Home

You must login or register to post a comment.

 
Submitted by David Silver-Westrick on November 14, 2011 - 6:58pm.

Silliness. NAR's habit is to cave in to traditional brokers and their fears. From a web standpoint, NAR is stuck around 1990. There will be a workaround, but why make the workaround necessary? Truth is, the ossified governance process at NAR will need a thorough redo to allow occasional independent thought before it becomes relevant again. It may be a while...

David Silver-Westrick
Operating Partner, Keller Williams OC Coastal Realty
Past president Orange County Association of Realtors and SoCalMLS

 
Submitted by James Dwiggins on November 15, 2011 - 12:54pm.

This article should be re-titled to "NAR's Recipe For Making Realtors Irrelevant"

Here are the ingredients needed...

1.) Put a committee together of people who obviously have no idea where the industry is headed or who our future competitors are going to be. Then have them answer to a majority of people who have their head in the sand and are still fighting over what data should be displayed online and who gets it. Then, let them make decisions that affect everyone else.

2.) Instead of making it easier for real estate companies/brokers/agents to build a better presence online that the consumer wants and needs... let's make it as difficult as possible and do everything we can to make our industry even more irrelevant online than we already are.

3.) Lets continue to make Zillow, Trulia, Yahoo, (non-real estate companies) the destination where consumers go for real estate because they have most of the listings nationally already since real estate companies and agents can’t on their websites. Now at this rate, we never will either!

I'm wondering if anyone at NAR has looked at the latest Hitwise report on real estate sites. If they did, they would notice that NO real estate company is in the top 10 websites used by consumers anymore. This committee should be more focused on how to make real estate companies and agents (of all sizes) more relevant online... not making them less relevant, but I guess that would be logical.

The Realtor value proposition is our knowledge… not the data… It’s always been this way!

Unreal!

James Dwiggins
Vice President
Realty World Northern California & Nevada.

 
Submitted by Bruce Ailion on November 16, 2011 - 6:30am.

Missing from the discussion and analysis is what the REALTOR's client would want. A survey of how many Sellers would choose to limit the number of places they would want their property marketed and displayed would come to a near unanimous decision. They would want their property listed as widely and in as many places possible.

When REALTORS as a profession do not place our clients interests ahead of our own, our place in the transaction diminishes in value.

I am disappointed with the decision, as a REALTOR I do not benefit and as a Seller, my client does not benefit from this decision.

Bruce Ailion,
RE/MAX Greater Atlanta
CRS, CRB, ABR, MSRE, CDPE, e-PRO, ESQ
Bruce@LocationLocationLocation.com

 
Submitted by Denis Johnston on November 16, 2011 - 7:11am.

This is something that may be addressed when speaking of Home Services of America and the corporate shills that they support. To take away from the Realtors, clients and would be prospects is something that should not to be taken lightly. Shame on you NAR for succumbing to the Warren Buffett pressure machine and for ignoring the needs, wants and requirements of the Real Estate professionals who continue to feed your coffers through your shameless dues and fees you impose upon us. With that said, when are you running for a congressional seat?

Denis Johnston
Oro Valley, Az
Denis Johnston says

 
Submitted by Rene Plante on November 19, 2011 - 5:25am.

The biggest issue that is being missed here and at the MLS level is Branding. The realtor does all the work to get the content for idx. They assume the responsibilities yet the Listing Agent is not allowed to brand the listing i.e.list the agent's name or company and phone number in all listings on all sites the internet. The old time insecure feelings that one agent may steal another agent's listing as a reason not to brand is rediculous.
The Real Estate agent provides and supports the seller. The Real Estate agent pays for promotions and assumes the responsiblity for the listing. He/she should be able to be recognized as the authority on the property and not Zillow or Realtor.com or some of the other hundreds who are making millions off the listings. Let me list my name as the contact in the listing, let me show my sign in the listing. Yes continue to open up the listings world wide only show the person who knows about the account so he/she can be contacted by interested parties.
http://reneplante.com Innovative Real Estate

 
Submitted by Mitchell McKenzie on November 19, 2011 - 6:12am.

Perhaps we have forgotten what Fiduciary means. Placing my clients interests in front of my own, is not just lip service, in my state, it is mandated!

Mitch McKenzie
Broker/Owner
Star Republic Realty
Texas Landlord Services
Austin, Texas

 
Submitted by Victor Lund on November 19, 2011 - 7:12am.

These comments are very interesting and some are well thought out. Franchises are part of the professional real estate family, but they are not participants in the MLS. As such, the MLS has no governance over their activities when they get the data - much in the same way that they cannot control or protect a broker's listing on a syndication website.

If anyone wants their listing on franchise websites - go into Listhub, or point2 and turn it on. In releases expected sometime this year, or early Q1, franchises will become syndication channels.

To all extents and purposes, the effect will be the same - anyone wishing to display their listings on franchise websites will have that freedom. Kudos to franchises - they are better off without the IDX data. They will be able to do more to meet consumer experience expectations without having to deal with pesky MLS rules and regulations that sometimes hamper creativity.

Victor Lund
Partner
WAV Group
http://waves.wavgroup.com
http://www.wavgroup.com

 
Submitted by John Woodward on November 19, 2011 - 7:19am.

Go ahead and nix the franchise folks but keep outfits like Zillow and Trulia around? That makes as much sense as a member cannot use the term "MLS" but if you are non-member, it's OK. What exactly is the 50% dues increase for? Who is looking out for who?

I would have liked to see what the discussion was to get to this decision. My guess is there were not a lot of top producers in the room....chances are those folks are back home selling homes and trying to navigate the overwhelming government and association rules put out by association types who somewhere along the line equated committee activity with being in real estate. These are the people who decide a dues increase to "feed the machine" somehow is good for it's members. An interesting survey question that will never be asked is "If membership were not required, would you continue to pay to be a member." On a national level, I think the answer would be "no."

I wonder how much money these 3rd party data vendors spend on influencing committee decisions. It seems to me that most of the folks who are out in the field actually doing real estate business are really not involved in the decision process that we all have to live by. Conversely, the I wonder how many homes the "party officials" actually sell.

If one is in the real estate business, you want your listings displayed in the most places you can get it. I am not part of a national organization but I was for 19 years. If there are some set of facts out there that says the franchise folks should not have access, I do not see how that decision can be made without lumping in the 3rd party players as well. Maybe, if committee and association members ever had to take the time to process a listing and enter it into the MLS (with their customer’s interested at heart) only to have that customer come back wanting us to explain a "zestimate", they would understand better.

John Woodward
Broker/Owner
Sarasota Real Estate Group
http://www.SarasotaOne.com/

 
Submitted by David Hageman on November 19, 2011 - 7:39am.

There may be plenty of "workarounds" or "solutions" to overcome this change but shame on NAR for caving and forcing its own members to do that. This is OUR organization and is supposed to be looking out for us as we look out for our clients. Shame, shame, shame on NAR! My clients would not agree with your decision... therefore you are wrong! In the end the client's opinion is all that really matters... we are your clients and the sellers and buyers are our clients. Shame on you! I will work around you but I should not have to!
David Hageman
Century 21 Centurion
Houston, Texas

 
Submitted by Chris Harden on November 19, 2011 - 8:20am.

A Realtor's fiduciary duty is to the client and always has been. This will take away part of our advertising in our clients best interest and just gives more power to companies like Trulia and Zillow who want us to pay for more services by scavenging off Realtor's listings. NAR has lot touch with the core of basic Realtor beliefs.

Chris Harden
Broker/Owner
RE/MAX Four Corners
McKinney, TX

 
Submitted by Kelly Exline on November 19, 2011 - 9:46am.

It is our duty to your clients to sell their listings, this is what we are paid and hired to do. I want my listing to have as much exposure as possible where ever possible. The fee that irks me the most is my NAR dues, you do very little to benefit Realtors. Get your act together NAR and stop impeding our ability to do our job.

Kelly Exline
Associate Broker
Prudential Idaho Realtor
Boise, ID

 
Submitted by Steve Barbey on November 19, 2011 - 11:52am.

The issue at hand is this: ReMax.com, for example, is NOT a real estate agency. They are a FRANCHISOR that sells franchises to real estate agencies. In January of this year
NAR adopted a policy in which FRANCHISORS gained access to all MLS data nationwide. Large regional brokerages that are not part of a national franchise and many small brokerages complained that this policy put them at a disadvantage. For example: "Hey, it's unfair that ReMax.com (the franchisor) can display all lisings nationwide, but we, the large regional non-franchise guy, can only display listings from MLSs that we are members of."

First, the issue is essentially moot. Although franchisor idx access has been revoked, the franchisors will still be able to gain access to the same exact data via syndication in the same way that zillow and trulia do today. They'll have to do more work, but they will still get the data.

For this to be a substantive issue, NAR would have to revoke franchisor idx access AND syndication which would result in data being available and shown only on websites of MLS members. At face value this seems like it would be a good idea right? My opinion is no.

First, efforts to limit access to MLS data is little more than protectionism driven by the fear that if we lose control of "our" mls data that realtors will be marginalized and ultimately our value and the need for consumers to use our services will fade.

I believe this fear is unfounded.

The value we bring to the market is not our mls data. The value we bring to the market is our expertise and our service as well as the tools, systems and resources that we utilize to do those things better. We should not waste efforts trying to control data, we should instead invest our efforts on improving the real value that we deliver to the consumer. We should strive to continually improve the service that we provide and continue to be students of our field. True expertise and quality service will win the day.

Further, in the long term, protectionist efforts will be crushed by market dynamics. NAR can choose to attempt to hold on to what we have for as long as we can and then have everything collapse when market pressures penetrate the stronghold, or NAR can help to direct and guide the evolution of our industry. I prefer the latter.

NAR should be focused less on limiting access to data. Instead they should be working to establish and evolve the process and standards through which the real estate industry at large accesses, uses and displays mls data. The NAR's best role is as a curator, not a king.

Steve Barbey
Broker / Owner
Atova, Inc. - IdahoRealEstate.com
Boise, Idaho

 
Submitted by Robert Wilkinson on November 19, 2011 - 4:40pm.

This is the most ridiculous thing I've heard. I agree with Bruce Ailion, it's not in the best interest of sellers, and it's not in the best interest Realtors.

Alex Wilkinson
Realtor-Atlanta GA

 
Submitted by Jay Thompson on November 20, 2011 - 1:56am.

Victor Lund and Steve Barbey nailed it. This decision really isn't that big a deal and won't fundamentally change a thing once franchisors get syndicated listings.

And for those who are lumping every member of the MLS committee into the non-practicing, clueless dolts category, please remember not all MLS committee members fit that bill. Sure some do, but not all. The problem is, is awfully difficult to try and influence and affect change in a 117 member committee and then get the 750 member Board of Directors to approve what the committee recommends.

And you know, if you're so pissed off at what the MLS committee does, join it and try to help those on it who are trying to do the right thing...

Jay Thompson
Broker / Owner
Thompson's Realty

Blog: www.PhoenixRealEstateGuy.com

.