Jeanne Garde

Let's all drop the "talking points" of pro or con. We all run a business, so if being in these sites changed your market share positively then you should stay. If your market share has not changed since being in those sites then you need to determine the real reason you are there. Many of us have allowed this because of our agents, not because of a sound business practices. If companies no longer providing data to these sites, do not see a reduced market share then they are better off. Why? because their existing marketing is actually working and the additional exposure has no significant impact. Anything you do should be measured, if it is not working find out why and change it. These companies could simply be changing something that did not bring more transaction through their doors and are looking for new ideas. Nothing wrong with that.

We as a country need to move forward, people elected should live and act like Americans first, the party be damned. That is why we should have a whole new group of elected members, because so far the word compromise does not seem to be a capability of any of the existing members. Compromise is not spelled "Winning" it is giving and getting. That is why Laura's comments are appropriate

As a real estate broker for 25 years and the owner of a real estate company for 18 years I deeply resent the implication that any real estate agent would delibertly recommend an inferior inspector to a home seller or a home buyer. It is far easier to solve the problem of "the rusted water heater, the broken furnace vent, and the faulty roof" in a pre-sale inspection or during the escrow period. We are here to help solve problems, not create more issues and insure having an unhappy buyer after close of escrow.