pressed, the brokerage industry who was acting illegally included three names NOT INCLUDING Core, who is an upstart and is probably a thorn in those 3 guys' sides.
4 - Poppmobile (who is not me) is exactly on target. This is an anonymous board. No one knows who I am ... few seem to believe that I'm not associated with Core (I say again I am not, but regardless of what is true about me or not, my points remain valid regardless). But all these guys complaining about Core - tell us who you actually are? Do you work for a competitor? etc. Are you upset that you lost a development to Core and are trying to sully their reputation? Where are you coming from - show us who you are and then you can legitimately call Core or anyone else a liar. But don't do it hidden.

Thanks

Amity95: about 10 weeks ago

Methinks Popomobile = verain with a new screen name.

dmag2020: about 10 weeks ago

I don't think Amity95 could have gotten a better answer to his question.

stealth1: about 10 weeks ago

Popomobile, I am certain that you would not be so amused if it was you who was lied to about a view on new construction. Doesn't get any worse than that.

Popomobile: about 10 weeks ago

Anonymous people calling other people liars amuses me.

stealth1: about 10 weeks ago

If Verain is associated with CORE then it confirms my belief that he is incredibly stupid. He has just exposed the firm for what it is, on a Board that a majority of purchasers in the NY market visit every day. What a horse's ass.

Amity95: about 11 weeks ago

I agree it's best to ignore verain, but I don't believe his disavowals of a CORE relationship. I think he is probably one of the CORE founders or someone else deeply invested in CORE. The fact that he openly states that "lying seems like fair game" makes it very likely that he is lying about his lack of a relationship with CORE. I think it would be best to group him with shong, closein10days, SteveF and others on this site who come off as being sleazy and untrustworthy. Furthermore, I had hoped that CORE might have some smidgen of integrity, but now I feel that CORE is probably best placed in the same category as Countrywide in terms of businesses that should be avoided at all costs. It is unfortunate, but it seems that CORE is a group that cannot be trusted at all.

KISS: about 11 weeks ago

I am afraid verain is a troll. I wish he was a CORE broker -- that would be a more rational explanation for his posts. But given his disavowals of a CORE relationship, I see no other rational basis to his posts. As with all trolls, best to ignore. Res ipsa loquitur.

tenemental: about 11 weeks ago

I'm not saying the buyer shouldn't beware or shouldn't perform due diligence - he should and should. That doesn't change tha fact that the brokers lied about the unit. If the question is "can broker X be trusted?" when broker X is known to missrepresent facts, the answer is no, regardless of the fact that reasearch on the part of the buyer and his lawyer should be performed.

verain: about 11 weeks ago

tenemental - Frederic's claim is silly. He was buying something for over $1 million, and he didn't even diligence core aspects of the purchase? He then went ahead, hired a lawyer who went through the contract, and knew full well that there was no specific claim or representation to the effect of the statements by Core.

verain: about 11 weeks ago

Stealth1, you would have lost your lawsuit, if you could have found any attorney silly enough to litigate it.

goldwillis: about 11 weeks ago

I looked at 125 North 10th Street. The brokers there couldn't have been nicer.

stealth1: about 11 weeks ago

Verain - "lying seems like fair game"?? What the hell kind of comment is that? Brokers make a very decent commission on these sales and no, lying is NOT fair game. Especially with something as integral to a purchase as a view. Personally, I would have sued the guy for misrepresentation and bashed his firm along the way. Further, any broker who adopts that kind of business ethic will not last long in the upscale markets. New Yorker's are far too savvy to allow guys that that to exist.

tenemental: about 11 weeks ago

frederic12 had a very specific claim: Core brokers lied to him. Totally in keeping with the topic of the thread. Their lie was about a specific feature of the unit, not about a subjective impression. Do all Core brokers behave that way? I have no idea, but frederic12's experience in worth keeping in mind for Amity95.

Calling bullshit on brokers is one of StreetEasy's greatest functions.

verain: about 11 weeks ago

-ps - Amity, I'm for openness.
What we have here are a lot of people complaining non-specifically about Core, or without being clear on who they are or what their own intentions were when dealing with Core or buying real estate.

Me thinks that there is a lot of hypocrisy by these accusers.

I have no relationship to Core, or any brokerage or sales firm, or any real estate developer, or any owner of a multi-unit rental property, etc.. When I say relationship, I mean direct relationship, one-degree of separation, or two-degrees of separation (beyond that I have no idea). I also do not have a property on the market, and have no way to benefit or be hurt by my statements about any firm, any developer, or any property.

I merely think real estate is interesting, and like calling people out for their own bullshit. Of which there is plenty here.

verain: about 11 weeks ago

Was the "open sky" view in the offering plan?

Lying seems like fair game ... buyer should be ware and only rely on the specific claims, representations and warranties in the legal document. Anything else, statements from salespeople, etc. are meaningless and it truly is shame on the buyer.