It is legal in NV also, I think neither has an advantage because that agent has to stay completely neutral to follow the law. You can not advice either side on what they should counter it has to be 100% their choice and you just let the other side know.

What I do as an extra layer of protection is just for the negotiation part have someone else help them from my team or office. That way both sides can have some guidance as to what to offer.

If this is your RE exam mock-up question. You need to research more.....

When a new realtor is on the job someone ask one a question your ans is "C" or let me ask AR friends.

It's legal in AZ too.  I see it being a disadvantage to both - so we don't do it.

In New Mexico it's okay to double end a transaction.  You just have to keep it equal and keep all parties updated and informed at all times. Stay neutral.

It is legal to represent both parties in Florida as a Transaction Broker. Advantage is a matter of perception!

Many of us had years of success in real estate sales before the concept of buyer agents. A reputable real estate professional will seek fairness for all of the parties.

AZ, disclosed dual agency is legal. We don't prefer to do it as the liability increases. However, I would rather have 1 competent agent on 2 sides than an incompetent on 1 side gumming up the deal.

not unless the agent is willing to reduce his/her commission because he is the only realtor in the transaction - and why should that happen since that agent is doing twice the work with all the legal liability and risk.

DC and MD allow the same but Maryland does not. I will write an offer for a buyer as the listing agent but never would "represent" both sides in the transaction - that is an oxymoron to me and a clear trip to realtor nightmares. 

 Good Wednesday morning. It is legal here in the state of Tennessee as well. You are right, in that the seller does have the advantage however, you still must do your due diligence to the buyers.

Great answers you got for your question.

More efficient.

There is no advantage.  Both the sellers and the lose. How can they be sure the confidentiality clause is maintained?

As far as the commission is concerned, they need a different Agent, if they can't come up with a price that benefits both.

It is legal here in California too.  You have to be very careful to isolate your seller side knowledge and buyer side knowledge.  I tell both parties up front, you will not have any greater knowledge than you would have had with two separate realtors involved.

The benefits come in when the escrow gets underway.  The last deal I did where I represented both sides would NOT have come together if I wasn't holding both sides.

The biggest benefit I tell both parties is: "I know I'll return my calls in a timely fashion.  You don't always get that with another agent."

In Texas when a broker represents both parties we do so as an Intermediary.  If done properly neither party has an advantage over the other party.