I wrote a couple of times yesterday about using the iPhone as the laptop killer for real estate transactions. If my guesses about cloud computing play out, the iPhone and subsequent hand-held computers have the potential to replace our desktop machines as well — or at least give us every bit of the power we expect from a desktop machine no matter where we happen to be. This is all for real, a brand new world unfolding before our eyes.
What is not new, alas, are the monopolies of morons imposed upon us by the National Association of Realtors and all of its many tentacular sub-cartels. Where everything in business is about to change radically — in response to the iPhone, to Web 3.0, to the unforeseeable efficiencies of the cloud — everything in our business will change at its usual glacial pace — driven not by the pursuit of profit, not by the thrill of innovation, not by the ever-more-vast oceans of information available to us — driven only by the need of the NAR and its cabal of sleazy vendors to hold Realtors hostage.
In late May I bitched about the vast hordes of bugs that infest Zipforms, but I knew going in that this was a Sysiphean effort. The people who impose these awful products on us are not the ones stuck using them. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if there are off-budget contributions — subsidies for Realtor association parties, for example — written into the contracts, which simply introduces bribery into what is already a capricious decision-making process. Caprice, it is worthwhile to stress, is the opposite of reason.
Tom Farley, the new CEO of the Arizona Association of Realtors actually called me in response to that post, but I could not manage to convey to him the importance of multiple, competing vendors to a free — or even quasi-free — market. What he told me is that, instead of Zipforms, in the future we will be inflicted with a different hopelessly buggy Windows-only piece of crap software. I know the man was in deep earnest, and I know that he thinks what he is doing is the best he can do, and I am beyond dismayed that, seemingly no one in the vast NAR cartel can understand that SOCIALISM DOES NOT WORK!
It’s plausible to me that the NAR’s own origins in the parlor-pink progressive era blind it to its own pernicious anti-capitalism, but who is it who cannot understand that the products of the Peoples’ Glorious Revolutionary Tire Company would not be your first choice even if they were your only choice. People do not work to earn your business if they cannot lose it. This is obvious to everyone when they are shopping with their own money. How is that no one at the Arizona Association of Realtors can understand that, first, I would much rather shop with my own money, and that, if this is to be forbidden by fiat — by a conscious betrayal of my true interests — that different people can only satisfy their differing objectives by having access to multiple, competing products? A monopoly vendor might kiss ass well, and it might kick in some juicy bribes dressed up as perks, but no monopoly vendor is going to work to earn my business. I’m not the client, the AAR is, and, whatever it is they are buying, it SUCKS for my needs.
Lately the RE.net has become infested with NAR types — vast hordes of them, it would seem, from Virginia. Our own Dave Phillips seems like the kind of guy with brains enough to pour bourbon on his Cheerios if the milk’s gone sour, but the rest of them do nothing for me but raise the hair on the back of my neck. Are they fifth columnists? Recruiting agents for The Borg that is the NAR. What they mainly seem to do is go around lecturing everyone else on how nice they are. To the nice niche are they completely welcome. Nice is the means by which the NAR sustains its cartel against half-assed rebels. Nice is the formless pit of tapioca in which it drowns everyone who comes too near it.
Here’s my take: If you won’t do the right thing without having your ass kissed, you know nothing about right and wrong. But on the off chance that Tom Farley and the Realtor association wannabe geeks actually do want to do the right thing — at least in this pitiably-limited context — here it is:
GET THE HELL OUT OF OUR WAY!
You are not software companies, and you do not have the ability to select software for anyone but yourselves. No one can select another workman’s tools, so your monopoly vendor strategy is a failure ab initio. But even ignoring that, you cannot choose software that you yourselves do not use every day. Even if you actually do use it, your choice is assured to be satisfactory to you and you alone. Moreover, your monopoly vendors understand perfectly that they do not have to earn my business, and they may have good cause to believe that what matters most to Realtor associations is not product quality but superficially-legal bribery. On top of all that, we know from 10,000 years of capitalism that entrepreneurs work best when there are profits to be made and losses to be avoided as a consequence of having worked well.
This is all completely obvious, so how about some real change instead of just more Realtor association jawbone? Here is all you need to do: Make the forms available to multiple, competing vendors. In other words, no more monopoly contracts. I would be amazed if you knew this, but PDF tools are written into PHP and other web-based software development environments, so, if it were possible to compete for the business, there could be web-based contracts software for the iPhone and other mobile devices in mere weeks.
My bottom line — for the NAR and everyone associated with it: I don’t believe anything will change. I can write sneakaround solutions for myself, just as I already do with the pestilential MLS system. Everybody else is stuck. But the internet is the Greek Agora made manifest for everyone at last. Your idiot Socialist cartel is doomed in the long run anyway. By standing between Realtors and the way we make our living, you will substantially hasten the arrival of the long run. Sic semper tyrannosauris — thus, always, to dinosaurs.
Technorati Tags: blogging, disintermediation, real estate, real estate marketing, technology
Chris Eliopoulos says:
Well said.
Every body wake up.
July 7, 2008 — 1:06 pm
Erion Shehaj says:
Greg
Aside from the monopolistic nature of how software selection is currently done and its Windows foundation, what are your issues with Zipforms?
I’m with you on the freedom of choice, all the way.
But, I’ve been using ZF for over 4 years now and I don’t find it half bad. I was just curious, with your sofware background, what additional issues bother you when it comes to Zipforms.
July 7, 2008 — 2:26 pm
Stephanie Edwards-Musa says:
Greg,
Sometimes I would rather hand write a contract than use zipforms. It does lock up quite a bit, recent version is not near as bad as a couple of years ago though.
I love your rant. I hope someone listens.
July 7, 2008 — 2:54 pm
Scott P. Rogers says:
Greg…
Here in Virginia (where everyone is very nice), the VAR standard forms are available for download at no cost to members as PDFs with form fields. There are also several vendors from whom Virginia Realtors can purchase form software. Lots of options — no mandated vendors — no wonder everyone is so nice here in Virginia!
If you ever get tired of Arizona and the AAR, consider moving to Virginia. Maybe you can become an NAR type too!
July 7, 2008 — 4:37 pm
Will says:
Wow… you have a serious issue with how things are done down there, don’t you? I can’t say whether what you got is any good or not because up here we have something else. The CREA (Canadian Real Estate Association) has built their own system called WEBforms. I think it’s terrific. It will play well on Macs, apparently, but not on mobile screens. No biggie since I can create a form, save it to my HD, edit it (even update it from the saved desktop copy to ensure it is the latest version) and import it to my VREO Dashboard for signing on my Tablet.
I still think you are way, way off on the whole iPhone love. That said, I do agree with cloud computing. In fact, the CREA designed WEBforms is cloud computing and has been since before that term entered popular geek vernacular (we’re on version 4.4 now and it’s been about 7 years since 1.0). Maybe you should have NAR (or whoever) take a look at what we do up here.
July 7, 2008 — 5:04 pm
Jason Berman says:
On its own accord, using an iPhone won’t transform one’s business.
Agents & Originators need to learn new skills so that they will be able to manage and direct their content (data) in ways that increase reach and decrease effort. W
With an ever-broadening array of applications and tools at our disposal, it is imperative for those that recognize this new era to begin honing technology skills so that they may compete and flourish.
The iPhone is merely a platform; a gateway to the possibility of a mobile and content-rich life complemented by connectedness to what is important to the user at that particular moment.
The future is exciting, worrying about the incumbent bureaucracy and its resistance to change is a waste of energy in my opinion.
July 7, 2008 — 5:26 pm
Greg Swann says:
> I was just curious, with your software background, what additional issues bother you when it comes to Zipforms.
I don’t have a comprehensive bug list. That would make me too crazy. And it’s plausible to me that these issues might not be present in your version of the software. As sick as this would be from a software engineering perspective, it is completely plausible to me that ZipForms/WinForms runs in multiple builds, state-by-state. I have no basis for asserting this other than the raw stupidity of the errors in the version we use in Arizona. The mistakes are so childish that I would put nothing past ZipForms, provided it’s stupidly juvenile.
Okay, here’s my pet: Type CTRL-S (Save), then select File/Close Transaction (since CTRL-W doesn’t work). ZipForms says: “Do you want to save the changes you made to this transaction?” I just saved. There are no changes. Same routine if I open and then close a transaction without making a change. Setting a change flag is GUI 101.
When you click on a field in the software, then scroll down to click on a different field, you will be scrolled back up to the top of the page. This error takes an exceptional kind of incompetence, since I can’t even imagine how it is accomplished.
If you Paste into a multi-line text field, your pasted copy will go where you put the cursor, but then the cursor will be thrust to the end of that field.
Templates are not updated (nor are you warned) when the forms making them up are revised.
There is no practicable way to do a Save As within the software. The practical work-around is to Save to the desktop then remiport.
I could go one forever. I frequently lose changes, despite all the hyper-pituitary saving ZipForms does. ZipForms doesn’t actually produce PDFs, it uses a third-party printer driver like some kind of cheapshit MS-Office knock-off. If you email your work product before printing or faxing it, you have to remember to change the printer driver back to a real printer, or your pages will never appear. If ZipForms were a final project in a CS-202 class, I wouldn’t hate it. But it is that persistent kind of college-boy half-assed software engineering that drives me right up the wall.
None of these errors are new, and I can’t go a week without finding something new to hate in ZipForms. They know their product sucks and they don’t care. It doesn’t have to be good, it just has to be good enough to get past the undoubtedly-very-nice Association halfwits who ram this crap down everyone else’s throats.
July 7, 2008 — 7:08 pm
jim little says:
I don’t always agree with you, but you got this one spot on.
ZF is a kludge, slow, akward,ustable. Does not print all forms in one pdf, only auto-populates if you use the HORRIBLE transaction cover sheet that includes many things we don’t need. It was definetly a camel.
Keep the pressure up Gregg.
BTW, what is the new camel we will have to use?
July 7, 2008 — 7:15 pm
jim little says:
PS: I forgot my favorite peeve, the font used on the agent written fields won’t fax once clearly, let alone multiple times. ZF has known about this for years, they just don’t give a damn.
July 7, 2008 — 7:18 pm
Greg Swann says:
> Lots of options — no mandated vendors — no wonder everyone is so nice here in Virginia!
Good on ya. Spead this virus, please.
> Maybe you can become an NAR type too!
This will never happen. The NAR silences dissent by assimilating it. My objective is to supplant the NAR, in any case, to eclipse and obviate it. But, that notwithstanding, my only hope of achieving anything like meaningful change, for the time being, is to assail from without. I entreat everyone reading this to consider this argument carefully. If the NAR is more important to you than the kinds of ideas we talk about here — the idea of being Unchained from every kind of compulsion, coercion, prohibition upon your own person or other people — you can work for whatever incremental change you might achieve within the NAR. If, instead, the idea of being Unchained is more important, you cannot make common cause with the NAR, nor with any tentacle of it. Again: The NAR silences dissent by assimilating it.
This is exactly what Emerson was talking about in Self Reliance:
Good and earnest people resolve to change the NAR from within, and they end up being changed by the NAR instead — and the NAR changes not at all. This is not an anomaly. This is the way the world works. You cannot rid the world of cannibals by eating them.
July 7, 2008 — 7:26 pm
Matthew Rathbun says:
Greg,
To a great extent I actually agree with this post. The Association of Realtors needs to get out of the product business, to include Realtor.com and stop trying to make money from ancillary services and go back to actually working to serve the members. This service mindset is exactly why I got involved with education full time.
As far as Virginians being “nice”, well yes most of us find professionalism as an acceptable way of conducting business. It may take a little more time than the direct and often offensive techniques; but long term I feel that it’s worth it. The 15 or so Virginia bloggers often meet and share and although we often disagree, we remain friendly toward one another. I can’t understand why anyone would feel that is a negative thing. Respect for others, even when we don’t agree is a principal that has followed us for generations.
Somewhere between my idealistic hope for a better industry and your desire for change is the perfect balance. I have chosen to work toward changing the Association from the inside. If there were options to the Realtor Association, I would balance the options and find which ones would best support it’s members and work for them.
It’s also why, I am veering away from authoring opinion pieces on blogs and sticking to training and being a resource, which is simply what I am better at.
It dawns on me however, that the trend that has lead to the decline of NAR in the eyes of its membership is also sinking the RE.net ship. Capitalism, self promotion, politics’s and turf battles are creeping into many industry blogs, which just a year ago were being used for information. Everyone seems to be trying to sell something or use the RE.net for gain. IMHO this is where the NAR train left the tracks, and ever so slowly the social media world is doing the same.
July 7, 2008 — 7:29 pm
Matthew Rathbun says:
I actually was writing my comment above while you were posting the comment before… So, it looks like we agree, just in different ways.
This: “You cannot rid the world of cannibals by eating them.” will go in the in book of Swannisms… 🙂
I hope not to be devoured by my efforts to improve the industry.
July 7, 2008 — 7:33 pm
Chris Johnson says:
Best post in a month, GS. By a wide margin.
You were right about ‘specific,’ information.
July 7, 2008 — 7:33 pm
Greg Swann says:
> BTW, what is the new camel we will have to use?
A program called eForms, but I can’t figure out which product that might be when I Google on it.
As a side note, and possibly of greater interest to Realtors working in Sun City than in other areas: Sometime very soon, it will no longer be possible to buy pre-printed forms. I thought the worst thing about ZipForms was the means by which the AAR rammed it down everyone’s throats, whether they used it or not. Lo-tech don’t mean no-tech, but our fellow Realtors who still write their contracts by hand will have to pray to the ZipFoms gods anyway. This is an atrocious betrayal of the members of a membership organization. At least the hand-writing will be readable by fax. 😉
July 7, 2008 — 7:38 pm
Greg Swann says:
> The Association of Realtors needs to get out of the product business, to include Realtor.com and stop trying to make money from ancillary services and go back to actually working to serve the members.
You make that happen and I’ll wash your car.
> As far as Virginians being “nice”, well yes most of us find professionalism as an acceptable way of conducting business.
Redefinition of terms, specious conflation of terms, fallacy of the many questions. etc. “Nice” in socialist context is very different from “nice” in a capitalist context. In a condition of actual market freedom, it’s “nice” when mutual satisfaction is achieved and the money changes hands. The issue of anyone’s being polite or impolite only arises because affiliation with the NAR and its sub-cartels is fundamentally involuntary — acapitalistic. It happens that I use three different FTP programs on my Macintosh, so there is no possibility that a monopoly FTP product could satisfy my true, pressing needs. But if I could fire the Arizona Association of Realtors in the same way that I can fire the manufacturers of Fetch, for example, then all the lecturing about being “nice” would be completely beside the point. We are entreated to be “nice” because our social concourse is coercive at its core. Slaves always resent their masters, and the masters always regard it as a particularly galling species of the most intolerable kind of ingratitude that the slaves are not more thankful for their condition of servitude. There is nothing mysterious about any of this — except, possibly, the mystery of why so few people are willing to think about it.
> Everyone seems to be trying to sell something or use the RE.net for gain.
I agree with that much, and it’s why we do things they way we do them. I feel like I’m not being as acerbic as I should be. We’re tending to our own garden, and my belief is that our best hope is by supplanting evil, rather than by running Batman games against it. But there’s a lot I’m letting slide by, lately, just because it seems not to matter in the long run. The bigger game, for me, for now, is to help the best among us rise to the point where they can define the marketplace in their local markets. Then those who wish to survive will rise to meet them, and the rest will go do something else. The NAR doesn’t want anything like this, of course, but that matters to me not at all.
> I hope not to be devoured by my efforts to improve the industry.
You misunderstood what I said. Good men do not fail to reform corrupt organizations and yet remain good. Good men corrupt themselves in their failures to reform corrupt organizations. It’s not a matter of being devoured, it’s a matter of becoming one with the beast.
July 7, 2008 — 8:36 pm
jaybird says:
Reading this post makes me think about health care and social security reform. I love it.
j
July 8, 2008 — 6:03 am
Bill Lublin says:
Greg;
Does it bother you when your facts are wrong?
NAR has nothing to do with the choices of Vendors made by State Associations. Or with crafting each state’s version of “Standard Forms” Or determining who the software vendor is for any state.
Each State Association has their own system for creating and disseminating forms, crafted by their members (that means any practitioners that were interested in the Standard Forms Process) and mandated by their members though their governance. In Pennsylvania, there is a choice of vendors, or you can buy pre-printed forms.
Before states got involved in creating these standard forms (which was during my time as a real estate professional), smaller real estate companies used forms printed by local legal forms printers (non real estate related entities that are probably still in business in some form) and larger real estate firms created their own real estate contracts. That option still exists. – If you have a problem with your state’s forms, don’t use them -be the capitalist that you claim to be and hire an attorney to draw the “Swann Agreements of Sales ” form and publish them on any platform you wish.
If the product is superior, other practitioners will adopt it, the sales of your product will overcome the Association forms and you will have accomplished your goal of extinguishing the Association’s position as a provider of forms for the real estate practitioners in your state.
Of course, there is the other consideration – that the State Associations have managed risk reduction for their members by creating these standard forms, and it is probably a good business practice to use the form in case you are sued some day, or need to defend an action that you took in completing the form. The trade-off is if you use the group’s products, the group (not any individual) gets to determine what the form says and how it is disseminated. But it is a reasonable trade off – the same trade off that takes place in any group effort.
As far as your statement “Good men corrupt themselves in their failures to reform corrupt organizations. It’s not a matter of being devoured, it’s a matter of becoming one with the beast.” Its well written, but way too dramatic for my taste.
We’re talking about contracts and software vendors, and a State Association so responsive to its members that the CEO called you about your concerns on a specific issue, not the “Encroaching Malignant Dominance of the World by the Threat of Godless Communism” (Yeah, I was here for the Cold War – and I didn’t buy rhetoric – no matter how articulate- then either)
I prefer Eldridge Cleaver’s statement, “You’re either part of the solution or you’re part of the problem” There is no beast – there is a group that you can contribute to and influence if you wished. They would probably welcome your eforts.
July 8, 2008 — 6:08 am
Jon says:
Monopolies are bad for everyone! Zipforms is notorious for this. For example, if you are an agent living in California or South Carolina, the only software form solution available for you to use is Zipforms. They have an exclusive agreement with the associations so that no other form vendors are able to compete in those markets. The ones who suffer from this are the agents!
July 8, 2008 — 8:04 am
Greg Swann says:
> NAR has nothing to do with the choices of Vendors made by State Associations.
Correct. The NAR simply sets the milk-the-agents tone that is echoed by every tentacle of that octopus.
> If you have a problem with your state’s forms, don’t use them -be the capitalist that you claim to be and hire an attorney to draw the “Swann Agreements of Sales ” form and publish them on any platform you wish.
That’s actually a decent idea. I had to rewrite the Consent to Limited Dual Representation form because it was impossible to use in practice. I spend much of my time, when going over AAR contracts with my clients, explaining the provisions that mean absolutely nothing, that are simply there to try to scare them into waiving their legal rights. Compared to boilerplate I’ve seen from other states, our forms are very good. But there is plenty of room for improvement.
> The trade-off is if you use the group’s products, the group (not any individual) gets to determine what the form says and how it is disseminated. But it is a reasonable trade off – the same trade off that takes place in any group effort.
This is not a reasonable argument. The forms belong to the members, not to the Association. To the extent that the Association uses the forms as “golden handcuffs,” it is betraying the interests of its own membership. This is evil. There is no other name for conduct like this.
> I prefer Eldridge Cleaver’s statement
Oh, good grief.
Let’s summarize, for the benefit of people who might have been distracted by your performance:
1. State Realtor associations have no business being in the software business.
2. State Realtor associations are incompetent to be in the software business.
3. State Realtor associations, by mandating monopoly software contracts, are betraying the interests of their members.
4. Software vendors in possession of monopoly software contracts are unlikely to respond to end-user complaints.
5. Software vendors who are obliged to compete for each individual end-user are highly likely to respond to end-user complaints.
6. Ergo, the best attainable outcome for each individual member of a State Realtor association would be for that state association to license use of its members’ forms at no added cost to as many independent software vendors as might wish to compete for business from those individual members.
July 8, 2008 — 9:20 am
Bill Lublin says:
“The NAR simply sets the milk-the-agents tone that is echoed by every tentacle of that octopus.”
Have you ever attended any meeting of your State Association? Every Association has different volunteer leadership and different staff. All of them operate in what they perceive to be the best interests of their Association. And all of them are different.
“The forms belong to the members, not to the Association. “
No, actually the forms are usually the work product of a committee of the Association in concert with Counsel for the Association. By any definition, the work product of such a group would be the property of the Association.
“To the extent that the Association uses the forms as “golden handcuffs,” it is betraying the interests of its own membership. ”
There are no Golden Handcuffs – YOU CHOOSE to use the forms, no one is compelling you to do so. And developing a standard form for use by a membership who, for the most part, does not wish to create their own is certainly in the interest of the members.
I said “ I prefer Eldridge Cleaver’s statement”
You said “Oh, good grief.”
Does that mean you prefer Charlie Brown to Eldridge?
Then listed some points –
1. State Realtor associations have no business being in the software business.
They can be in any business the members desire. And by providing standard forms, they assist their members in risk management, and by licensing software, they defray some of the costs of operating the Association – another benefit to the members.
2. State Realtor associations are incompetent to be in the software business.
I hate generalizations. I believe they are inherently flawed. But it raises the question of what enables you to determine what they or are not competent to do?
3. State Realtor associations, by mandating monopoly software contracts, are betraying the interests of their members.
When State Associations negotiate contracts with vendors, the financial benefits accrue to the members, making your statement inaccurate. I would agree however that my personal preference is a choice of vendors
4. Software vendors in possession of monopoly software contracts are unlikely to respond to end-user complaints.
I don’t agree. In your example (Zip-Forms) the company does business with a much larger base then one state. Maybe they’re just crappy at end-user support But I agree, I don;t like monopolies either.
5. Software vendors who are obliged to compete for each individual end-user are highly likely to respond to end-user complaints.
Once again, a statement with no validation. People that provide crappy service may just be bad at providing that service. Having more then one person providing service provides no assurance that the service will be superior, only that there will be more suppliers.
6. Ergo, the best attainable outcome for each individual member of a State Realtor association would be for that state association to license use of its members’ forms at no added cost to as many independent software vendors as might wish to compete for business from those individual members
I really didn’t get the point of this sentence past the pretentious use of ergo rather then therefore – If you mean that the Association should make its work product available to vendors at no charge for those vendors to resell to its members, that would not be in the best interest of the members. Though, as I said earlier, I also like the idea of a choice of vendors for anything. I also think the State can make more money that way to defray expenses for the membership.
I would point out that by not participating in the Association, you lose your ability to make changes to the group. When I teach contracts, I teach the concept of laches – sort of a legal “use it or lose it” Since you like latin, let me quote Wikipedia.
“Vigilantibus non dormientibus æquitas subvenit.
Equity aids the vigilant, not the negligent (that is, those who sleep on their rights).”
July 8, 2008 — 11:30 am
Jim Little says:
Bill Lubin said ” The forms are…property of the association.” I think the NAR and state associations may be forgetting they are made up of the rank and file members.
The act of associations writing the language of forms is, indeed, risk management. Associations providing said work product to an “approved” monopoly isn’t, and is contrary to the interests of members.
Re Vivilantibus…, isn’t this post in the spirit of vigilance?
July 8, 2008 — 11:57 am
Todd Tarson says:
Mr. Lublin is doing a fabulous job with his responses (plus he is from Philly so I like him anyway).
Greg, you know that I have plenty of respect for you and that I don’t often take issue with your views on the Association. I’ve volunteered to be part of the process that will, hopefully, lead to new changes to perhaps improve not only our Associations… but our industry as well.
I serve on the AAR executive committee and I can clearly state that AAR is NOT in the software business.
The forms that AAR has produced over the years are for the Members. I’ve only been a member since 2001 and I’ve seen two completely new contracts as well as many other forms. It is a constant work in progress to update the forms as needed due to changes in the industry and legal matters.
All Zipform is to the Members is a working program to distribute said documents to Members who choose to use the Member driven and produced documents. I get it… you don’t like the program (others feel the same way I suppose but I wouldn’t guess the percentage of Members that don’t use it because they don’t like it).
You mentioned that you have already worked up a ‘sneakaround’ in order to use the forms on the platform of your choice. To me this means that you are still using a clear Member benefit brought to us all by the state Association.
There is no mandate that a dues paying Member has to use Zipform… or the AAR forms to transact.
Your idea to have the doc’s ready to go so that other vendors can offer their products to the Members is not a bad one… and perhaps it should be given consideration in front of the Membership. I believe the exclusive contract that Zipform has is coming to an end fairly soon. The time could be right for something like you’ve outlined.
The Members that make up the leadership groups are constantly looking for new ways to improve services to the Membership. Changes take time, especially big changes, and someBODY first has to suggest a change.
At the next EXCOM meeting I’ll broach this subject and see where it leads. There is no doubt that technology is changing light years faster than our industry is traditionally ready for. Keeping tech changes in the midst of the decision making process is very important. Perhaps the days of exclusive contracts with one vendor are coming to an end, but that may mean that Members have to come out of pocket on their own for the product they’d choose (fine with me).
At a recent strategic planning session I attended a few months back… the subject of current Member benefits came up — as in — of the benefits that are currently offered which ones are still considered benefits that are being used by a good portion of the Membership. All I can say at this point is that ALL benefits are being looked at and there could very well be many changes in the future. Of course the changes will be based on who makes up the body of leadership. Plenty of space in the big rooms we meet in for those that want to fight the good fight.
July 8, 2008 — 1:18 pm
Greg Swann says:
Hi, Todd,
I don’t have time to play just now, but I thought I’d give you a lens for interpreting Mr. Lublin’s remarks — or the self-justifications of any government, charity or other anti-capitalist functionary:
Imagine that your local Fry’s store decided unilaterally that it would only stock Hormel meats. If you were to raise a complaint about this new policy, would you expect to be lectured, condescended to, told that lack of choices was your own fault for having failed to volunteer to serve on the meat selection committee? If any free market vendor elected to blame and harangue you for having objections to the way it did business, would you bother to argue the points, or would you just take your business elsewhere?
It is the lack of an alternative that induces Mr. Lublin to think that he has the right or the power to try to invalidate my complaints — and you will note that my complaints are legion. It’s typical of entrenched organizations to circle the wagons when they meet resistance, but this again is a hideously bad reputation management policy. People with less chutzpah than me learn very quickly that raising any sort of complaint with the NAR invites smarmy lectures from congenital Scoutmasters.
If the AAR really wants to convince me that it believes whole-heartedly in the value of what it does, all it has to do is make membership voluntary. When I can belong to ARMLS without also being compelled to belong to PAR/AAR/NAR, then I will be fully free to criticize or embrace the AAR. And then the AAR will learn the difference between doing what members really want and ramming what it wants down their throats.
I admire your idealism, Todd. But you’re trying to fix a machine that was born to be broken.
July 8, 2008 — 4:00 pm
Matthew Hardy says:
I’d bet that if most associations polled their members on whether they’d like to participate in affecting these kind of changes the poll would be useless because most agents won’t see it – because they view their association as either an obstacle or inherently useless. If members of the AAR we’re truly consulted, the forms situation would not be as it is. Real estate industry associations are not bottom up entities; they exist as a fig leaf to cover the perpetuation of a control mindset.
July 8, 2008 — 4:25 pm
James Boyer says:
Very well said, funny how all the boards are the same isn’t it. They all presume to know what is best for their members. I think we all get fed up with being treated like kids.
July 8, 2008 — 4:31 pm
Todd Tarson says:
Greg, although I can’t state for certain… it is the bylaws of ARMLS that mandates that you become a member of a local, state, and the national Association.
I’ll redouble check the information that pertains to this as best I can. But from recent experience (being part of a group that put together a new regional MLS locally), our MLS bylaws insist that MLS members be local, state, and national Realtor Members.
Why it is the way it is, I’m not for certain. As for the role the national, state, and local play in ensuring that the MLS bylaws have this insistence is also unknown to me and my experience.
I am aware of other MLS’s that accept non Realtor members into the service, but again I guess to say for why.
I’ll be checking the AAR bylaws tonight.
July 8, 2008 — 4:55 pm
Greg Swann says:
The local associations — Phoenix, Glendale, Scottsdale, SEVRAR, etc. — own ARMLS. The MLS systems that permit access with NAR membership are owned by the brokers, not the associations. I’m told that in some states courts have ruled that these rules are forced assocation, violations of the state or federal constitution. Given that Arizona is a Right to Work state, I could make a plausible argument that forced membership in the NAR is a hindrance on my right to work. This is an idea that rarely comes to me — never more than 12 or 15 times a day.
July 8, 2008 — 5:20 pm
Bill Lublin says:
Gregg; Please get your facts right – Shouting inaccurate information doesn’t make it right, it only makes it loud.
The fact that I choose not to engage in pointless rhetoric is not indicative that I am a functionary of any organization. I am a volunteer member as you could be if your desire to effect change was real.
The fact that I disagree with you is not indicative that I am an “anti-capitalist” (a truly empty phrase).If you want to indicate that I am other then a capitalist, you should decide what economic system I favor and use the appropriate epithet. The fact that I won several businesses, all started from scratch, and have not had a salaried job since I was 17 (driving a delivery truck for a sandwich shop as a college freshman – which also relied upon tips for income) would indicate that you are inaccurate, and that I am a capitalist by definition, (or at least an entrepeneur – which should count as a capitalist)
You said “It is the lack of an alternative that induces Mr. Lublin to think that he has the right or the power to try to invalidate my complaints ”
Another inaccurate statement. Not only did I suggest an alternative to you, I didn’t invalidate your complaints – I actually responded to the coherent ones. You invalidate them by posturing outside of an organization , criticizing without contributing.
I am impressed that you think that I, by my lonesome am circling wagons when I present a position opposite to your party line. Again your misconceptions are amazing. In many parts of the country REALTOR membership is not required for MLS membership. And it doesn’t impact those associations at all.
Philadelphia in fact, had a large Non-REALTOR real estate community for many years, as well as a local Non-REALTOR real estate board which operated its own Multiple Listing Bureau (which I served on many years ago)
You also said “The MLS systems that permit access with NAR membership are owned by the brokers, not the associations. ” that is also untrue, Trend MLS, of which I am a member is owned by REALTOR Associations, and does not require REALTOR membership to join the MLS. In fact, most large regional MLS systems in the US do not even though they are owned by Associations.
@Todd Thanks for the kind thoughts about Philly – I think you’ll find The reason for MLS By Law conformance revolves around the E&O insurance provided to the Regional MLS.
@James – All Boards aren’t the same, but the volunteers there can only do what they think is the right thing. If you want them to be run differently get involved and change the direction of the Association. You won’t be the first person to get active in their local board and shake things up – and I hope you won’t be the last.
July 8, 2008 — 5:46 pm
Greg Swann says:
Greg has been very busy for months, and this makes me write wisely but not too well. A couple of people have mentioned it, and I’m inclined in my perfect vanity to agree: My tongue was especially well-honed in this post. So it doesn’t get lost in the chaff, I should like to reiterate what I see as being mots most juste:
I can’t imagine what the nice boys from Virginia can hope to do about this, and, by this, they and we can know that their cause is doomed. The Unchained among us will win in the end because nobody takes shit by choice.
July 8, 2008 — 9:27 pm
Bill Lublin says:
Greg; I’m from Pennsylvania, not Virginia – get your Commonwealth’s straight – As far as chutzpah goes – believe me you don’t have any corner on that market –
BTW you didn’t get a smarmy lecture, you got the accurate information to balance your inaccurrate unfounded rhetoric
Don’t you think its a little lame to preen yourself and point out that you’re a legend in your own mind instead of addressing the issues?
July 9, 2008 — 3:44 am
Mike Farmer says:
All associations should probably be managed by professional management companies who have knowledge gained from diverse clients about best practices. Plus big management companies keep up with the latest technology, have buying clout, are more efficient, and can be fired if they underperform or someone else offers better services.
July 9, 2008 — 5:19 am
Greg Swann says:
Actually, I think I hit on the perfect solution in my reply to Todd: Make membership voluntary.
July 9, 2008 — 6:05 am
Mike Farmer says:
Memebership should definitely be voluntary, but when talking about the efficiency of an association, if one is going to exist, it would be best to have it managed by a management company.
July 9, 2008 — 6:50 am
Bill Lublin says:
Mike: Most Associations are managed by professional association executives. when you see someone with the designation RCE, or CAE, they have been trained specifically to do that job. And based on my own experience as apart of two search committees, you would be amazed at the diversity of the applicants. They do come from all kinds of diverse backgrounds. The final choice to hire is , of course, handled by each association.
Greg- Though I don’t know your MLS rules, I think you will find in most instances around the country that membership is voluntary, and that it is not a condition of MLS membership.
July 9, 2008 — 6:54 am
Todd Tarson says:
As I left my office last night I too then remembered that ARMLS was local Association owned, and for that matter our MLS up in Mohave County is also Association owned. No doubt that to be a member of the MLS will come with the requirement to be a member of the local, state, and national Realtor Associations.
I didn’t join this discussion to offer any ‘sermon’ or ‘lecture’. I’ve faced Member apathy and cries of hindrance since day one as an elected Association leader. At times it almost becomes a weird form of entertainment for me.
Yet I can prove that one voice can make a difference (it is nice to have help though).
I see a value of being part of an Association like AAR (especially on legislative and otherwise real world governmental issues). If membership was voluntary I’d be first in line to sign up. I can dig it that you wouldn’t want to be a part of that and you lose no points in my eyes.
Keep up the good work around here.
July 9, 2008 — 7:17 am
Mike Farmer says:
Voluntary membership, with no strings tied to MLS like in Georgia, with all operations under an independent management company motivates valuable service and attracts membership. If members get what they pay for it’s a win/win deal
July 9, 2008 — 7:29 am
Greg Swann says:
> with no strings tied to MLS like in Georgia
Can you clarify, that, Mike? Is it possible where you are to gain full access to the MLS without being a member of the local, state and National Association of Realtors? If it is, is this part of the MLS rules, or is it a fiat of legislation or jurisprudence? I haven’t made any study of this, but the only truly voluntary MLS I know of is NWMLS in Washington State. Even then, you can be obliged to join the NAR by your broker, but there are NAR-free brokerages, and self-employed brokers can join or not join at their own discretion.
Others? Are you forced to belong to the NAR cartel in order to gain access to your MLS system?
July 9, 2008 — 7:38 am
Mike Cutlip says:
The Realtor Assn in Massachusetts has offered forms through 3 vendors for many years now. The approach has worked quite well for us and we’re starting to see a truly preferred vendor as decided by the free market (no, I won’t say which one). We don’t offer the forms for free, but give roughly 50% discounts on purchase and renewal.
As for this: “Are you forced to belong to the NAR cartel in order to gain access to your MLS system?”
The regional new England MLS, MLSPin, does not require Realtor membership, although it costs twice as much to join if you’re not an Association member.
As for the status as cartel, well, membership is optional in MA, but we provide more than enough free member services so that there’s quantifiable savings for joining.
Just my 0.02
July 9, 2008 — 8:18 am
Michelle DeRepentigny says:
“Is it possible where you are to gain full access to the MLS without being a member of the local, state and National Association of Realtors?”
GA MLS with approximately 45000 members, requires no association memberships and is owned by the member brokers, but does require that every agent in a member broker office pay monthly dues. GA MLS is one of two mls systems in the Atlanta, GA area which has spread throughout several other areas in the past few years – I really hope they take over the state, but there is of course considerable pushback from association owned mls groups.
I utilize Ga MLS and also a smaller local mls in Athens, GA that does not require association membership, but actually cost the same for non association user as it does for those who are asociation members, HOWEVER it does NOT require membership from every agent in the office – my commercial agents choose not to participate in the local mls even though some of them are members of the association.
July 9, 2008 — 10:54 am
Mike Farmer says:
No, I was confirming that Ga is that way — you have to belong to the association to have access to the MLS — I said inexpertly but I meant it should be otherwise — voluntary with no ties to the MLS.
July 9, 2008 — 10:55 am
Carolyn Gjerde-Tu says:
I’m involved in my local association and from my perspective it seems like there is a shortage of tech-savvy members involved in the decision making process. Zipforms seems like it was probably a pretty decent program but seems about 10 years out of date.
July 10, 2008 — 7:35 am
Tom Farley says:
Greg,
You wrote, “Tom Farley, the new CEO of the Arizona Association of Realtors actually called me in response to that post, but I could not manage to convey to him the importance of multiple, competing vendors to a free — or even quasi-free — market. What he told me is that, instead of Zipforms, in the future we will be inflicted with a different hopelessly buggy Windows-only piece of crap software. I know the man was in deep earnest, and I know that he thinks what he is doing is the best he can do, and I am beyond dismayed that, seemingly no one in the vast NAR cartel can understand that SOCIALISM DOES NOT WORK!” I think a few things need to be stated here for the record.
I called you to learn about the problems you and others encounter with ZipForms and how they might be resolved. That may mean working with ZipForms to correct problems, contracting with another “e-forms” vendor or simply using fillable PDF smart form for AAR forms. I never stated that it was my intent to inflict the membership with a different hopelessly buggy Windows-only piece of crap software. For the record, AAR is in the process of supporting two e-forms providers: ZipForms and TrueForms. TrueForms seems to be quicker than the current ZipForms product, but ZipForms is launching a newer version on a Java platform instead of their current forms viewer platform. You may not like either forms provider, but the record should reflect that changes are occurring.
There are several problems in providing AAR forms to “any vendor”. For starters, the association will end up providing technical support to our members for several form vendors and those forms may or may not communicate or integrate with other systems including multiple listing service providers, transaction management systems, etc. Secondly, if a form needs to be updated because of a court case, a new material defect or a law/rule passes at the federal or state level; the association will end up chasing down more than one vendor to change the form to comply with the new mandate. I can tell you that converting the AAR forms to work in the TrueForms system has been no walk in the park. Matter a fact; it is a tedious line-by-line review process for the benefit of our members and their clients. Lastly, while it may sound like a good idea to license, at will, the use of AAR’s forms to as many vendors as possible in the name of a free market place, the only beneficiaries I can see are the vendors. I fail to see how giving away our intellectual property contained in the forms to any forms vendor will provide a lower cost to our membership.
I appreciate the comment that you believe that I am in “deep earnest” and that I am doing the best I can do. That is the reason that I contacted you to learn more about the problems you and others describe within your blog. By the way, I am still waiting for the in-person meeting with you to occur so that we can talk about forms, blogs and social networking. I am still game. Are you?
It is time to sign-off now as the Olympics are on and Michael Phelps is about to race for gold…again.
August 14, 2008 — 10:40 pm
Sam says:
I am so happy I am not a Realtor. How about someone offering competition to NAR (and is subsequent state and local boards), by starting a new organization that offers such freedoms and is based on freedom as its founding principle. Oh and this new association would not only listen to its member agents and brokers, but the public at large. It’s that or just do not be a Realtor and have an attorney draft some basic forms contract forms and be on standby for unique contract situations.
Just some thoughts.
Sam
December 17, 2008 — 12:17 am
Susan says:
I think Carolyn’s point is well taken. Zipforms probably just needs some updating. Perhaps they can hire a techy to take a look and bring the program up to speed.
December 21, 2008 — 8:24 am