OpenMLS, an open multiple listing service that features property information from the real world and the three-dimensional virtual world of "Second Life," has announced the first-ever Real Estate Metaverse Conference and Expo, scheduled Oct. 26-28.

"Second Life" participants are represented by characters called avatars and can use a virtual-world currency that can be traded for real-world dollars. Participants can buy and sell real estate, and can design and build homes. Coldwell Banker is among the companies that have hung out a virtual shingle in "Second Life."

Registration for this virtual conference is free and open to "Real Life and Second Life Real Estate Agents, Associations, Brokers, Builders, Buyers, Consultants, Developers, Educators, FSBOs, Investors, and Realtors," according to an announcement at RealEstateMetaverse.net.

The conference sessions and presentations will reportedly "explore the connections between real life and second life real estate; buying, selling, and developing virtual land; cross-marketing for real estate in the virtual and real worlds; and a host of other topics."

As an incentive to participate, OpenMLS is offering a free 512-square-meter vacant lot in Larkspur Landing to "one lucky avatar from our guest list." (Note: That's a plot of cyberspace in "Second Life," not actual, real-world property.)

Conference organizers are seeking sponsors and exhibitors.

RE InfoLink, a Silicon Valley-area multiple listing service with about 21,000 members, this month notified members about a new policy that allows its subscribers to pay a fee to conceal the sale price of a property, at the request of a home buyer or seller (see Inman News article).

It's not uncommon for an MLS to have a mechanism to deal with such requests, said Jim Harrison, RE InfoLink president and CEO, though he said that the MLS had long resisted such a policy. What prompted the MLS to change the policy was that some subscribers simply chose to pull a property out of the MLS prior to a sale to avoid reporting the sale price, he said, in which case the MLS would lose out on data related to that sale.

Requests to withhold sales price, say MLS officials, are rare and tend to occur in higher-priced neighborhoods. It's an interesting issue: a desire to keep your own financial matters private vs. the public good in knowing what homes are actually selling for in your neighborhood.

Listing agents who are members of RE InfoLink can pay $500 for the first instance in withholding sales price, $1,000 for the second instance, $2,000 for the third instance, $4,000 for the fourth instance and $5,000 for the fifth and subsequent instances to withhold price information, according to the policy description, and agents must enter the code "SPWHLD" in the confidential remarks for those property listings.

The policy also provides that the "listing agent will close the listing as sold using last list price as the sale price," so agents who are conducting a comparative market analysis should avoid using properties that are flagged as sales price withheld.

Lucien Salvant, a spokesman for the National Association of Realtors, said, "NAR does not have a policy that says an MLS can't institute such a rule."

Since the housing market began to sober up from years of utter drunkenness, days-on-market data provided by MLSs has become an issue in some areas. Citing complexity and confusion over this information, SoCal MLS last weekend decided to remove all days-on-market data from consumer reports.

In an announcement on its Web site, the MLS says that:

"With the changing market there has been much discussion, contention and even litigation over Days on Market and Cumulative Days on Market figures.

"One view is that it hurts sellers, another is that it helps buyers.

"The bottom line is that you, the real estate professional are in the best position to explain to your customer - buyer or seller - what the true DOM figure is and what it means."

Almost any Realtor would tell you that a home that's been on the market a long time can cause difficulties when selling -- buyers feel they have more bargaining room so they'll either lowball the offer or just sit back and wait altogether.

Some MLSs have laid down the law on practices like re-listing, which occurs when agents remove homes from the MLS and "re-list" them in order to manipulate the days on market data. While clever, this marketing technique is also deceiving, some say. (See "MLSs attack for-sale home 're-listing' practices.")

In Southern California, buyers will still be able to access days on market information, but only through their agent.

SoCal MLS officials in an OC Register report said the information needs explanation and the board felt it would be best understood if consumers were encouraged to discuss it with the real estate practitioner. Days-on-market information can be misleading, they said, because the listing times can seem longer or shorter than they actually are.

While the MLS may not be providing this to consumers anymore, plenty of Web sites display the info or some version of it. Some examples are: ZipRealty and Catalist Homes both show days-on-market info on their sites,  and Redfin displays a "days on Redfin" number, which isn't exactly the same but gives consumers an idea of how long the listing has appeared at that Web site.

(See also a related blog post from July 3.)

The California Association of Realtors is mulling over some important plans for the future of multiple listing services and their content.

The group has approved an engineering project that will map out data fields from MLSs throughout the state -- a project that could serve as the backbone for a statewide MLS database or a consolidated statewide MLS (see Inman News).

Association officials are expected to weigh these options at a meeting in October. There are currently about 70 MLSs in operation in the state, and some agents and brokers join multiple MLSs -- which means paying multiple fees and complying with multiple sets of rules. Brokers who work in multiple markets don't like this.

Participation in either project would be voluntary. The state Realtor group plans to study regional MLS data-sharing and consolidation efforts that are already in progress in the state. Meanwhile, the National Association of Realtors is studying the creation of a national real estate data repository that could form the basis for a nationwide MLS.

This path is fraught with potential pitfalls, though, as MLS consolidation threatens jobs and control at the hundreds of local and regional MLSs across the country. Technology is not the problem.

Will brokers and their agents prevail in the drive to simplify and unify MLSs ... or at least the MLS data? Is the industry ready for this?

A NAR advisory group is pushing forward with a prelude to a national MLS. Sure, they don't call it a national MLS, rather they dub it a "national real estate data repository" that could serve as a building block for a nationwide MLS.

Some highlights:

• The database would include comprehensive information for all categories of property, including residential and commercial properties and vacant land.
• Properties in the repository could be flagged by status (for sale, for lease, etc.).
• This data repository would be fully owned by participants.

There's a sense of urgency in the need to move forward with this project. Members of the NAR group said on Saturday that if the organization doesn't do it, then someone else will.

We'd love to hear from readers on why this is or is not a good idea for the industry and the consumer.

The National Association of Realtors "should develop a new 'brand' (including name and logo)" to describe the publicly accessible aspects of multiple listing services' property information, an association working group recommends.

This MLS Internet Issues Work Group, formed by the Realtor association's Multiple Listing Issues and Policies Committee, also recommends that the association "establish rules governing use of the term 'MLS' by participants and subscribers so it will be clear that consumers do not receive full direct access to all information in MLS databases when they use participant or subscriber Internet Web sites."

Some MLSs have already passed rules restricting the use of the terms "multiple listing service" or "MLS" in company names and Web sites, though U.S. Realtors do not own the rights to the term "MLS."

A settlement agreement has been announced in a lawsuit against Regional Multiple Listing Service of St. Paul, Minn., that challenged restrictions on the use of the terms "MLS" and "multiple listing service." Though a settlement was reached (see Inman News article), there are still some bad feelings about the rule.

Steve Westmark, a Realtor who brought the lawsuit along with two other companies, says the settlement isn't everything he had hoped for. He still questions whether it was necessary to pass a rule that prevents RMLS members (with the exception of a few grandfathered companies) from using the term "MLS" in company names and Web site addresses -- even though third-party companies that are not members of the MLS can use the term as they wish.

RMLS officials, meanwhile, say the rule thwarts member companies and agents from passing themselves off as the MLS or telling consumers that they will be able to "search the MLS" at their Web sites.