Why ‘MLS of Choice’ isn’t much of a choice

How can we improve on it and make it the true foundation of cross-market insight?
  • If the one MLS doesn't have all the listings in the market the broker needs, brokers and agents feel that they have to belong to two — or more — MLSs.  

Big plans for business in 2018?
Give yourself the tools to own the new year at Connect SF, July 17-20, 2018

I've been getting a lot of questions lately about the recent National Association of Realtors' "MLS of Choice" decision. On the surface, it seems like a no-brainer that allowing brokers to choose where to get MLS services will be much, much better, but there are some growing doubts that the decision may not do what it was intended to. "MLS of Choice" doesn't just imply that brokers have the ability to move from one MLS to another freely, it states it clearly. Technically true, because brokers are no longer obligated to participate in an MLS if they don't want to, if you look a little deeper, the reality is more nuanced; any broker leaving MLS "A" will not have access to listing data from MLS "A" when it moves to MLS "B." Unless it belongs to both, of course, which defeats the purpose of "MLS of Choice." Choice means exclusion Because the MLS industry has seen little progress with MLS “A” providing a data set to MLS “B” to ensure continuity for brokers moving ML...