There was a dance of sorts held in DC on Tuesday, June 5, when the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission hosted a ‘workshop’ to discuss competition in residential real estate. But while NAR and industry players prepared for the fox trot, bringing their best arguments for maintaining the status quo around data access, the DOJ put on a little salsa music and shifted the discussion to commission transparency and coupling.

Rob and Greg are reversing roles this week, as Greg spins conspiracy theories regarding the government’s intentions and the potential consequences of its intervention in the real estate industry. They speak to organized real estate’s nothing-to-see-here approach to the discussion and review the range of views shared in the Developments in Real Estate Fee and Service Models panel.

Greg explains why decoupling would effectively end the MLS, and Rob covers the paper prepared by the National Bureau of Economic Research suggesting conflicts of interest due to coupling. They address who would benefit if buy-side commissions went away, how such changes would impact portals like Zillow, and the surprising number of industry players who support decoupling. Listen in to understand why Rob and Greg are calling for NAR or CMLS to move on this and start leading the dance to develop solutions around commission transparency.

 

What’s Discussed:

 

Organized real estate’s nothing-to-see-here stance at the DOJ/FTC workshop

The Developments in Real Estate Fee and Service Models panel

– Reps from Realogy, Purplebricks, Glass House & TRELORA

Greg’s take that the industry was caught off guard

-Prepared for data access and transparency

-Discussion of commissions, decoupling

How decoupling cooperation and compensation would end the MLS

The NBER paper on realtor commissions and conflicts of interest

The theory that real estate commissions are high due to coupling

Rob’s concern that the DOJ has already made up its mind

Why the industry needs to move on commission transparency

Why real estate is the only industry in which the seller pays the buyer’s rep

How the potential changes might impact portals like Zillow

Who would benefit if buy-side commissions went away

The leadership opportunity for NAR, CMLS to address DOJ/FTC concerns

The surprising number of people in support of commission decoupling

Public response to the previous NAR budget transparency discussion

Resources:

DOJ Residential Real Estate Workshop

Videos of DOJ Residential Real Estate Workshop

Rob’s Blog on the DOJ/FTC Workshop

Brian Boero’s Buzz Saw Blog Post

‘Conflicts of Interest and the Realtor Commission Puzzle’

 

Our Sponsors:

The Red Dot

Cloud Agent Suite

 

Connect with Rob and Greg:

Rob’s Website

Greg’s Website

 

As Peter Parker will tell you, great power comes with great responsibility. And there is little doubt that NAR has a great deal of power. With Bob Goldberg at the helm, many have anticipated a ‘kinder, gentler NAR,’ an organization that rules with a warm embrace rather than an iron fist—serving its membership with open discussion and greater transparency. Does the recent drama over the dues increase demonstrate a more-of-the-same-old approach from NAR leadership? Or is the perceived crisis around the budget an overreaction? Is there evidence that the culture at NAR is really changing for the better?

Rob and Greg are back in the ring on the heels of the REALTORS midyear legislative meeting, going toe to toe over the recent controversy around NAR spending. They start with an overview of what went down, beginning with the Houston Association of REALTORS opposition piece in Inmanand the subsequent op-ed credited to Jim Harrison of MLSListings. Rob and Greg walk us through the retractions, rebuttals and apologies that followed as well as the board of director’s vote in DC.

Rob offers his take on NAR budget priorities, sharing the questions he has around spending on things like zipLogix, RPR and advertising to protect the REALTOR brand. He goes on to discuss the way NAR handled the spending controversy, framing it as a missed opportunity to embrace opposition as a catalyst for discussion rather than ruling with an iron fist—which may discourage membership from speaking up in the future. Greg offers his defense of NAR, pointing out that the SMART Budget Initiativeis clearly outlined NAR’s website and citing member engagement as an incredibly complex issue. Listen in for Rob’s insight around NAR’s responsibility to its members and decide whether NAR is, indeed, using its power for good.

 

What’s Discussed:

The Houston Association of REALTORS’ opposition to the dues increase

How the controversial op-ed credited to Jim Harrison went too far

The questions around NAR’s spending on zipLogix, RPR and advertising

The line items Rob would like to see NAR prioritize in its budget

– Advocacy

– Professionalism

Greg’s perspective that there is no evidence of an NAR crisis

How NAR might have handled the spending controversy differently

– Could have offered ‘warm embrace’

– Opposition as catalyst for discussion

NAR’s postponement of the 2.5% annual dues increase

Rob’s take that NAR’s iron fist will discourage others from speaking up

Rob’s concern about the lack of explanation regarding NAR spending

Greg’s defense of NAR as being more transparent than ever before

– SMART Initiative outlines spending objectives

– Elizabeth presented proposed budget at T3

– Communication with membership is difficult

Rob’s belief that NAR’s power gives them a higher level of responsibility

Resources:

 

Houston Association of REALTORS Member Survey

HAR’s Dues Increase Opposition Piece in Inman

Jim Harrison’s Op-Ed in Inman

HAR’s Clarification and Apology

Harrison’s Apology

NAR’s SMART Budget Initiative

Rob’s ‘Crisis and Opportunity’ Blog Post

 

Our Sponsors:

Cloud Agent Suite

The Red Dot

 

Connect with Rob and Greg:

Rob’s Website

Greg’s Website

Email gregrobertson@gmail.com

 

Is Zillow getting into the house flipping business to make a profit buying and selling real estate? Of the users who submit an Instant Offer request, one-third sell their home within 90 days—and 10% of that third take an investor’s offer. Zillow’s main play here may just be seller lead generation.
 

Today, Rob and Greg talk T3, iBuyers and Zillow. Greg shares his takeaways from the T3 conference, including praise for Stefan’s keynote address and an eye-roll over the ‘no corporate sponsors’ sentiment. Our hosts discuss the recent bombshells around Dale’s departure from RPR and Zillow’s expansion of Instant Offers. Rob walks us through the details of Zillow’s announcement, explaining how sellers will now get an offer from Zillow itself when they use the Instant Offers platform. Rob and Greg share surprise at the lack of backlash around the announcement, examining the benefits for an agent representing Zillow as well as the drop in stock price in light of the news.

 

Greg offers insight on potential abuses of the iBuyer model, considering how predatory lenders might target seniors, the uneducated, or the poor, and they cover the impact of Zillow’s shift on other players in the iBuyer space. Listen in as Rob and Greg address the windfall Zillow is likely to earn in the form of seller leads and learn how the company could solve the affordable housing crisis—and gain invaluable PR in the process!

 

What’s Discussed:

 

Greg’s takeaways from T3

The rumors around RPR and Zillow

Zillow’s announcement of the expansion of Instant Offers

The surprising response to Zillow’s plans to flip houses

Greg’s concerns about the iBuyer model

The recent drop in Zillow’s stock price

Why flipping is not a change in Zillow’s business model

The prospect of Zillow making a fortune on seller leads

Greg’s casino analogy for Zillow’s home-flipping venture

Rob’s take on how Zillow could solve affordable housing

Zillow’s impact on other players in the iBuyer space

 

Resources:

 

Rob’s Zillow Blog Post

Ben Thompson’s Zillow Post

‘Opendoor Founders Subtweet Zillow’s New Home Buying Service’ in Inman

 

Connect with Rob and Greg:

 

Rob’s Website

Greg’s Website

Would the woes of the real estate industry be resolved if agents were employees rather than independent contractors? At Inman Disconnect, Rob posited that shifting from the 1099 to a W-2 model would give brokers more control and allow them to address several of the fundamental issues in the space, raising the standards of professionalism by eliminating incompetent or toxic agents—without risking their livelihood.

Today, Rob, Greg and Sunny debate Rob’s proposal, discussing the challenges brokers face in mandating trainings and mentoring for new agents who are independent contractors. Greg argues that leadership is at issue rather than employment status, contending that employees and independent contractors alike are only motivated by leaders who inspire buy-in. Rob, Greg and Sunny address the broker’s responsibilities around professionalism in the industry and weigh in on whether or not brokers can afford to fire top producers who are toxic to the business.

Rob breaks down the revenue structure in a brokerage, explaining how the shift to a W-2 model would give brokers more autonomy and abate the head-count-driven model that fuels a lack of professionalism. Listen in as Rob and Greg come to an unprecedented agreement on the role of leadership in raising industry standards and learn how the law firm model—with its division of employee-associates and partners—might be adapted for real estate.

 

What’s Discussed:

 

Rob’s proposal that the 1099 is the cause of many industry woes

The history behind the shift to agents as independent contractors

Sonny’s take on the broker’s challenge in mandating trainings

Greg’s argument that the issue is leadership vs. control

The broker’s responsibility around agent professionalism

How great leaders attract great talent

Why it’s difficult for agents to move brokerages

Why brokers are hesitant to fire toxic agents

The breakdown of revenue in a brokerage

-Don’t make money on top producers

-Earn on 60/40 agents (five deals/year)

How the W-2 structure would give brokers more control

What triggers the head-count-driven model

-Companies compensate for recruiting numbers

-No cost to keep agent who does two deals/year

-Brokers make LESS from superstar top producers

How the law firm model might be adapted for real estate

 

Resources:

 Inman Disconnect

 

Connect with Rob and Greg:

Rob’s Website

Greg’s Website

 

Our Sponsor:

Cloud Agent Suite