Displeased, perhaps, that outfits like Redfin.com draw all the negative attention, Trulia Blog asks:
Does the MLS continue to believe that fascist dictatorships work?
Inasmuch as an MLS system is a mutually-voluntary membership organization composed of self-selected volunteers, each of whom voluntarily agrees to abide by a set of rules voluntarily established by the membership as a whole, it easy is to understand how Trulia Blog would mistake MLS systems for the second-most murderous branch of Totalitarian Socialism in history. They’re like twins!
An MLS system is a club. Whatever bad things we might think to say about a club, a club is still far more benign than even the most benign of governments. Why? Because you can quit a club, where quitting a government is difficult at best, impossible at worst — and almost always fatal under Totalitarian Socialism. If you haven’t seen a huge pile of bodies stacked up behind the local MLS office — there’s a reason for that.
There are three things you can do about a club you don’t like: 1. You can try to change it from within. 2. You can try to change it from without. 3. You can turn your back on it and up your own organization.
I have had nothing but good things to say about Trulia.com so far, but after this stunt, I have this much to add: Trulia, up yours!
Technorati Tags: blogging, disintermediation, real estate, real estate marketing
Sean says:
Ouch Greg! We’re a good group of guys & gals over here at Trulia – full of love for everyone. However, we have to call it as we see it.
Don’t misunderstand us: Trulia believes that the MLS will continue to play an important role in the buying and selling of a home in the future. However, we don’t think that role involves prohibiting brokers from marketing listings or winning new clients. You have to admit that there is no way for brokers to quit the MLS “club” no matter how much they may dislike or disagree with the rules. If they did then their listings would not get displayed on other broker websites through IDX and, therefore, sellers would simply choose not to list with them. Even the top three brokerage houses, who have long discussed getting out of MLS and IDX and creating their own listings exchange, can’t pull out of MLS because the DOJ would come down on them for anti-trust. We just want to encourage conversation that promotes the broker’s ability to market their client’s listings freely and responsibly. It seems the only way to get the conversation going is to stir up the pot a little.
September 13, 2006 — 7:50 pm
Greg Swann says:
> We’re a good group of guys & gals over here at Trulia
I know you are.
> You have to admit that there is no way for brokers to quit the MLS “club” no matter how much they may dislike or disagree with the rules.
First, many, many real estate licensees do not belong to the MLS. Second, if MLS membership proves too onerous, you quit and do something else. Third, I think a supposed fiduciary makes a poor case for his value by saying, “You know you can trust me because I give my word and then send our a press release when I break it.” Fourth, there is nothing to prevent MLS memberships from changing the rules if they want them changed. Fifth, none of this is fascist dictatorship.
> We just want to encourage conversation that promotes the broker’s ability to market their client’s listings freely and responsibly.
It would seem that this is not of importance to the brokers themselves — certainly not to anything like a majority. I personally don’t go out of my way to help FSBOs — with one exception. I don’t farm them, either. It’s a bottom-feeder business, almost always with built-in personality issues. (This last might well be true of all bottom-feeder business models.)
> It seems the only way to get the conversation going is to stir up the pot a little.
I’m a good example of a real estate broker who is friendly to innovation. Imagine how much bad will you bought from the ladies and gentleman who are not — completely unnecessarily. I don’t see that you made any coherent case for change, but I’ll bet you made a bunch of enemies.
September 13, 2006 — 9:10 pm
cw says:
Totalitarian Socialism vs. taking yourself too seriously
tough call.
September 14, 2006 — 6:08 pm
Not Gonna Give Trulia My Listings says:
The case against Trulia is very simple
1) Trulia is pimping listings from brokers:
http://realestate20.wordpress.com/2006/09/15/trulia-truly-a-pimp/
2) Next thing they will post FSBO’s along with the pimped listings per their recent comments.
September 30, 2006 — 8:47 am
Sam says:
Question from an outside observer. I’m trying to understand the value an MLS offers its members, and I’m feeling I’m missing something. What is the primary benefit of an MLS to an agency? When it comes to data sharing, the MLSes in my area just don’t make it easy for agencies to access their own data for their own applications. Interaction seems to be limited to the MLS’s own website. Why doesn’t another “club” come along who can offer better value in those areas?
November 13, 2006 — 12:09 pm
Not givings my listings to Trulia either says:
Great question, Sam.
The primary value of the MLS to its members is broker cooperation in commissions. The MLS sets a contractual legal structure for members sharing commissions on the sale of homes.
Folks outside the industry, like Trulia, don’t understand the MLS isn’t just a data source. Brokers naively giving their listings to Trulia and others are cutting off their future income. Giving their content and source of commissions away to Truila is crazy.
On Trulia’s own blog they show how out of touch they are with Realtors. Here are a few quotes:
“doesn’t posting FSBO’s on broker Web sites benefit everyone?”
“Does the MLS continue to believe that fascist dictatorships work?”
See the full post here:
http://www.truliablog.com/?p=33
See a great analysis of this here:
https://www.bloodhoundrealty.com/BloodhoundBlog/?p=330
Trulia is truly bad for Realtors.
November 21, 2006 — 8:36 am
Sam says:
Thanks for the input! I was beginning to wonder if I’d ever get a straight answer about the function of an MLS.
I’m still left with a few questions:
1. Our local MLS website and Trulia seem to offer the same basic type of information. Bottom line: you have to contact a realtor to see a house. So wouldn’t the realtor still be getting the same commission?
2. I don’t ever see myself contacting a realtor about a property unless I’ve already researched it online. I’ve come to expect to be able to research major purchases online. I see myself starting my search at a “big” real estate search site, and finding realtors through their listings. I see myself favoring sites like Trulia that excel at presenting information over the less managable/meaningful presentation I get at the local MLS website or local realtors’ sites. Wouldn’t a majority of buyers (and sellers too) have a similar mindset and be more likely to go with perceived “web-aware” realtors?
November 21, 2006 — 8:31 pm