现在为了卖个房子，都荒唐到什么地步了。 房产中介竟然培训"演员"，轮番给房东施压，339万的房子被砍到280万，538万的房子被演到510万，一场戏就能白捡几十万。 我们来看这段话："你尽量讲优点，缺点的话，可以讲一到两点，因为讲多了，房东可能认为是演员。" 这两天，上海房产中介的套路被曝光，中介招募职业看房人，每场演出能挣200元。 这些经过培训的群演不仅点评装修挑刺户型，还要轮番给房东施压，让房东主动降价。 一名中介工作人员透露，他每天需要带15个客户看房，这是公司的要求，通过这种方式，他可以不断跟房东反馈价格，加速成交。 一套挂牌价339万元的房子，同户型市场成交价为285万元，中介却让演员从280万元开始报价。 然而，二手房市场的买卖双方博弈却在加剧。 据中介内部人员透露， 假带看 现象的背后是严格的KPI考核，在部分中介机构内部，每日15组带看量的硬性考核指标，为了完成任务、获取绩效，他们不得不走上造假捷径。 上海市房地产经纪行业协会已连夜约谈二十多家相关企业，要求头部机构启动内部核查。 当房东听到这个价格大吃一惊后，中介会指导演员假装出去打电话和家人商量，实际上是被通知可以加点价。 就这样，在精心 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the phenomenon of "institutional arbitrage" in the economic sector, highlighting how individuals exploit legal loopholes to engage in fraudulent activities that are more damaging than traditional scams [1][2]. Group 1: Case Studies - A publishing company faced significant losses due to a partner's failure to pay for goods, which was exacerbated by the partner's strategic evasion of debt through the establishment of multiple companies and changing legal identities [3][4]. - The publishing industry is particularly vulnerable to high bad debt rates due to lenient credit policies, allowing fraudsters to exploit the system and accumulate debts exceeding 100 million yuan [4]. - Another case involved an individual who created a facade of professionalism to gain trust, ultimately leading to a fraudulent investment scheme where the promised returns were never delivered [5][6][7]. Group 2: Mechanisms of Fraud - Fraudsters often establish multiple companies across different regions, frequently changing legal representatives to evade debts and legal repercussions [12]. - They utilize a strategy of "credit sales" and "borrowing" to gain benefits while intentionally delaying payments, leading to numerous disputes that are often too small for victims to pursue legally [12]. - The legal framework presents challenges for victims, as proving intent for fraud is difficult, and many cases are classified as civil disputes rather than criminal fraud, complicating the recovery of losses [14][15]. Group 3: Legal and Systemic Issues - The current legal definitions and standards make it challenging to prosecute fraudsters effectively, as the distinction between civil fraud and criminal fraud is often blurred [10][14]. - The legal protections intended to encourage business innovation are being misused by fraudsters as shields against accountability, allowing them to escape consequences for their actions [15]. - The article calls for reforms in the legal system to close loopholes that enable such fraudulent behaviors, emphasizing the need for a collective response to restore trust in economic transactions [17].