Just a short while ago nearly every broker reading Inman News raged that MLS’s could never be replaced, and as the sole means supporting co-brokerage agreements and payments between brokers that MLS companies are the backbone of the entire real estate marketplace.
It was suggested that the whole real estate market will collapse into a maelstrom of pocket listings without the MLS’s oversight of co-brokerage arrangements. Yet the hottest topic among many real estate brokers is “my listing, my lead.” This philosophy is the antithesis of co-brokerage and yet the mantra of many real estate brokers.
These brokers’ complaints begin with Zillow Group. Exposure there, along with displays on every website possible, offers maximum market exposure for your seller’s home at no cost to you. Yet Zillow has the audacity to offer home buyers an opportunity of full representation in their home purchase—scandalous!
To hell with co-brokerage when there’s money on the line; seller’s agents should solely receive the buyer leads on their seller’s home these brokers say. That way neither the seller nor the buyer can expect full representation in the sale; all with the agent, brokerage, and franchise making more money on each deal. Does anyone else see why the marketplace is not all that fond of real estate brokers and the system they have created?
Dear seller, I know that I promised to fight for your maximum sale price; I know that I swore that I would go all-out advertising your home in every way possible; I know I promised to negotiate all the way to the point of the other party’s death—but hey, I can double my pay by not doing that; please sign here acknowledging I am no longer representing you. Oh, would you mind giving me a great reference on these 92 websites?
What, it’s not really like that? What are the major principles of being a transaction broker between a seller and a buyer? You cannot show any favoritism to either party; you cannot advise any advantage to either party; and you are supposed to simply carry out each party’s explicit commands. You’re an order taker filling out forms.
Let’s place you in the same kind of situation the underrepresented buyer and seller are in. A past client decides to sue you for $2 Million in damages—and their attorney offers to also take your side of the case. Do you feel confident of getting the best counsel possible?
How well will this go on a deal between a first-time home buyer and a first-time home seller? “Judge, I know the house is a historic 125 years old, but the buyers never explicitly told me to look into finding an engineer on their behalf. It’s not my fault the structural brick was decayed below ground level.”
Transaction brokerage should be a rarity, applied only in cases involving experienced parties, and desired and initiated by both parties while fully aware of the representation they are giving up.
The “National Broker Portal”, is made up of franchises, MLS companies, and brokerages no longer interested in allowing home sellers’ properties full market exposure or home sellers or buyers full representation, and is all built on My Listing My Lead My Greed.
Hey, this group of brokers and franchises want more money from each deal. That’s up to them as they are the ones legally representing a client and then removing that representation.
But what right do these MLS companies have in purposely limiting home sellers and home buyers exposure of information, and assisting in removing their full representation and their liberties? By funding and directing the design, development, and deployment of a plot to diminish information to the marketplace these MLS companies are probably culpable in this deed. This may end up an interesting case before the US Department Of Justice. These MLS companies can call NAR’s attorneys for advice as they have some experience with the US DOJ. If it ever comes to this I bet they’ll want full legal representation.
A home seller deserves to receive 100% of the services they contracted for; a home buyer deserves full representation. The more exposure that a seller’s home has on the internet the better the chance it will sell for its full market value. A seller’s agent should attack the preparation, marketing, advertising, and negotiations on behalf of their sellers whole-heartedly, singing and dancing with joy with every exposure on every website possible, and pray that a million buyer agents and their clients show interest in their seller’s home.
##end of my original article##
Once again the mob of brokers attacked me with pitchforks and torches at Inman News. And again, there were so many angry comments I just don’t have time to copy and paste them all here, sorry. I let them rant and using their own comments made but one retort regarding how they think the marketplace should benefit them. Here it is:
Okay, so looking at the arguments from the brokers here’s how the real estate market should function. We must have a bunch of fragmented MLS monopolies as they are the only means of co-brokering and broker compensation policing. All listing brokers should receive all leads as they are best able to represent that listing to that buyer. So at this point market exposure of this listing should only be at locations giving all leads to the listing agent; co-brokerage is out with no sharing or compensation with buyer agents.
But 99% of the time that buyer does not purchase your listing. So now co-brokerage and buyer agent compensation is back in so you can get paid to sell a home that would have been better represented to that buyer by the listing agent of another home.
Okay sorry for my article, I was just thinking of sellers and buyers and was not organizing the system to best represent the brokers; my bad.