The_Bayou,

I agree w/ you on several points. I could not shout loud enough on a megaphone how much I endorse raising the standards for entry and licensing as a real estate agent. I think the low barrier is a substantial problem for the industry. There are many who possess licenses who should not. :-(

State licensing boards, and associaton build their revenues on increased licenses and members. Personally, I would much prefer to pay a higher licensing fee or association fee and weed out those who are dedicated to professionalism.

There are also many excellent Realtors who have substantial knowledge, skill and dedication. I don't ever use the analogy of a surgeon.....but I have used the analogy of an attorney at times. There are valid comparisons. We, as Realtors, are not attorneys and do not practice law. We do represent our clients and advise them on matters of significant monetary value, advise them of the rules and laws by which they must abide and do our best to minimize their liability. We do this representing one party, and in the best case scenario, the opposite party has their own representative. The most common analogy I use is that in a divorce, you wouldn't go to your divorcing spouse's attorney for advice about what is best for you, when I try to explain to buyers why they should have a buyer agent.

There are "Realtor Bashers" who simply attack, and I believe that is what JR was addressing. I am confronted w/ lack of knowledge or availability when dealing w/ other agents more than I am confonted w/ acts of dishonesty. The vast majority of all agents that I have ever dealt w/ have been forthright in their dealings. Of course, there are bad apples, but those indeed, are the exception.

Realtors who are dedicated to their profession, are actively on-call 7 days a week, continuously upgrade their knowledge and advocate strongly for their clients do not deserve to be bashed.

I spent a number of years in corporate sales and marketing positions. As a Broker, my hours are longer, my freedom is less (always on call), my need to stay on my toes is greater, my liability is greater, and my personal life frequently takes a back seat and is subject to change in order to meet the needs of clients.

When I hear cheesy slams as blanket statements against Realtors as a entire lot, I disregard these comments for they lack credibilty. We can only trust that the pubic, in general, is educated enough to dismiss anger bashing for what it is.

The integrity of Voices depends upon value contribution. Bashing will deter professionals and and it will also deter legitimate buyers and sellers. Trulia needs both. Trulia needs real buyers and sellers to visit property listings. Trulia needs content from credible providers to make Voices a place that consumer find worthwhile. Trulia needs brokers to want to submit listings, and buy advertising. It behooves Trulia to discourage Realtor bashing.

Opposing opinions and controversy is informative and helpful for consumers and RE Pros.

Cameron did not bash a Realtor by introducing this thread. He, as many consumer, simply wants easy access to info. I answsered earlier on this thread, as a consumer, I wanted the "book"....but coulnd't have it. :-( I didn't dismiss the notion of using a Realtor, nor her value to me as a consumer.

JR makes very valid points and I couldn't agree w/ her more. I, too, have drug buyers kicking and screaming to a property they thought they did not want to see. Upon seeing it, they wrote an offer.

Informed consumers are good consumers. I enjoy working with consumers who have knowledge of the area. A consumer who has read a few lisitngs and think they have the same knowledge as a Realtor who does this full time will often put themselves at risk. I have heard consumers boast about their successes w/o a Realtor and those are usually the ones who did not do well, but don't even know it. There are some very savvy consumers out there - so my comment clearly is not directed to all consumers. Not just in real estate, but in all walks.....it is the Archie Bunkers who think they know so much and trash others who are the ones who are the most "off." They are the minority. I am happy to say that I love most of my customers! :-)

Cameron, Thanks for a lively thread!

Bill, I have participated in several round tables w/ brokers and MLS representatives about who owns the data. Brokers think they own it; MLS think they own it, since they assemble it. What is blatantly clear in these discussions is that everyone wants a piece of it. Trulia, and other companies extend substantial efforts to encourage agents, brokers and and MLSs to provide the data to them. MLSs extend much effort to court those of us who have direct feeds of the entire MLS. As a broker I have that, and I have also signed agreements about how I can use those feeds. Yes, many would love for me to provide that feed to them. Of course, when it is the feed, it isn't just data about our company lsitings, its everyone else's, too. I don't own other broker's data, but I do consider that I own ours. I grant permission to the MLS to export it with the IDX feed. Bill, you couldn't hit the nail more exact on the head with your point about who owns the data and all the discussions that follow.

Bill, Does your MLS feed to Realtor.com? If so, providing you elect to participate in IDX, isn't your seller info already out there? Perhaps your data isn't on Realtor.com? My sellers want to be there....and everywhere else we put them.

The Bayou, I think the vast majority of us are all on the same page. The discussions about the confidential data was for clarification. Cameron wasn't asking for it, sellers wouldnt' want it dispersed, and most buyers completely accept that. The vast majority of sellers are already on the internet, but the info is limited. Cameron simply wants more of the factual material data made more easily accessible to buyers....room sizes, taxes, type of heat, etc., and more search options.

Elvis........Your comments are so well spoken.....as always. We could award you a bulls eye for just being on target. Perhaps a bulls eye could be your next avatar. Before I was a Realtor, I can remember being a buyer and seller. I wanted to look at my Realtor's book, and I wanted her to leave it w/ me overnight. She wouldn't. When I first started in this biz, we still had books, and my clients wanted me to give them my old books. Perhaps one of the reasons I am so supportive of giving consumers access to property data (room sizes, taxes, etc.) is that I remember how much I wanted access to the "book" when I was a customer and not a Realtor. Elvis, you make great points in discussing "expectation" of access. I don't think that as a customer I had an expectation to have my Realtor's book, just a desire. I thought it would make our collective goal easier to achieve and more efficient. I reflect on those feelings when I hear buyers, such as Cameron, discuss his desire for increased accessiblity to info.

I don't think the public has the right to demand....and those member of the public who bash agents, belittle them and then demand do more to harm progress than help. Elvis spoke well about this.

The vast majority of agents are supportive and responsive of customer's input and suggestions on how to improve our industry.

This is crazy. The original poster simply suggested that his house searching process could benefit from access to some of the information on the MLS system which currently is not available to non-Realtors. He suggested that he would be willing to pay for that information, and tossed out a nominal amount of $15-$30.

Realtors took the question off topic immediately, suggesting that home owners wouldn't want their sleep patterns or lock box numbers made available. Despite the fact that it was obvious that this is not the type of information the poster was looking for, it should be noted that technology allows different levels of authorization to web databases. This is not an issue. Also, homeowners could advise their Realtors as to whether or not they want certain information, including the address of the house they are selling, made available to only Realtors, or all potential buyers.


Also, I understand that many Realtors pay upwards of $500 a year for this information, or $40+ per month (which in many cases must be paid yearly and upfront). But, it is not to crazy of an assumption to that if the site was open to more people, the price could come down. (If I can make $1000 charging 2 people $500 each, I can make $2000 charging 10 people 200).

Many argued that the data is owned by the Realtors. Well, great, but that is not an answer to the question. The question was "Why not make the MLS open to the public and charge them access fee [sic]?" If Realtors own the data, then the poster is directing the question to Realtors as they are the only ones who could do so. Are Realtors against making money on the data by opening it up?

He did say that is he is probably "dreaming", there was no need to the Realtor community to get so worried that non Realtors may find out more information about listed properties.

These are the types of posts that for some reason force Realtors to get defensive and argumentative for no reason, resulting in the "Realtor bashing" that many of the Realtors complain about.

Cameron, the answer to your question, in summary from the people that own the data is "because we don't want it to be."

YIkes!

The following is only a partial quote from the CG:
“be considerate of others and do not attack other community members. Be respectful at all times.”

Sharing viewpoints and different perspectives is informative for all. Name calling and accusations against another person’s personal character is childish.

Consumers, who really want and appreciate experienced insight are turned off of Voices or any forum that becomes a cesspool of mudslinging. RE Pros who have the desire and knowledge to make valuable contributions will be deterred from participation if the result is character assassination. Certainly, share your viewpoints if they differ. But, can such be done with civility?

Trulia Voices is one of the best online media sources for real estate information. Some other attempts at online forums are thought of poorly due to lack of credible content. I hope Trulia is smart enough to value integrity and enforce community guidelines accordingly.

DSM RESPONSES:

Pertaining to “creative uses of MLS data” - That rule applies to every member of the MLS, and every vendor, and I fully support that rule. What would thousands of sellers think of if their info could be manipulated for another’s benefit? There are strict rules about how feeds from MLS are used (IDX); and I fully support those rules. The integrity of the data and the privacy of all citizens trumps any argument for “creative use.” The info, as input by the listing agent/broker may be shared by other MLM member brokers, and duplicated on any number of sites as determined by the MLS. Brokers may not alter any other Broker’s data that we receive in our IDX feeds.

Pertaining to the ease to which one may acquire a license. Acquiring a license and being skilled, knowledgeable and capable in your profession are not the same thing. As voiced previously on this thread, and elsewhere, I fully support raising the standards for acquiring and keeping a license. I believe that a newly licensed individual should not be able to list or sell a property alone and should have to co-list or co-sell property as part of an apprenticeship. But, I don’t get to make the rules. To be a great Realtor, you need to know your inventory, and that changes every day. There are many of us who invest substantially in our continuing education, hold advanced degrees, and come from diverse backgrounds. To belittle all agents and imply that all agents function with 2 days of training and that is the extent of their value is inappropriate, offensive and grossly incorrect. Every week, I add more information to my knowledge base.....because the list of how many hats I wear and how many things to know is endless. There are many of us with a deep commitment to education, high professionalism, and superb client experiences. Not all of us, but there are many.

Businesses try to make decisions based upon meeting and exceeding client expectation and balancing what is reasonable. I honestly believe the most the most “jump through the hoops” service in any trade or business is that which is offered by outstanding Realtors. No business, trade, or vendor that I pay $$ to jumps through hoops for clients to the extent that a dedicated Realtor does for their clients.

I do support the release of more details of the listing data via the IDX feeds. It’s a decision that meets customer wants and makes good business sense (viewing only......not data editing or input!) I don't support that position because of bullying. I support what makes sense.

I find the attacks on Realtors as being stupid, lazy and self-serving laughable and offensive concurrently.

Deborah

Zack, we may be arguing semantics here...

I'll accept the fact that we own the "collection" of the data, but perhaps not the data. (not really sure what the distinction is, 'cause the sellers don't really own the data either... just because they own the house that has the "number of rooms"... and the sellers don't own the photos (we took them, we own them), nor do they own the "description" (i wrote it)... the "public record" is the "public record" neither of us owns it... we just include it (by law) in our collection... they just own the house described.

But I agree, holding the data "hostage" (as you call it) is a major part of what fuels the bad image.

Realtors were scared to death, when the internet became popular, fearing that meant the death knell for Realtors. In truth, the internet did a lot for making our clients "educated" and we've found that we now receive a real estate client 6-8 weeks further down the road, more educated and closer to their purchase.

Releasing the MLS (in a secure and limited version) can do the same thing, and yet many Realtors are afraid it'll be the death knell for Realtors. I don't believe it will... I believe it'll enhance our image and our business... but it may take a while to get there, and it may take some calmer heads (on both sides) who aren't "hating" and who aren't calling everything "idiotic", to get there.

We've made a lot of progress, and we're still progressing. I'd request your help and understanding, rather than inflammatory rhetoric that calls us consumer-hostile gatekeepers who aren't serving our clients interests.

Did you ever think about it this way .... Without Trulia .. agents would be far less useful....?
________________

a cute turn of phrase, but no.. it's not humbling, 'cause it's not correct. Without the realtors data, trulia would be just as ineffective as zillow, which pulls it's data from public records.

Oddly enough, we didn't have people calling for "transparency" and access to our records when we were printing 300 - 500 page books with photos of homes, every week or two. The public understood that this was a tool that Realtors created for their use, and it cost a lot of money to create, maintain and use. Large reams of paper, they seem to understand.

The over 700 MLS systems across the country still cost a lot of money to create, maintain and use, even though they no longer print on paper and large books, and they were created strictly for the use of their Realtor membership. Still, many of them also created limited sites for public use, at no cost to the public, and they're being berated for not giving more.

I'm not anti-public access (for viewing only, not for input)... and I agree, I think that's coming. But it's wrong to feel that this is an inalienable right... MLS isn't required to open up it's data to the public, even though they have. MLS isn't required to provide a free public site (limited though it may be)... and yet many of them do.

MLS isn't a government agency using data drawn from public tax sites, it's a private agency using data input by private companies across the country. We don't expect General Motors, Starbucks, or Sears or any other private industry to open the software they use to operate... and the public not only expects it, but demands it from real estate agencies.

And what many of you may be missing, is that Trulia is a site that has the full support of Real Estate Agencies across the country, and we feed them our data willingly. Without our data... Trulia would be far less useful.

Buyers already have limited access to MLS listing info via IDX feeds. If a customer sees a listing online, they can call a Realtor and get the complete detailed listing sheet emailed to them. This info is already available, but with an extra step.

My office will provide an email within 5 minutes upon request that has the complete room sizes, taxes, etc. This costs me $$, since my staff is being paid by the hour to perform the search and email it.

The buyer still makes arrangements to view properties through a Realtor. Some buyers, who do not value the knowledge or services Realtors provide may elect to try to see properties without Realtors. They do that now. Those buyers are in the minority, but can be quite loud. Their loud voice may sometimes give off a false impression of their mass.

Listings also appear in MLS (but not JUST the MLS) as a result of a listing broker representing a seller.

I don't support a gatekeeper approach to real estate. I have been in real estate for 10 years....and I still learn....every day. I don't support forcing a buyer to come to an agent because the agent has the data under a lock.....but rather I support a buyer working with an agent for the value they provide to the buyer from search through contract through closing.

JR,
I have noticed that the Realtor Bashers tend to be loud vocals who profess knowledge, but exhibit clearly by their posts that they do not possess such. Thankfully, these represent the minority.
Deborah

JR,

I agree that there is a lot of Realtor bashing on this site, but there are also a lot of Realtors exaggerating their importance. I have seen several Realtors use expressions like "You want to buy a house without a Realtor? Do you perform surgery on yourself? Would you represent yourself in court?" I am a finance executive, but I would never compare the importance of my services to that of a surgeon or a trial lawyer. Potential clients would rightfully think I am pompous and ignorant, and would never consider hiring me.

There are a lot of bad Realtors out there, as many Realtors on this site have readily admitted. In most states it is very easy to get a real estate license. It is so easy that Melinda even recommended getting a license just to get access to the MLS. My wife got a license in a weekend (Massachusetts).

Because it is so easy to become a Realtor, there are hundreds, likely thousands, of people that do the job part time. Many argue that Realtors are professionals, and I agree that many are, but would argue that the weekend warriors are anything but. These Realtors are usually recommended to buyers by family members or friends ("Did you know that Kate down the street is a Realtor? You should have her look for some houses to show you."). Because buying a home is such a big decision, and because of the amount of information available on the internet today, a home buyer often conducts many hours of research on the neighborhoods they want to live in. They got to greatschools.net to hear about the schools, they talk to friends of friends that live in the neighborhood, they read local blogs, they go to all open houses, talk to the listing agents, other home seekers, etc... They often end up knowing a lot more about the areas they are interested in than the buyers agent they hired, despite the fact that the agent they hired works in those areas.

In my opinion, real estate agents will always come under fire as long as there are no real barriers to entry to the profession, other than a small fee. There is nothing to stop me from getting a license this week, signing on with a brokerage and helping buyers find houses next week. This has to stop.

Hi Cameron,

I am not aware that Santa Clara is providing sold data, etc. I don't know. As far as providing buyers detailed info and the ability to customize a search with greater detail......I think that option should be provided to consumers now....and at no charge. I can see nothing but benefit for all on that.

I have marked this thread and am curious to hear others comment on sold, or under contract data. BTW, I am a member of several MLSs and we don't have records for 10 years back. I have been tossing pros and cons of releasing sold or under contract data.

I do think entry should be limited to Realtors to keep the data pure. Failure to adhere to the rules can result in loss of membership. A Realtor has an incentive to maintain membership. A seller might not have the same vested interest once his/her property is sold. Enforcement of data integrity is important.

If it were my call, you could have access to all active listings with extensive search capabilities, minus the confidential data noted in our earlier posts.

The local Chicago free public access to the MLS is posted below. You don't even need to walk into "the lion's den" by making a phone call. The Multiple Listing Service of Northern Illinois publishes a public website (and has for many years) with no fee, and no membership, or registration required.

You can also search the entire local MLS at our regional site http://www.coldwellbankeronline.com with no registration required.... FREE, FREE, FREE and have been able to for years. Cause that's just the kind of access we believe in.

As a buyer, I want to see all I can see. As a seller, I would not authorize my property to be placed in mulitple listing databases if too much information was made available for every Tom, Dick and Harry to have at it. Push too hard and you will end up with nothing. I heard in some areas a few big brokers pulled out of mls already.

"Some buyers sound like children: "Mommy, I can do it all myself, I don't want any help!!! Whaaaa!!!"
-----------
This is an example of the type of statements I was talking about. No prospective buyer would hire an agent that would make a comment like this. The Realtor encounters a buyer who thinks he is better off buying a house on his own. The Realtor's response is to effectively call that buyer a baby for not hiring a Realtor. A professional would make an argument for why the buyer would financially and legally benefit from representation, and be sure the explain that the benefit goes beyond access to a database.

MLSs make the active listings available via IDX feeds so that brokers and agents can share info about properties available for sale. I agree it would be helpful for everyone if the active listings provided more complete data.

Some of the info on the MLS is confidential data for agents to share w/ each other. i.e. house is vacant, owner works nights and sleeps til noon. The MLS was created for Realtors to share listing data w/ each other to provide a larger buyer pool for properties that are listed. It has transitioned to and become a database that is a marketing tool and will probably contiinue to evolve.

There are many real estate listing sites and consumer complaints are rampant about missing, incorrect or outdated info. Most MLSs have strict enforcement rules that provide for an iformation source of high data integrity. Still, MLSs have their imperfections.

The MLSs will probably continue to evolve and additional consumer options may be part of that. I would have to hear arguments of the pros and cons to have an opinon about opening up an MLS entirely. Obviously, such could not be done without a fee.

I do support more detailed data on active listings to be made available to the public at large for no charge.

My point was to illustrate that you don't understand.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Judging from a recent thread I participated in regarding agency, I would say you've hit the nail on the head for 90% of the realtor bashers.

"Gary, I am not sure why all the steps you mentioned are necessary"

My point exactly.......

It is such an easy thing to say...yet so hard to do.

Frankly I could care less if you had 100% total access. I would probably make my job easier. But who decides where to draw the line of who gets access.

Me? You? The President? God? Who..........?

I'll tell you who, the courts will, as soon as someone takes the access and uses it for nefarious purposes.

My point was to illustrate that you don't understand. You asked a simple question and yet have not liked even one of the answers.

There has to be a standard in life. Without standards we have a little thing called anarchy. Now don't come back with a reply that "Gary said if I get MLS access it will cause Anarchy" Because that is not what I am saying.

What I am saying is that this is just one of the hundreds of thousands of standards that you have in your life. That is all.

You see, it does not matter what answer you get until someone says, ...Hey Bayou, that is a great Idea...Call me tomorrow and I am going to make sure that we change all of the rules and give everyone total access to all of the data.

Gospodin Bayou,

There is nothing to stop you from creating a high quality Database that will become an MLS. Encouraging REALTORS to list all the information that is important in a home search and then selling memberships to whomever you like. It may take you years and years to get it ready for version 1.0 and then getting the information input is simply a matter of convincing all of the REALTORS that it is the best thing since sliced bread. Immediately after you do that, you can simply sell memberships and sit back and rake in the cash.

Now make sure that you hire a team of attorneys so that you can ensure that the information posted does not violate any of the laws from HUD or Fair housing, and then you can again site back and count the cash. Next you may want to consider a sales department to get plenty of REALTORS to continue putting the info in. And then a marketing department to make sure that other folks know to search there. Then you can sit back and ......

I almost forgot, as soon as you get this system up and running, your Board of Directors will be named in a federal Anti trust suit. There will be a Ton of press and your name will get drug through the mud, but then it will get tossed out of court since it has no merit. There will not be a press conference this time, but that is ok, since some one will complain about you breaking a fair housing law and you will be busy defending that suit...

Then you can sit back and......

Oh, some one will want more information at a lower cost and since you really don't have any standards that you sell this information with "open to the public" then you will have to release more information....

But then someone will get broken into and robbed….OR WORSE….. and since the house is on the market, The data is in your OPEN TO THE PUBLIC SYSTEM and since you have no standards as to who can see all of the information... Bad guys are members of the public too……..you will be named as a defendant again!! Sorry..

Eventually, you will determine some sort of standard....but you have no authority to license anyone. You can't just open a school without Government Sanctions...so you will need to Borrow some other standard. So why not use This one,

“THE BAYOU MLS is now open to ATTORNEYS AND FIREMEN”. I mean it is a standard and it is not REALTORS and everyone uses an attorney anyway and everyone loves FIREFIGHTERS…..So, that is a great standard…….Right?

OK, you set the standard, but now the Anti Trust suit case can come back....

So you reopen it to the general public but hide some of the information...

But then you are where we are now....

Man, it’s a vicious circle…..

Gary De Pury
Director, Florida Association of REALTORS

Elvis,
I couldn’t agree w/ your last post more. Very well stated......again. You consisently have great content, composure, and delivery! :-)

JR,
I am hoping you are incorrect in assessing that Trulia Voices is turning into a Realtor bashing troll fest, as other forums. I share the concern, but am hoping that a recent flurry of vulgarity, snide remarks, and hostility was the result of a full moon, spring fever, too much Tequila, or some other extraneous cause. I am hoping that Trulia extends the appropriate efforts to keep Voices a place where consumers, Realtors, and other RE Pros can exchange ideas and information that aids in shaping a better real estate experience for all.

The Bayou,

The public will never come to complete agreement on what info should be available and what should not. Harryp made a very telling statement onthis thread, when he explained that what he wants to see about other sellers is different that what he wants shared about himself as a seller. Privacy advocates have raised much opposition to the volume of public record data that is too easily distributed and promoted.

While you, The Bayou, might be able to figure out that private comment areas on the MLS for member Realtors contains info on showing instructions, many other members of the public have not. On Trulia, and on other forums, public members have posted questions asking about the private info area of the MLS and asked why they couldn’t see it. In one instance the inquiring mind went on to accuse Realtors of using the private notes area for anti-consumer objectives.

On this thread, there were comparisons to other public database sites outside of the real estate industry. Many of these sites were created for the benefit of the public. The MLS was not designed for the public. It was created as a tool for listing agents to share data w/ buyer agents. It has evolved as a vehicle for use in marketing. It is not “anti-consumer” to factually look at the history and original purpose of MLS. A look at a roadmap of where we have been and where we should aim to go is “pro consumer.”

Cameron’s inquiry and post was welcomed by most of the Realtor community. The public’s ability to access info held in the various MLSs across the country will most likely increase.

Discussion about who owns the data is critical to the continued transition of placing more information in the hands of the public. Such changes cannot be effected with disregard to the ownership of the information, and acknowledgment of who and how decisions are made about what data is released where and when. Consideration of the need for consistency in delivery of information is necessary for the buyer. How many complaints will we hear if a buyer is able to access differing levels of data on 5 different properties in the same neighborhood? The Bayou suggests one seller may permit and another may deny the release of an address.

I thank Cameron for the introduction of this thread. I found many of the contributions well constructed and delivered, whether I agreed w/ the content or not. I do concur entirely w/ Elvis.....an excellent use of bandwith. There were a few posts that were unnecessarily hostile and belligerent. We could all do w/o that. I hope that Cameron found the thread informative.

Deborah Madey - Broker
Peninsula Realty Group - New Jersey
Deborah@PeninsulaFirst.com
(732) 530-6350

The original poster asked... "why not make the MLS open... for an access fee"

Realtors did NOT immediately go "off topic"... Cameron's question opened up a lively conversation, exactly about "why". Some agreed, some didn't. Some had logical reasons, some emotional. Some talked ownership, some talked entitlement and image.

The conversation was a good one, often taking tangents, which is how a good conversation often functions. There were a couple of really good comments, a few cheap shots (from both sides of the fence), and lots of thumbs (both up and down).

Some opinions wavered, some changed, some were intransigent. In my opinion, an excellent thread, and good use of bandwidth.

Where was the 2 saturday class. I went for several weeks and then follow on classes and then Brokerage school and then follow on classes and then continuing education every year and then professonal designations.....

Boy did I get screwed....

We should be able to do what ever we want, because the world owes it to us.....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You got it! Which is something I think about everytime I go to a seller who is upside down in their house... yet has a pool, two new cars, Waterford crystal, designer dog...

Wow, this is a great thread and underscores a number of good points.

First, having read from the bottom up, I have to agree with The Bayou when addressing J R's comments. She's clarified more at the end, but earlier comments are a large part of the problem people have with realtors. They hold the implication that realtors are "in the know" and the simpletons shouldn't try to do anything on their own, and should probably send a letter of thank you for paying them an outrageous commission. The way realtors and brokers work in NYC though, this is hardly surprising. The plumber analogy is a good one, to a point, but I'd consider it more like tiling your kitchen where you're not sealing anything, you just have to line up tiles, and can generally do a good job with a little effort and a wet saw. I see you're still responding J R and have clarified your position in a much less demeaning manner, but initial comments are the types such as: "LOL Good point Elvis! The problem is that when something is on computer, ..." that people read and mutter, "I hate realtors" and then stop reading. The industry has a large perception problem and while in very desirable markets, especially like NYC it doesnt' matter because you need to deal with a realtor and people will always want to live here, its bad for the industry as a whole. Its not that on the computer it doesn't have value, but there are no printing/binding costs, no time spent collecting the data etc, and no real intellectual property here. You have data entered in a system to share a listing, the description is generally useless because nearly all of them are puffed up. Allow a quick query to get factual data on a house costs the industry almost nothing and provides consumers with data they want.

Elvis' point about sense of entitlement is excellent, but it doesn't go far enough. I agree people are not entitled to just have this data. I personally would love to get access to MLS, and think sales history, time on the market, price reductions, listing date, contract date, title passed etc should all be made public as it gives the buyer a much better idea of where the market in a smaller area is currently at. In my experience (which recently has been very bad) our realtors hold this data close to the vest and then make blanket statements about how its a good time to buy and provide a couple of examples of places that are selling. Since I can't see how long houses have been on the market, or what has sold in the past year, it can be hard to refute certain things. I don't think this data needs to be, or should be free, nor do I think people are entitled to it. But when dealing with buyers who know its available, yet can't get to it, it also reflects poorly on realtors as a whole because it appears to be withholding insider information. Also, the sense of entitlement doesn't stop at this data. Look at the world today, everyone thinks their entitled to make a profit on their home. Everyone thinks they are entitled to fly cross country for $300 in a desirable time slot, and have no problems with crowding or delays at the airport. J R and Elvis may be right that the internet and all the free things that came with it spurred this way of thinking, but this sense of entitlement and lack of personal responsibility is a large part of the reason the market is in such bad shape now.

Also to Elvis, could you clarify on this comment? "On the contrary. We built the field, and we supplied the bats and the balls, and allow the public to play on the field, but deny them access to the club house. And while some suggest that they'd be willing to pay a monthly fee, we do it for free."
--It seems to imply that realtors built the real estate market, which is obvious incorrect. Buyers and sellers built the field, buyers bring the bats, sellers bring the balls, and realtors were the kept the box score, acted as umpires and official scorers. And as the box score is now done by anyone and printed in every newspaper, so should the MLS data. Realtors are still needed to umpire the transactions, but trying to hold the official data in the hands of a few is feeding the negative feelings towards the industry IMO. If public records held historical listing prices, days on the market, etc and all that, this wouldn't be necessary, but only MLS has that, and with restricted access, the public has no way of policing their realtors or ensuring they're not being misled.

As to the privacy concerns, I believe the only information that could and should be made public are the same things shown on realtor.com today, and contract and title passed date. Along with all this being made for houses sold in the past few years, and houses currently in contract, or any other status besides available. I like this thread a lot and find the responses very thought provoking. Great question Cameron.

Zack

Cameron...

Here in the Chicago area, our MLS is MLSNI (Multiple LIsting Services of Northern Illinois)... and the Realtors and their agencies DO own the MLS.. .it is run and operated by the local real estate agencies, along with the North Shore Barrington Board or Realtors (my board), the and all the local member boards (CAR & others)... who have representatives who sit on the board.

So our MLS was created by Realtors, run by Realtors for the express use of Realtor members. That being said, you can access MLSNI by going to http://www.mlsni.com, and search through the listings. This is NOT the same MLS as the realtors see... ours is http://www.mlsni.net which is password protected, and available by subscription (should probably be PREscription) only. So we DO own the publishing medium in this case. And yet, we willingly share it with the public in mlsni.com

We are one of those rare areas where we have TWO MLS services....(which we pay membership in as well, to stay property informed) MAP is the second one, but they are combining this fall, and MLSNI will be the prevailing MLS of the two... (woo hoo!)

MLSNI does have information that goes back many years (1980)... but the photographs only last a year or so, and then they're purged to make room for more incoming memory.

Hi Bill,
I agree that data submission should stay w/ Realtors. Acrcurate and timely data is critical to the value of the entire database. The integrity of the data can only be maintained by limited access and having penalities for non compliance. What Cameron and other consumers want is to be able to see more detail than the scaled down IDX data. Allowing consumer to look at data (excluding the confidential info) in more detail is a good thing.

Earlier I said I was a fence sitter on the solds and under contract info, but fully in favor of releasing detailed active property data. As I have tossed this around today..........I thought that current active lisitng data could be free to the public, but access to view sold and under contract data should be avaialable by subscription only.

I am still sitting on the fence on that.......but sharing the thoughts that I have considered. Of course, I don't make the MLS rules.....so this is all for not. Thanks for an interesting thread, Cameron.

There are several areas in which I would be concerned about allowing public access. First of all, it would cost a great deal more than $30 a month. Membership is $500/year in our Association. MLS is owned by the Realtor organization behind it. Realtors have a code of ethics that applies to our statements in the MLS as well as our advertising, termed "a true picture". Access by members of the public would take all that certainty out of the data: is it really a 4 bedroom house, is it only 2 years old, is it really in perfect condition, etc. The Realtor can be held responsible for incorrect or inappropriate information. Although most members of the public would also be responsible, there is always the exception. And now, our MLS is being sued for allowing a misrepresentation in the data base.
There is a lot of stuff that needs to be considered before the public should be allowed access to our MLS.

Cameron,

4 years ago if you made a statement like that, people would say "it will never happen ..."

It's the 18th day of March 2008 and it's already happened ... and the nice thing is, it's free from a feed from an agent ..

Now I can't speak for your area of the MLS because they're all different (but changing very quickly) ..

But there is MLS area's where you can read all of the pending with a full advanced search .... plus, all of the "pending" that's gone back on the market (30% failure rate on closings) .. .. active and expired, which ones closed and how much, and the percentage of sale vs the "original asking price" months ago .. cdom and the names of the last brokers .. you can track homes that have been bought and sold in the last 3ish years ...

So it's come a long way in 4 years...

Think about it, nobody is encroaching on anyone ... let the buyer do 90% of the search, it will cut the agents time down by 20 hours a week - as stated by one of the agents topics, that you answered --

: ^)


-

JR, I understand where your fiduciary loyalty lies. That said, would you make comments to the buyer that you know to be untrue? Such as "they are probably selling this house at a big loss..." I would think that this would come back to haunt you if the buyer had done research or will do research. Not legally, but reputation wise.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have no duty to disclose or surmise to a buyer why the seller is moving unless it is a possible short sale. My answer to "why are they moving" is usually, they want a different house, or I don't know.

Agree, Elv!s. I am so sorry to see this forum is threatening to turn into another Realtor bashing troll fest, as so many other forums have.

Elvis you deserve what you have coming to you. This site and others like it are not helping Realtors. We are already looked down upon without good reason. I am not giving anything for free here. Guess it is that Evanston liberal mindset of yours. Stop contributing here because it is not appreciated by lowlife troublemakers that are claiming to be sellers and buyers on here they are just trolls looking to start trouble on the internet.

First of all, I never said anything about realtors being like doctors. I made the plumber analogy.

Some people do try to manipulate the DOM on MLS. With the Listing Book service you can also see if a house was listed previously. If you are a client, that is.

It's sad that you can't see how wrong you are. Sad, but unsurprising. After all, you've already admitted that you are willing to work against the wishes of your clients
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I actually have a service called Listing Book that allows my customers and clients to access the MLS the same exact way I do. They get their own name and password, for free. I pay for them to have this service yearly. It includes days on the market and comparable sales. However, if a buyer is a customer, they cannot access those two items. As I said, those are client level services, not customer level services.

I do not understand your statement that we are working against the wishes of our CLIENTS. Do you know the difference between a client and a customer in agency law?

I love a good thread, too... it's one of the things that makes Trulia somewhat addictive for me. And thanks for the TU... it'll help to counter the myriad of TDs I receive.

Does this mean if an agent/agency wanted to allow the public to search for listings that are in contract, pending sale, sold, basically anything that is not currently active, they could?
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes, on the MLS, but NO on our other sites... our main sites don't show anything other than active (sometimes even after they're under contract). But a direct answer to your question... COULD THEY?? Yes they COULD.

Are offers made and declined kept in MLS? (I don't believe this should be public data personally, but oh man, would I love to see it for some houses).
~~~~~~~
I can't speak for all MLS, but in ours... NO... there is no indication as to whether or if a home has received a contract, declined or failed inspection... In fact we don't even share that information agent to agent... and it's definitely not in the MLS.

K - I was happy being a spectator in this thread but I just have to respond back after reading your thread

- The consumers on this thread aren't asking it for the whole kit-n-kaboodle free. You gotta pay to play. That's only fair.
- It's ironic that the I keep hearing arguments along the lines that we built this, thus we own it, thus we don't have share we don't want to. Fine as far as it goes. The irony is that internet you are using right now was developed by researchers for their own use in educational institutions.
- I believe eBay is a good analogy to use. They compile the listings, own the system, yet don't charge consumers to search the statuses or have varying levels of access to the data. People who aren't comfortable lising their own used clothing can hire an agent to do it. Granted that you can't compare the value of the most expensive purchase many consumers will make to the low-cost merchandise found on eBay but I just imagine if eBay had made it difficult for buyers to search for items by their status by keywords by brand etc. etc. etc.
- Realtor's are a monopoly, plain and simple. Glib answers by JR purporting that having Realtor.com means MLS isn't a de facto monopoly are just silly. In the end, it's the MLS that powers everything, including Realtor.com. Think of the MLS, the platform, as Microsoft Windows. There is no t even a threat for a Linux, Apple OS (for the tech geeks out there) because of the network effects that gives MLS its power also ensure that nothing will come close to replacing it. If it did, it would become another MLS!
- The houses are a commodity and every commodity has an exchange to buy and sell it. MLS is the exchange for the houses. Yet, unlike any other exchange I can think of (NYSE, Nasdaq, CBOT, CBOE, etc..), MLS perpetuates information asymmetry in which its agents have more information than its consumers, kind of like the old days of having traders in the pit of the NYSE before their gatekeeper role got replaced by computers. I'd have to imagine that traders who made their living as gatekeepers probably didn't fair well in the long run. Traders who added value by synthesizing that data into proprietary insight would have been best positioned when that tide turned. Same for Realtors. The change is real and its coming. Realtors who don't make a living from strictly being gatekeepers will have the best chance to survive.

Thankyew, Thankyew very much!

Richard, that's some serious hostility you're wearing.

"It's fine to hate people who openly admit that they are purposefully screwing their customers "
~~~
I disagree... but go ahead and "hate" if you must... it's only negative energy and the only person you harm is yourself.

Furthermore your analogy about a survey is idiotic at best.
~~~~~~~
Idiotic?! Really... don't hold back, tell me what you REALLY think. It's basically the same thing. We've compiled information that we solicited and wrote down. Title companies have most of the same info, so do the taxing bodies, so do the attorneys who were involved, and so do the inspectors (who request a copy of the contract when inspecting)... none of them chose to "compile the information" and keep a database...'cause it's not cost-effective for them, and doesn't serve their needs.

The MLS exists not because of hard work, but because of momentum and legal documents that forbid many forms of competition.
~~~~~~~~~
Now... talk about idiotic! We have no legal documents that forbid competition... That would violate Sherman Anti-Trust laws... in fact in some areas (like Chicago) there are competing MLS, and Realtor.com, and Zillow and anybody else who wants to join the fray!

That said, the whole thing is moot as you actually agreed with me that it would be in the customer's interest to disseminate the information, yet you still argue against it. I understand the urge to stick up for your fellow REALTOR but the fact is you're both wrong, and you're both acting against your customers wishes.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
The whole thing is NOT moot.. I did agree with you that the info should be disseminated. What I argued about what the "ownership" of the information.... I did NOT argue against it's dissemination. I'm not sticking up for fellow realtors... I'm arguing my own valid points. Since you're having some trouble understanding the points I'm arguing let's make it really simple:

* Realtors own the MLS and it's information and get to decide what to do with it.
* Realtors should share that information with the public freely... it will enhance our business, not damage it. And many MLS already do that!

Clear enough!?

Elvis,

Whoosh, you sure have a tendency to bring-out the "best" in people (how does that commercial go.?) .l.o.l.. anyway I shot an 84 yesterday with 2 new hybrids in the bag, so it was better than I expected - where does your bro play ..?

The national MLS deal I was referring to .. was to give the consumer, lets say in Atlanta the paid opportunity to do research in depth in Denver, Austin and lets say Riverside before making any kind of move ...



JR,

>>> Not going to argue ownership of information, which is debateable---but who pays to store it, maintain the hardware and software to store it, and administer it and police it, Tman? That's right we do, the Realtors, with out dues.>>>>

There's not really much to debate about ...

The local and state courts fired off the first volley 5 years ago for the consumers and has been upheld by the Federal Trade Commission .. and it's been the FTC's job ever since to keep the MLS & NAR in check .. .. everything else has just been a battle between waring factions inside your own ranks for territory, money, percentages, file sharing, etc etc ..

http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2006/11/new_…


Who pays to store it, maintain the hardware and software to store it, and administer it and police it...? ... you do.!

And "why" do you do it...? ... the very same reason why car dealers store huge amounts of inventory, maintain their hardware and software to store information on 8 million vehicles, and administer it and police it -- it drives their business.

Your advantage..? ... no high cost of inventory --- and it drives your business.

... and business is m-o-n-e-y .... in this case, you just have to share more with the consumer


: ^)

Wow ....!

.. hate..?!? ...

That's a little word with big ramifications ...

... how about if you just dislike their comments and don't agree with their ideas and go on.


: ^)

-

Zack, with some of the posts that have been made to some other people here, I would never post OTHER than anonymously.

People are right to hate me? Oh my! Most of my customers and clients don't hate me at all!

I would have to disagree that sellers would want some of the MLS info divulged. I have taken over expired listings who have asked me how they should list so their DOM are back to zero. I am not for or against divulging all this data. As I said, as I see it 90-95% of the data is readily available, depending on which MLS you are in. Zillow and public records have enabled the public to find out what a seller paid for their house, which is more data than the MLS gives! I don't know what MLS tells you what they paid and what mortgage they have (or at least what they started with. The public record attached to my MLS has that info, did you want to access that also?

I think we will all see many things changing in the future: it is like that with anything. Things change!

A couple of disagreements from me, Kevin.

1st - People are NOT right to hate anybody, regardless of viewpoint. Everyone has the right to their opinion and the right to disagree. But let's not foment hatred.

2nd - Respectfully, I have to disagree that the data does NOT belong to the seller, even though I agree that it clearly in the seller's best interests to have that information disseminated wide & far. The information is gathered and compiled by Realtors, and put into a database for our own use. The data belongs to those who gather and create it.

By your logic, the information derived by a "survey" in which you participated, is owned by those surveyed. Buyers and Sellers are certainly allowed to created their own MLS database, but it's neither practical or fiscally viable for them to do so.

No, the data belongs to those who compiled, created and maintain the database. And what should be done with that data, is the decision of those owners. I agree that it would be strongly to the advantage of the sellers and buyers to have more availability to those records, and we have made great strides in that direction, and are making more as we go along.

J.R. Off the top off my head, access to full (security-redacted) MLS databases would be of incredible use to buyers, sellers, appraisers, insurance companies, financial consultants, marketers, builders, contractors, and entrepreneurs.

Such availability could create an improved market for broker and agent tools (customer management, automated valuation, easier and more accurate screening of possible properties), as well as better tools for investors, and a smoother experience for both buyers and sellers.

I'm an entrepreneur, so to me the value of opening the data is obvious. To me, I see clearly that you will make more money with it open that with it closed, and that the REALTOR brand would become more firmly entrenched as it would discourage the creation of alternate markets and solutions.

It's a shame that you don't see that by keeping a monopoly on the information, all you're really doing is stifling progress in your own field, which frustrates everybody by creating needless inefficiencies.

That said, even if you don't agree with that, I hope you'll consider that from the property seller's viewpoint, the data is not yours at all. The data is theirs, and they likely want it published as widely as possible. You happen to be given the data by the seller, because it is in their interest to do so.

It's unfortunate that you then mistake the seller's data for your own, and act solely in your own interests instead of those of your client.

People are right to hate you. It's not prejudice, is that you have openly admitted that you are working against your clients wishes, and that you do so with no regret or shame.

J R and have clarified your position in a much less demeaning manner, but initial comments are the types such as: "LOL Good point Elvis!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Elvis made a good point. I agreed with him. What was wrong with that?

I'm not the kind of person who types 600 words on a message board to make my point. I can do it more succicntly. As another poster said, this board is (relatively) friendly towards realtors. There is a large part of the public, who has no idea what our occupation entails, who think all we do is open doors and collect (a full) 6% for 15 minutes work, and they hate us for that misconception. There's nothing I can do to change that, it's a form of prejudice. I don't know what they do for a living, they don't know what I do. Enough said. I'm a little tired of non real estate people actually ARGUING with those in the business over what our jobs are whether or not they are entitled to our job related data.

BEST ANSWER
JR: I believe those Realtors are simply making a point. There are things you CAN do yourself, but do you want to.
---
I agree that those Realtors are trying to make a point, just doing a very bad job at it and coming off like fools. Are you just trying to defend the lowest common denominator, or do you really believe that a Realtor does not sound pompous when comparing the services he or she provides to that of a surgeon?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
JR: I hardly think they're coming off like "fools" because you don't like their analogy. I made an analogy with a plumer. Is that acceptable to you? Can you address MY post where I compared Realtors to plumbers or hair colorists?

"Some buyers sound like children: "Mommy, I can do it all myself, I don't want any help!!! Whaaaa!!!"
-----------
This is an example of the type of statements I was talking about. No prospective buyer would hire an agent that would make a comment like this. The Realtor encounters a buyer who thinks he is better off buying a house on his own. The Realtor's response is to effectively call that buyer a baby for not hiring a Realtor. A professional would make an argument for why the buyer would financially and legally benefit from representation, and be sure the explain that the benefit goes beyond access to a database.

JR: Not at all. That remark was not in response to a seller wanting to sell their house ontheir own. It's in response to those of the public who would like to use all the tools we use and ask for advice from us, but not want to pay us. I'm afraid you just don't want to hear the truth.

I think Deborah and others have nailed the true spirit of the thread. I have absolutely zero interest in seeing the name of the seller, their contact info,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
JR: You don't. Others do.


I'd consider paying $60/month to get access to listings
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
JR: So would some others. Many pay more than that. They also have to pay by the year. A full year.


BUT, and it's a huge but, the Realtor's don't own the publishing medium, which is the MLS.
~~~~~~~~~~
JR: You should have said IF, and it's a huge IF. Realtors DO own the publishing medium. Where did you get the impression we didn't.


Currently, the MLS is a monopoly in any given market.
~~~~~~~~~~~
JR: It is? There are no listings to be seen on Realtor.com etc? Some buyers sound like children: "Mommy, I can do it all myself, I don't want any help!!! Whaaaa!!!" I can't tell you how many times I've had people INSIST on seeing houses I knew were not for them, and kick and scream about going into houses they were sure they would HATE, and they ended up buying them. You can't judge a book by it's cover, Cameron. You can't judge a home by it's photos, sometimes you can't even judge it with a drive by.

I think Deborah and others have nailed the true spirit of the thread. I have absolutely zero interest in seeing the name of the seller, their contact info, their lock box code, etc. etc. I'd consider paying $60/month to get access to listings (as far back as they go) of various statuses, days on the market, etc.. I understand that with some old listings on the MLS in Chicago, there are pictures still attached to that listing. What an insight that would give! Comparing before/after pictures of the same property should it come into the market to see what upgrades have been done, comparing how taxes and assessments have evolved, cutting through any tricks played by realtor on the true days on the market, seeing the original listing price vs the final listing price. Or taking a look at listings under contract to see what price level are they at or looking at expired listings to see what not to do. Or taking a look at rental listings to see what comparable properties would rent for, should that be a valid concern. It will make for a much more knowledgable buyer and seller. The value-add of the Realtor would be in their marketing ability, intimate understanding of the process, tying random pieces of data into an insight that buyer/seller without years of experience would be hard pressed to get to, and ensuring that emotion isn't part of the overall process so that a market-based outcome can be easily obtained.

Good question about who owns the data. I'm guessing here but would think that any MLS would make the Realtor's sign a contract right at the beginning that gives it full control of the data. Does that happen in real life? If not, then whomever is responsible for gathering and entering the data own it. Other than private contact information, I don't think the seller owns the data because they didn't take the time to come measure and input into the MLS. It's like someone taking a picture of a subject. As long as the subject gave consent to have a picture taken, its the photographer who owns the picture. BUT, and it's a huge but, the Realtor's don't own the publishing medium, which is the MLS. So, hmmmm, it would take consent of the both the Realtors (authors) and MLS (publisher) to be able to release the data to the public. The real question is what do you gain or lose by doing so? Currently, the MLS is a monopoly in any given market. Sometimes there may be more than one MLS that covers the same area but i"m guessing that that is rare. Anytime a monopoly is broken up, the stakeholders in that monopoloy suffer. But we are not asking to break up the monopoly. In other words, the input of the data is still monopolized. It is only the distribution of the data that is under discussion here. So who gains, who loses? The MLS gains to the extent that they have people like me willing to pay a high fee to get access to listing related data, the MLS loses to the extent that the weaker Realtors who rely solely on access to data as their reason for being will likely get pushed out and thus won't subscribe to the MLS anymore. The agents who currently rely on the IDX feed to provide content for their websites may lose a portion of the traffic but I would think that not everyone will want to pay more to get more. There will be a majority of clients out there who will be content with the free IDX feeds.

I'm not entirely sure that this is strictly a win-lose situation. It could be a win-win. The buyers/sellers win, the stronger Realtors win, the MLS wins, and the real estate industry wins because it might cull the weaker realtors all together.

Elvis:
Oddly enough, we didn't have people calling for "transparency" and access to our records when we were printing 300 - 500 page books with photos of homes, every week or two.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LOL Good point Elvis! The problem is that when something is on computer, people think it's "free". The same effort goes into obtaining and compiling listings now as then--the difference is it's available at the touch of a finger, so it has no "value".

Alan (elvis)

Did you ever think about it this way ....

Without Trulia .. agents would be far less useful....?

.. humbling isn't it.....?



-

Fellow Realtors,

Another point that is yet to be made is: who owns the data on our MLS? Is it each individual brokerage, the MLS itself, or is it the seller? What do our sellers want us to do with their data? Would they want all of the information we gather from them and about their property available to the public? Realtors do provide a buffer in that information process that our sellers may value and require. No discussion of opening up our MLS data to non-members will be complete without the sellers' input and authorization.
Deborah, thanks for your clarification.