Asked for their opinion on whether or not utilities could charge commissions, posed by moderator Greg Byrnes, of PECO Energy Co., two panelists said yes; two, no.

SiteFinder partner, Merrill Freedman, executive vice president of Mt. Laurel, NJ-based NAI Mertz Corp., was the strongest advocate. Conceding that, as one of six broker partners covering "the largest, but least populated area of the state," his firm hasn't yet closed a deal through the program. "But, we're close. I can't yet put a dollar figure on the relationship," Freedman says, adding, "we've gotten a lot of leads, and I wouldn't be without (the program).

"That we belong to a network lets clients know they are getting the widest possible exposure," he explains. When a deal happens through the partnership, PSEG gets a share of the commission, and the proportion rises with the size of the deal.

Jamie Covello, executive director of Cushman & Wakefield, who splits her week between the New York and Philadelphia offices, adds, "some sort of fee seems reasonable. We get incredibly valuable information and financial analysis from PECO," she says lamenting that no such source is available to her in New York.

By contrast, Caleb F. Fox IV, senior vice president of locally based Chesterton Blumenauer Binswanger, sees "an inherent conflict of interest. I'm not sure the market would accept that," he says. Dave Beal, partner and vice president of Southampton, PA-based Hart Corp. agrees.

Instant Insights /

Panel Splits on Commissions for Utilities

Related Stories

Recommended For You