Where Real Estate Gets Its Dirt

Washington Post writes about CCP and “secretive off-market listings”

Real estate battle over secretive off-market listings heats up

“When prospective home buyers come up empty-handed, seeing a “sold” sign on an ideal home that never showed up during their search rubs salt into the wound.


What’s frustrating to so many is these nonpublic sales, often known as off-market listings, shortcut the transparency that’s meant to inform the buying and selling process: Every home that’s listed by a real estate agent and marketed to the public is supposed to be visible through one of the hundreds of databases known as Multiple Listing Services (MLS).

Now, an internal battle is heating up between real estate brokerages over off-market listings — just as the dust is starting to settle on commission rule changes triggered by lawsuits against brokerages and the National Association of Realtors (NAR).”

Pretty balanced article about the issues surrounding CCP. This kind of headline is exactly what Brian Boreo warned about in his talk at CMLS in Seattle a couple months ago. Does the industry really need the messaging of real estate agents supporting “secretive off-market listings?” right now? I don’t think so.

I took at look at the comments on the article. While most of the comments were trashing The Washington Posts new commenting software, the AI summary did conclude…

“Concerns include the potential for discrimination, the manipulation of property prices by flippers, and the lack of transparency in pocket listings, which may benefit agents over sellers. Some suggest reverting to traditional methods or eliminating agents altogether.”

So there you have it Robert Reffkin, based on this summary many people would rather have no agents at all if the transparency the MLS provides goes away. Your move Compass.

Wurzer asks, “Dude, where’s my listing?”

Dude, Where’s My Listing?

“The other day I posted some Unsolicited Advice About Clear Cooperation and, in this post, I want to follow-up on my promise to address some of the tired arguments trotted out in favor or against Clear Cooperation. Here we go:”

Both blog posts are a good read. As someone who has been a bit hyperbolic about the implications of removing CCP it’s great to read a measured (and informed) opinion that we all need to calm down a bit.

CMLS takes a stand on CCP

CMLS urges NAR to keep Clear Cooperation in new letter

“The debate over NAR’s Clear Cooperation Policy is intense and complex,” CMLS CEO Denee Evans said in an open letter Friday afternoon. “Our position is measured and simple: CCP should remain in place. Modifications should preserve the spirit and effect of the policy. The CMLS Board of Directors has arrived at this conclusion after careful consideration of the objections to CCP.”

Bravo!

CoreLogic offers “private” solution for CCP concerns

Technical Capabilities Can Help the Real Estate Industry Navigate Clear Cooperation

“Matrix and Trestle can be used together to support MLSs, brokers and industry players regardless of which direction the Clear Cooperation policy is decided, for example:

-Listings marked as private will be suppressed from broader syndication
-Broker’s agents enter all their listings into the MLS system (Matrix)
-The Broker’s agent chooses the appropriate status when entering a listing, including a ‘private’ status
-Matrix is able to include their ‘private listing’ into the data feed back to the appropriate broker in near real time (via Trestle)
-Listings marked private remain private to the broker, and only that broker
-Listings marked as private are only available in any searches by the broker’s own agents or the broker’s agents’ clients.”

–Devi Mateti, President, Enterprise Digital Solutions at CoreLogic

Obviously, each MLS would have to approve this solution, but I like the concept. I had a discussion with another vendor about this, and he pointed out that even beyond CCP, there are still mandatory submission requirements. However, I think brokerages like Compass are signaling that they don’t want to deal with those requirements either.

So yes, this does make it easier for brokerages to implement private networks, which I still oppose. But I believe it’s better to use the MLS system to do so. Why? Well, the data will be cleaner when it’s entered, and if the listing sells off-MLS, it can be added to the MLS system with a simple status change. I think if the listing is first entered into some random private network software, adding it to the MLS later might be an afterthought, leading to incomplete or inaccurate data.

Another point Devi’s post touches on is a glimpse into CoreLogic’s strategy if the whole MLS industry collapses.

Why is Robert Reffkin spreading lies about MLS?

Bright MLS CEO checks Robert Reffkin on Clear Cooperation Policy

“What concerns us the most is that these false claims are trying to harm us and benefit primarily the brokerage through sellers not getting the widest exposure for their listing.

“In our view, it could put homebuying and selling in the hands of a select few agents who could choose with whom they want to share information. Ultimately, we think getting rid of the norms and protocols about how information is shared would slide the real estate industry down the mountain into a heap where buyers and agents are forced to pore through online marketplaces and thousands of brokers’ sites to weed out scams and find possible properties. I am confident no one thinks that’s a good idea.”

Brian Donnellan, CEO Bright MLS

Masterful rebuttal from Brian Donnellan calling out Refkkin’s nonsense. At CMLS the misinformation Reffkin was putting out on stage reminded me of another meme.

But why put on such a show? What with all the hand waving? We all know what’s going on. Brian Boero’s post, “Clearing the air of Clear Cooperation” laid it out.

“Some big brokers, among whom Compass is the most vocal, want to accelerate their private listing efforts. Compass has been quite clear about their desire to become a listing destination. Given years of eroding margins, and the potential for commission compression in a post-settlement world, big brokers would like to keep as many transactions in-house as possible and fully leverage their hard-won market share. A critical mass of private, exclusive listings is also a big recruiting lever.

Why not just say that? It’s an obviously rational position, and one that is not inherently evil.”

It seems that culturally, we now rely on fear as the main way to make a point. Whether it’s immigrants ‘eating our cats and dogs’ or the ‘end of democracy.’ Just stop.

And by the way, if Reffkin or any other broker thinks that private/exclusive listings are the right strategy to increase their margins, they need to think harder about this problem. The market will turn, and coming up with band-aid solutions to current problems is not the answer. The real reason you’re failing is that you’re not delivering value to your customers. Focus on that, not on spreading fear.

Zillow President, Susan Daimler, speaks out against private listing networks.

Private listing networks harm sellers, buyers, and fair housing

“For the very few people who need maximum privacy over maximum price, there should be options to have a home privately listed. This practice should be the exception, not the rule, because it doesn’t serve the needs of most sellers. And most MLSs do allow sellers to opt out of having their listing online. But for those who believe they are making the decision to list with a private network for any sort of reduced hassle in the form of avoiding showings or timing delays need to understand the clear tradeoff they’re likely making in price and selling speed. “

Exactly. Many proponents of pocket listings argue that it’s about preserving the seller’s freedom to sell however they want. But that’s just a smokescreen. Sellers and buyers currently benefit from a unified marketplace, and dismantling this system would harm them, driven by the greed of larger industry players.

Robert Reffkin defends Compass leaving CCP

“They’re eating the cats. They’re eating the dogs. They’re eating the pets, of the people who live there.”

At least that’s what I heard. ; )

Open or Closed?

Clearing the air on Clear Cooperation

“this is about what kind of industry we want to be, and what kind of housing market we want to create: open or closed.

It is that simple. It is that important.“

Brian Boero, 1000watt

Brian writes so well it almost makes me want to give up writing myself. In his “Friday Flash” he breaks down the posturing and rhetoric surrounding CCP and gets down to the real issues. It’s about whether we as an industry want an open or closed market.

I’m with Brian. “I want open.”

This a must read. Especially if you are at the Department of Justice.

Are A.R.E.A. and NLS for real?

National Association of Realtors Faces Competition From New Group

“Mr. Umansky said that AREA will offer its members a nationwide database of home listings as an alternative, built from the technology he acquired for his own private listings service. That platform, which they’re calling the National Listing Service, is currently live with limited listings at theNLS.com.

“A centralized database with access to the full scope of listings across the country is better for everyone in the industry, and someone just had to do it,” Mr. Umansky said.

Debra Kamin, New York Times

A good question I would ask the two luxury real estate agents/brokers launching this new endeavor is this: “Will this new entity follow (or match) the Clear Cooperation Policy (CCP) guidelines?”

That would be a good tell.

Sponsored By MLS Reset