To all the agents in the house,
Last week I asked what your Multiple Listing Service was doing for you. Several agents directly answered my question - while also expressing intense frustration with the status quo.
"Don't even get me started on the subject of MLS," said one Dallas agent. "It's all about money. Us individual Realtors do not have a clue of what goes on behind closed doors."
"There is no clarity and that's the way it always has been and likely will be for many years," asserted a San Jose, California agent. The agent specifically was alluding to fogginess in how many MLSs operate, and why some of the 500 or so MLSs have merged while others have not.
Another complaint is that while their brokerages hustle up to speed on advances in digitizing information and interfacing with agents and consumers, MLSs feel no comparable pressure to update their technology.
"My view is that MLSs are living in the past desperately trying to maintain 1980s level services," decried one agent in the Finger Lakes region of New York.
A Boston area agent placed the technology of the Massachusetts Property Information Network MLS a bit later into the 20th Century.
"Our member website is from the 1990s and offers very little in terms of a powerful search capability," chimed in a Boston area agent. "Outside of the terrible interface they offer little training, and they offer very little decision-making data."
"And here's the thing," added the agent, "They have a monopoly, so they have no incentive to do better."
A 9th Circuit Court of Appeals case in California is reviewing the National Association of Realtors' requirement members list homes in MLSs, and whether the shared, alleged monopoly power of NAR and the MLS systems pose a meaningful harm to either agents or consumers.
In fairness to the MLS way of doing business, agents noted a couple of practical features they like. One is a code of ethics. Agents say those at least provide basic ground rules in a profession with arguably low barriers to entry.
The other is perhaps more fraught. Several MLSs, including Massachusetts Property Information Network, integrate their software with ShowingTime, which is the industry leader in agents scheduling appointments.
However, NAR this spring purchased a ShowingTime rival, SentriLock, leaving agents to wonder if their current scheduling practices might be forced to change. Also, Zillow's acquisition of ShowingTime -- announced back in February -- still hasn't received federal regulatory approval (in fact, Inman News reported that the Federal Trade Commission may look into the deal).
In any case, agents, I've heard your complaints about the current system. What would you like to see replace it? Is the answer one MLS per state? Brokerages, instead of local NAR chapters or broker owner-operators, running MLSs? Or something less radical that may practically improve MLSs?
Please let me know your thoughts. I can be reached anonymously at mblake@housingwire.com.
Sincerely,
Matthew Blake
Senior Real Estate Reporter
EmoticonEmoticon