 |
|
|
|||||
Want more housing market stories from Lance Lamberts ResiClub in your inbox? Subscribe to the ResiClub newsletter. In todays article, were sharing the full results from the Q4 2025 Zoodealio-ResiClub Real Estate Agent Survey. To conduct our real estate agent survey, ResiClub partnered with Zoodealio, a cash-offer platform, and iBuyer-management software designed for real estate agents. Among the 204 agents who took the survey, half (51%) have been real estate agents for 15 years or longer. The survey was fielded from November 17 to December 29, 2025. Respondents included real estate agents spanning all regions of the U.S., giving us a ground-level view of buyer urgency, seller motivation, leverage shifts, commission structures, and expectations for the next 12 months. Heres what the results revealed. Buyer urgency cools and leverage continues to shift away from sellers Nationally, a majority (55%) of agents say buyer urgency is lower than it was 12 months ago. The pullback is most pronounced in the Southwest, where no agents reported seeing buyer urgency pick up, and 65% reported seeing lower urgency. This slowdown is underlined by a continued downturn of buyer demand, with 52% of U.S. agents reporting lower homebuyer demand relative to 12 months ago. As buyer demand softens and inventory continues to build, 54% of U.S. agents now say sellers outnumber buyers, with 64% of agents in the Southeast noting the trend, reinforcing that buyers are gaining negotiating power as they move less urgently. Moreover, the overwhelming majority of agents across all regions (82%) agree that the leverage continues to shift toward homebuyers in their local housing markets. As buyer urgency fades, seller urgency is rising. Nationally, 45% of agents say seller urgency is higher than it was 12 months ago, led by the West (51%), Southwest (48%), and Southeast (46%). In these regions, fewer sellers appear willing to wait for conditions to improve. By contrast, the Northeast looks more stable: 55% of agents there say seller urgency is about the same as a year ago. Agents expectations for 2026 In Q4 2025, 39% of agents surveyed expected home prices in their local market to increase over the next 12 months, up from 28% in Q3. The shift is driven by a rise in expectations for prices to stay flat or see slight appreciation, with only 2% of agents anticipating price increases of 5% or more. Mortgage-rate expectations have dipped lower over the past quarter. Earlier in 2025, many agents were still bracing for a higher-rate outcome by the end of the year. As the year progressed, that view softened: Throughout Q4, most agents reported their expectations shifted toward a mid-6% end point, with far fewer expecting rates to remain in the 7% range. Overall confidence is weak, but agents see growth coming from existing homeowners Some 60% of real estate agents surveyed describe their business outlook for the next 12 months as optimistic, led by those in the Southeast (67%). Where do agents think the pie can grow the most in 2026? They say more homeowners are looking to downsize. Roughly 43% say downsizers will be the fastest-growing client segment, followed by move-up buyers (20%). First-time buyers trail well behind (15%), reflecting ongoing affordability constraints. Agent commissions are holding upbut theyre still mad at NAR Sentiment toward the National Association of Realtors remains weak: 57% of agents describe their view as somewhat unfavorable (26%) or very unfavorable (31%), while only 13% express a somewhat favorable (10%) or very favorable opinion (3%) of the organization. Agent compensation structures remain largely similar to the way they were prior to the March 2024 NAR settlement: 88% of sell-side deals and 82% of buy-side deals still use fixed-percentage commissions, mostly in the 2% to 3% range. Alternative structures are more common on the buy side but remain a minority. Meanwhile, about 10% of U.S. agents say they have discussed iBuyer cash-offer options with clients very often in the past year. These conversations are most common between agents and clients in the Southwest and the Southeast. Big picture The Zoodealio-ResiClub Real Estate Agent Survey results from Q4 2025 show a market moving in the same direction, but with more clarity than in Q3. Buyer urgency has cooled further, seller urgency has picked up, and the majority of agents say sellers outnumber buyers, reinforcing the ongoing shift in negotiating power toward buyers. At the same time, expectations around home prices have firmed modestly, with fewer agents anticipating declines and more expecting flat to slight growth in the next 12 months. As in Q3, agents expect activity to be driven primarily by existing homeownersparticularly downsizers and move-up buyers. Meanwhile, post-settlement agent sentiment toward NAR remains poor, and commission structures remain largely unchanged.
Category:
E-Commerce
The Swiss company Punkt has released its latest handset, the MC03, a cellphone that merges minimalist hardware design with a matching UX experience that promises total privacy protection against greedy corporations who want to track you and own your data for their own benefit. This thing got me at “DeGoogled From the Core,” which is one of the phone’s declared core selling points. According to founder Petter Neby, “Punkt is about using technology to help us adopt intelligent habits for less distracted lives.” In 2015, Punkt launched its first phone, the MP01, as a secure device that supported only text and calls. No apps. No tracking. Punkt later released the MP02an even simpler phone that had a small screen and physical buttonsand the MC02, a secure phone with basic encrypted apps like email and calendar. The new MC03 acknowledges that while people might appreciate this obsession with monastic simplicity, security, and privacy, there is clearly a need for some extra features from time to time, like ordering food, getting a cab ride, or wasting time on Instagram. [Photo: Punkt] Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde The Punkt MC03 UX design divides your phone experience into two environments: One is a distraction-free, fully protected private environment called the Vault; the other is called the Wild Web, and its where all the Android apps you want to install live. The Vault is the phone’s main screen. Here youll find the core built-in apps and services, all designed with safety and privacy from the ground up, with encryption, no third-party tracking, no data profiling whatsoever. Stuff like mail, messaging, calendar, contacts, or your file cloud live here. They’re featured on a white-on-black home screen in Helvetica type that’s meant to recall the iconic design aesthetic of Dieter Rams for Braun (an influence that permeates all of Punkts products). The Wild Web features a fully customizable “external” screen, where youll find your standard rows of icons (white over black square buttons) over a white background. Its clearly distinct from the Vault so it changes your mindset: Security is not guaranteed here, although each app lives in a privacy bubble. According to the company, the phone runs each app in its own walled playground, with no access to other data or hardware on the device. Punkt says this ensures your data privacy and limits third-party tracking from app to app (although if you use the same Gmail credentials to log into each app, Google will be able to track you on the server side). Ending you are the product The secret sauce behind this phone is AphyOS, a custom operating system that severs the umbilical cord that typically tethers Android phones to Mountain View’s data-harvesting servers. While a standard Android device “calls home” to Google every 4.5 minutes to report your location and habits, AphyOS uses “hardened code.” This OS core has been reinforced to block attacks and close security loopholesassisted by what the company calls a bank-grade Secure Element chip that keeps your data on the device. It cuts out the bloatware and hidden background services that drain your phones battery and your privacy, giving you what Neby calls “a modern, premium device without the need to compromise.” All of this digital sovereignty comes with a price tag, but thats exactly the point that Punkt is trying to make: Do you want to pay with your private life or do you want to pay to keep your life private? The MC03 includes a 12-month subscription to AphyOS, after which you will have to pay roughly $10 per month to maintain it. By paying for the operating system, you become the customer rather than the merchandise sold to advertisers. As Andy Yen, founder of partner company Proton, puts it: “People deserve choice. Choice over the phone they use, the software they rely on, and who they share their data with.” The monthly subscription price is not to use the phone but to pay for the services. The subscription bundles 5 GB of cloud storage, email, messaging, and calendar into a single secure package. But the real power comes from its integration with Proton. The phone comes with Proton Mail, Drive, Calendar, VPN, Wallet, and Pass, effectively replacing the entire Google Workspace with an encrypted alternative. For messaging, Punkt has preinstalled the cross-platform encrypted client Threema directly into the MC03s Vault, ensuring your chats have “rigorous data protection and rock-solid security” right out of the box, the company claims. It also includes a VPN called Digital Nomad, which protects your connection on sketchy public Wi-Fi networks. Unlike standard VPN apps, this one is integrated directly into the operating system for better performance and requires no extra setup or third-party subscription. p>Finally, the phone forces you to confront the cost of your digital life with the Data and Carbon Ledger. Punkt says this dashboard doesn’t just let you manage app privacy permissions in real time; it actually tracks the energy consumption and carbon footprint of every app you use, pushing you to make smarter, more sustainable choices about how you use your device. The ledger also gives you “full transparent control over app data flow,” allowing you to see and restrict app-specific privacy permissions. [Photo: Punkt] Nice hardware too The object itself is a solid piece of industrial art designed in Switzerland and manufactured in Germany. Solid, matte gunmetal finish. Simple. Nothing added for effect. Just a metal-and-glass slab with a 6.67-inch OLED screen with the usual high-end 120Hz refresh rate standard. One of the best features, however, is its removable 5,200mAh battery, which, oh boyin an era where phones are sealed shut like tombs, allowing users to swap their own power source is a radical act of repairability that extends the device’s life indefinitely. I missed this from the old 90s candy phones, and now I want it. The MC03 doesn’t skimp on the modern specs required for the Wild Web. It sports a 64-megapixel main camera that the company claims can capture sharp images in low light, backed by an ultrawide lens for landscapes and a macro lens for close-ups. Like most phones, its water and dust resistant, and supports wireless charging. Priced at $699, its shipping in Europe later this month and hitting North America in the spring.
Category:
E-Commerce
The federal government signaled a new direction in federal funding this week when it announced plans to put as much as $150 million into a private semiconductor startup. Instead of a grant or a loan, the government would take an equity stake. It’s a meaningful departure from how federal funding has traditionally operated. For years, federal R&D support came structured as non-dilutive grants and Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) awards that didn’t require equity concessions. An early-stage company proves its idea with federal support, investors wait for validation, and the company grows. If the government begins converting grants into equity stakes, that calculus changes fundamentally. A quiet shift The semiconductor deal is the latest in what has otherwise been a relatively quiet shift taking place inside the federal funding system as the Trump administration considers treating some grants like venture investments. For founders, this creates genuine uncertainty. The government has not yet defined the rules of engagement for what ownership in a startup means. There are no clear answers about how much equity might be taken, how dilution would work over time, when the government expects a return, or who would manage these positions. Startups already struggle to keep their capitalization tables clean enough for private investment. Adding a federal agency to the picture introduces new friction. While experienced investors routinely ask about investor composition before committing capital, even seasoned ones may hesitate if the answer includes “the United States government.” History lessons There is instructive history here. Twenty years ago, the state of Texas launched the Emerging Technology Fund with the goal of supporting high-growth technology companies through a venture model. The fund encountered structural problemsincluding non-dilution clauses that prevented it from being fairly diluted alongside other investorsthat ultimately undermined its portfolio companies’ growth. New investors wouldn’t fund them because the risk was not shared fairly. The lesson is clear: Public capital can be valuable, but if it ignores downstream market dynamics and investor expectations, it can choke off the very growth it intends to catalyze. The timing of this equity push is particularly concerning given that SBIR and STTR programshistorically the backbone of non-dilutive federal support for early-stage companiesexpired on September 30, 2025, and remain unauthorized. With traditional grant pathways frozen and equity stakes emerging as the new model, founders face unprecedented uncertainty about federal funding structures. The scale of this disruption is significant: These programs typically distributed approximately $4.73 billion annually to support scientific progress and early company formation. That scale alone makes it essential to understand how any replacement federal support structure would function. Program officers are experts in research evaluation and scientific merit. They are not trained to make venture-style assessments about valuation, equity terms, or long-horizon return timing. Asking them to perform both roles simultaneously creates tension. Conversely, finance-oriented staff who understand investment models are not necessarily equipped to evaluate frontier science. These programs do not operate like traditional venture funds. Ripple effects If the federal government proceeds with equity investments, it must understand the implications for early-stage companies and the ripple effects that follow. If federal agencies become equity holders, they will need to establish clear standards: How are positions structured? Who holds them? When is liquidity expected? How does the relationship evolve as companies raise capital? How are equity percentages, dilution rights, and board representation determined? These decisions cannot be improvised. They determine whether private investors engage or walk away. Startups also need to reconsider their assumptions about federal programs. If equity or royalty components begin appearing, founders must decide what they are prepared to trade for early capital. They’ll need to understand how those terms affect later fundraising rounds and how private investors react to a federal stakeholder at the ownership table. Digital health and medtech founders already have to navigate a complex landscape of regulatory pathways and clinical validation procedures. Having to decipher unclear investment rules from an early funder is more likely to stymie growth than accelerate it. Eyes wide open That’s not to say startups should avoid federal funding if equity is introduced. They may simply need to approach it with clear-eyed expectations about the long-term implications. There is opportunity here if the federal government establishes clear rules. Beyond Texas, other states have experimented with public venture approachessome that helped companies grow, others that created lasting complications. If policymakers systematically study both categories, they can avoid repeatable mistakes. The worst outcome would be moving forward without a framework and discovering too late that the system discourages private capital, slows company formation, or generates new burdens on innovators, investors, and taxpayers. Policymakers have a responsibility to design federal equity participation that is predictable enough that companies aren’t blindsided by unclear terms, and transparent enough that private investors understand the government’s expectations and governance role. Otherwise, having Uncle Sam on your capitalization table may come with complications no one is prepared to manage.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||