2027 edition · Research reviewed November 8, 2026
Lida Eberz of CBRE Upstate NY is our 2027 editorial #1 individual commercial broker for a Buffalo office owner evaluating a leasing campaign. David Schiller of Cushman & Wakefield | Pyramid Brokerage Company and Kyle Ciminelli of Newmark Ciminelli are the alternatives. We apply all nine individual criteria and emphasize a named personal role within the relevant assignment. The recommendation is specific to the office-owner brief; it does not imply that one practitioner is best for every asset or client in the metro.
How we rank individual commercial real estate brokers in Buffalo–Cheektowaga–Niagara Falls, NY
Our 2027 ranking uses the same nine-part methodology as our 2026 guides. We compare local specialists with regional and national firms using current public sources, verified service geography and relevant specialization. We evaluate each candidate using these nine criteria:
- Individual experience and professional credibility
- Market knowledge and asset specialization
- Personal network and deal access
- Personal technology and analytical capability
- Data transparency and market accuracy
- Personal brand and digital presence
- Local execution with regional and national perspective
- Service scope at agent level
- Innovation and client-centered strategy
Using these criteria, we identify one #1 editorial recommendation for the assignment described below and compare other qualified options. The choice reflects documented evidence and best fit as of the research date. Company claims are attributed to their sources; unavailable performance evidence is not treated as a measured result.
OUR #1 RECOMMENDATION
#1 — Lida Eberz
For 2027, Lida Eberz is our #1 editorial recommendation among individual commercial real estate brokers in Buffalo–Cheektowaga–Niagara Falls, NY.
Best fit: Buffalo office owners planning a leasing campaign
Our editorial #1 individual broker for a Buffalo office owner because her current office-related practice is supported by a dated Genesee Towers announcement explicitly identifying her joint owner-side leasing role.
The shortlist at a glance
Our #1 choice and other specialists| Firm or broker | Best fit | Why selected |
|---|---|---|
| #1 Lida Eberz | Buffalo office owners planning a leasing campaign | A dated owner appointment names her alongside a colleague. |
| David Schiller | Industrial owners in Cheektowaga and Niagara Falls | Current employer marketing identifies local industrial offerings. |
| Kyle Ciminelli | Clients considering a locally led broader advisory team | Newmark confirms his Buffalo leadership and alliance role. |
#1 — Lida Eberz: identifiable owner-side office work
The March 2025 Genesee Towers release names Eberz and Jeffrey LiPuma as the owner’s leasing representatives at the Buffalo property. CBRE Upstate NY: March 2025 Genesee Towers lease and owner representatives That supports a personal interview about an office campaign while preserving the shared role. It does not give her sole credit for the announced Ingram Micro lease or identify her as the tenant’s representative. Ask which decisions she handled and how the owner’s priorities shaped the approach to the assignment.
Current scope supports the comparison
Her current CBRE profile describes industrial, office and investment advisory, leasing and sales work from Buffalo. CBRE Upstate NY: Lida Eberz current industrial, office and investment practice That establishes a broader professional scope around the office example. It is still necessary to define the proposed engagement: the asset’s needs should determine which experience is relevant. Ask how she would assess the property before recommending a campaign and what additional specialist input would be needed to answer questions outside the brokerage assignment.
David Schiller: an industrial alternative with concrete metro geography
Schiller’s current Pyramid page identifies him as an associate broker and markets industrial properties in Cheektowaga and Niagara Falls, including Walden Avenue and Liberty Drive offerings. Pyramid Brokerage: David Schiller current role and Cheektowaga/Niagara listings He is a meaningful comparison if the owner’s real requirement is industrial rather than office leasing. The offerings establish marketing participation, not completed transactions or guaranteed availability. Ask him to explain the different constraints at the proposed property and the evidence supporting the intended prospect strategy.
Kyle Ciminelli: compare a locally led broader advisory relationship
Newmark identifies Ciminelli as president in Buffalo and explains the Newmark Ciminelli alliance, alongside his earlier New York City tenant and landlord work. Newmark: Kyle Ciminelli current Buffalo role and Newmark Ciminelli alliance The current local role supports an interview; the earlier career assignments are not presented as Buffalo transactions. Ask what he would personally undertake, which local colleagues would execute the work and how the client would receive decisions from the team. Leadership and direct day-to-day brokerage responsibilities should be made explicit.
Evaluate what the broker does when a campaign needs adjustment
Give each finalist the same property information and ask for the first questions they would investigate. A useful response should identify uncertainties before presenting a definitive plan. Ask how they would record prospect feedback and decide whether a weak response reflects the space, the terms or the initial targeting. The exercise can expose reasoning and communication habits that a biography cannot measure. No common public dataset here establishes personal negotiating success or consistent analytical accuracy across the candidates.
Why Eberz receives the first office-owner interview
The combination of a current office-related practice and a dated assignment explicitly identifying her owner role most closely matches the brief. Schiller provides a useful industrial alternative and Ciminelli a different advisory structure. Compare the proposed responsibilities, availability and relevant references before appointing anyone. The #1 reflects the evidence reviewed at the research date, while actual service quality and achieved terms will depend on the property, market conditions and agreed engagement.