Home

You must login or register to post a comment.

 
Submitted by Bruce Ailion on May 22, 2012 - 8:10pm.

The concerns raised by Edina express more concern for the broker's ability to capture buyers than the sellers concern for having their property broadly exposed to the market. Personally I advertise heavily on Realtor.com Trulia, Zillow,Homes.com and other Internet sites. My clients receive a steady flow of prospects, I make more sales sooner rather than later. As with the MLS I am never concerned that a buyer found another agent to buy my listings. Brokers should display listings where buyers are looking and that is on the sites, Edina has pulled their listings from.

Years ago, some brokers refused to put lockboxes on their listings to protect the homeowner and force co-brokers to come to their office to sign out a key. The age old capacity for brokers to protect their full commission by protecting the seller from showings and exposure is slow to die.

Bruce Ailion,
RE/MAX Greater Atlanta
CRS, CRB, ABR, MSRE, CDPE, e-PRO, ESQ
Bruce@LocationLocationLocation.com

 
Submitted by david holland on May 22, 2012 - 11:31pm.

Bruce,
Actually Edina's concerns are important for all our profession. Example - you have a listing in Atlanta and put a sign in the yard with your name and number - so, following your opinion noted above - I can also put my realtor sign in your yard with my name and number? No - you would have a violation on me so quick my head would spin. This is your listing and all contacts should be directed to you which is a benefit of the hard work you invested getting the listing. Edina does want "their" listings to be exposed to the broad audience - However, they want recognition (their name and contact info) where recognition is due - period. Per Gary Keller and many other great listing realtors - listings generate leads. Sometimes the buyer does want that particular home but other times the discussion reveals other requirements in which the listing broker can help them achieve their purchasing goals. Listing brokers should not be held hostage - period. I hope you would agree? This is extremely important to all of us that are putting our best efforts in our profession. I noted you advertise heavily on Zillow and Trulia? is this why you disagree?

 
Submitted by Jan Chilton - Myrtle Beach Web Design and SEO on May 23, 2012 - 12:16am.

The other thing you aren't looking at is how with all the money you (or they) invest in having a great website with an expensive IDX, perhaps using pay-per-click ads, or blogging till your fingers bleed... When you list your content on Realtor.com, Trulia, Zillow, or any of them, what you are doing is promoting THEIR websites. And then they turn around and sell you back your own leads.

This type of corporate and nationwide taking over of agents' websites in the search engines is pervasive, and only those of us in the industry understand it. Some of the franchises are now doing very agressive marketing with Yahoo LOCAL and Yellow Pages - and they are removing YOUR website link and replacing it with the corporate links. Even Allstate is doing this...probably all of the big corps either are now or soon will be.

Used to be when you searched for something like "Las Vegas Real Estate" or "Charlotte NC homes for sale" you got a page of agency sites. Now, you get Realtor.com, Trulia, Yahoo Real Estate, and AOL before the local agent sites. There is a reason for this...and it's because so many are listing with them and it's manipulating the search engines. Better keep a check on your Google and Yahoo Local and Maps listings, because one day you may see Century21.com there instead of your own website. You all need to be banding together to fight this. Every bit of content and every link you have to these sites will contribute to making them show up before your own website. Pull the plug on it, and they won't be able to take over.

 
Submitted by Matthew Rathbun on May 23, 2012 - 3:12am.

My question is simply this... Would the decision to not syndicate be different if Dual Agency was not permitted in their state?

Matthew Rathbun | Vice President
Coldwell Banker Elite
Fredericksburg, VA
www.TheAgentTrainer.com

 
Submitted by Timothy Krause on May 23, 2012 - 3:21am.

Hooray for Edina! My hat off to you! As Realtors we work so hard to get sellers/buyers and why should we be subject to the inaccuracies of these 3rd party websites or pay additional fees to promote ourselves when it is our listing...I have had sellers contact me regarding the inaccuracies or photos that won't pull from the MLS properly etc...
I applaud you for taking a stance!

 
Submitted by Teresa Boardman on May 23, 2012 - 4:47am.

"Samuelson said it is his understanding that Edina Realty's decision to stop providing listings to third-party sites "is based in large part on a desire to channel as many consumers as possible through their own website."

I love the idea of having my customers on my own web site instead of driving them to someone else's. If all of the third party sites vanished I am positive that we would still sell real estate. I applaud Edina Realty for saying no.

 
Submitted by Joe Farley on May 23, 2012 - 5:02am.

I hope more brokerages follow Edina Realty's lead. Third party sites have gotten out of hand and in my opinion the negatives outweigh the positives they bring. Their focus on mass marketing and volume which has minimized accuracy is telling. To be relevant, data has to be accurate and responsibility and accountability are oftentimes missing.

 
Submitted by John Rowles on May 23, 2012 - 5:32am.

As a developer of B2C eCommerce sites who moved to real estate, I have never understood how brokers got maneuvered into a position where they create the "product content" that drives the market on line, and then immediately give away the marketing power inherent in being the originator to third party sites that charge them for "enhancements" while positioning themselves to own the relationship with the buyer.

The argument that sellers are disadvantaged is dubious. Since the selling agent is the only agent who knows anything about the property, there is a benefit to being connected directly to the agent that accrues to the homebuyer at no additional cost to the selling agent or broker if that contact happens on their own domain. A smart listing content management strategy can make that happen more often.

The status quo doesn't make sense, it doesn't work this way anywhere else in the world with the exception of Canada, and the only way it will change is if brokers follow Edina's lead and either drop third-party sites or, at a minimum, stop giving them all the listing content they have on their own domains.

If brokers manage to get the syndication toothpaste back in the tube, can we then talk about how the duplicate listing content IDX feeds to hundreds or thousands of domains also works to the detriment of listing originators and homebuyers now that Google has made it abundantly clear that it is unimpressed by central databases that spew redundant content to many domains?

John Rowles
CEO
MainRhode Real Estate Search Tech. LLC

 
Submitted by Timothy English on May 23, 2012 - 5:46am.

NAR gave away too much control when the original deal was struck with Realtor.com.

The result has been the successor owners of Realtor.com charging Realtors to have their contact information appear next to a listing their Broker has supplied to Realtor.com through IDX agreements.

Each Realtor who wants to have contact info appear prominently along side photos and copy developed by their own sweat and effort must pay hundreds of dollars for the opportunity.

We are one of the many individual salespersons who paid thousands of dollars for this privilege in past years. We finally cut off cold turkey in January 2012. Our phone is still ringing and our Inbox is still receiving requests for showings.

Tim English
Sally English and The English Team
Realty Associates of Atlanta
404-235-8900

 
Submitted by David Barr on May 23, 2012 - 5:48am.

I applaud Edina Realty's move to cut out Realtor.com and other third party sites.

I firmly believe that agents and brokers who create their own robust online presence, with control over their own content and accuracy of data, provide a much more important user experience than a 3rd party website.

David Barr, Broker Associate
Sandals Realty of Sarasota
www.davidbarrhomes.com

 
Submitted by Janice Ruizzo on May 23, 2012 - 5:58am.

I applaud Edina's actions. I wouldn't mind if Realtor.com, Zillow and Trulia went away. The public has come to trust the info there and it is usually stale and incorrect. I spend more time explaining why my clients should just stay away, and use the links I give them to search the MLS. One time I found my own personal residence for sale on Zillow. How did it get there? No one knows!

 
Submitted by Deborah Fox on May 23, 2012 - 6:01am.

My concern is the direction of the industry to award work to those who spend the most... Buy your leads,buy your territory, buy to prevent us from allowing your competitors to buy space next to you - enhance or die, buy the latest technology....even from the website that is supposed to BEST SERVE their members, realtor.com. Is there an end to the number of ways to get another dollar out of a realtor's pocket? I applaud Edina's guts to say, "enough" .

 
Submitted by Ruthmarie Hicks on May 23, 2012 - 6:47am.

Wow, I was lurking to see what others would say. I applaud what Edina is doing. hey are saying "enough is enough". Frankly, around here third party sites are propagating like bunnies. When you type in an address, they are dwarfing legitimate Broker and IDX sites. Good luck even trying to find the listing agent in this mess.

OTOH - there is also a confusing message here for the public. We have been spending years trying to promote buyer agency. Directing the public into the arms of the listing agent whose fiduciary responsibility is to the seller is a peripheral issue, but not irrelevant since it has worked its way into the discussion.

The public deserves transparency here. That should include a clear understanding that the listing agent is NOT their advocate and is representing the interests of the seller. Third party sites also need to clearly state that they don't vet their "preferred agents" and that this list is comprised of people who flexed the most plastic.

What is most disturbing about third-party sites is that they really offer nothing of value that a brokerage IDX or Agent IDX can't offer. They succeed simply by crowding out these sites on search engines. In short, they are the ultimate pointless middle man siphoning hundreds of $$$ per transaction. For that reason, it is past time for brokerages and agents to take back control of their listing data.

 
Submitted by Tim Ziifle on May 23, 2012 - 7:01am.

Thank goodness Edina Realty finally woke up! Maybe others will after reading the following:

REALTORS ARE SO STUPID!!

It is fascinating to watch how the national and local REALTOR Associations' actions undermine their own member's knowledge, expertise, professionalism, continuing education, not to mention the horrendously high fees REALTORS have to pay to their national and local Associations in order to have access to the MLS system, which the public gets for FREE!

NAR and local REALTOR Associations continually marginalize their own REALTOR members in the real estate transaction. They continue to think that by constantly touting that they have a "Code of Ethics", that should be more than sufficient to convince the public that REALTORS are of value! What a joke!!
Now these Associations have finally agreed to aggregate all local MLS systems into a national MLS! YEAH!! The public can now know more about every market in the US than the vast majority of local REALTORS could ever know. Like Cramer says, "THEY KNOW NOTHING!"

NAR obviously has an agenda that is totally out of sync with its members' interests and REALTORS don't even get it. NAR’s executives have an agenda to grow the revenues of the National Association’s coffers regardless, whether it hurts the individual, stupid members.

Think of current NAR executives as being just like our current members of Congress, aka Princes and Princesses. You can voice your opinion with your individual voice or as the majority of REALTORS do, you just sit back indifferently, uninvolved and you say nothing. Consequently, you get TOTALLY ignored by both! Their mission is to grow revenues, which provides them with additional power to dictate terms – you are of NO consequence because you remain uninformed, uninvolved, quiet and therefore, stupid!
WANT PROOF OF REALTOR STUPIDY?
What other industry’s trade Association do you know, would…
Charge its members thousands of dollars each year to be a member of both the local, state and national Associations and then,
Require its individual members to spend huge amounts of gas, time, effort and money collecting, photographing and inputting tons of information into the members’ collective Association database, which, by the way, totally supports the individual members’ ability to generate their individual incomes then,
Tells its members that it will now give all their information to third-party entities for an UNSHARED FEE and ultimately, to the public for free, which totally undermines the individual members ability to continue to earn their incomes, as a result of all their hard work then,
Advises its members that their Association NOW intends to combine all their individual member’s information into a giant national database, and give that away too for additional unshared fees which will ultimately be made free to the public, so that eventually, there is absolutely little need for the public, anywhere in the country, to continue to believe that there are any valid reasons why they should hire the Association’s members for their individual knowledge, expertise and counsel and then,
The Association has the audacity to tell its members that their LIFE-LONG CAREER ASSOCIATION EXECUTIVES are looking out for the individual member’s best interest and to just make sure that all the future information they collect and input into the local database follows a standardized national format, is 100% correct and timely or they will be fined by the Association and then,
The national Association continues to propose more ways to generate additional revenues via, “Showcased”, “Enhanced” or “New And Improved Super-Duper, Deluxe Listing Advertising for a large, additional fee, all under the guise that this will ensure that REALTOR.COM remains competitive with the numerous third-party websites, which only exist because the national Association gave them access to the individual members’ data - for an UNSHARED FEE!
The individual Association members continue to actually believe this and continue to send in their thousands of dollars each year to their Association, in order to ensure the continuation of their MINDLESS REALTOR CULT! Many members even proudly wear a REALTOR pin to demonstrate their collective and individual stupidity and official cult member status!
THAT’S WHY REALTORS ARE SO STUPID - I KNOW BECAUSE I AM ONE AND I FEEL SO STUPID FOR ALLOWING ALL MY EFFORTS TO BE SO UNDERMINED BY NAR, TAR & HAR!!

 
Submitted by Sam DeBord on May 23, 2012 - 7:26am.

Realtor.com is not the same as a syndication site (Zillow, Trulia, etc). Brokers need to understand the difference.

Syndication sites are full of inaccuracy and outdated listings. Realtor.com is sourced directly from MLS systems and is highly accurate.

Companies like Edina make a wise decision when pulling their listings from inaccurate syndication websites. Realtor.com is not one of those websites.

The only reason to make this move is to direct a larger share of online traffic directly to Edina's website. For most brokers without an already large web presence, this move would not be beneficial.

Sam DeBord
Managing Broker, Realtor
SeattleHome.com - Coldwell Banker Danforth of Greater Seattle

 
Submitted by Douglas White on May 23, 2012 - 7:36am.

Third party sites are a joke! Zillow has information that's off by 30% thats being used by professional organizations. These sites hurt all of us! Get rid of them!

 
Submitted by greg fox on May 23, 2012 - 7:53am.

Interesting the comments went to agency and sharing the listings. Edina states they are STILL in IDX - they share the listings with other brokerages in their area. Those agents who would show the home and cooperate. Edina has not removed the listings from those sites. What I read is Edina wants the National Aggregators that CHARGE for the listings, or sell additional advertising around the listings. With IDX they retain agreed on control via their MLS.

As for REALTOR.com Advertising, the statement is correct on the detail page, other advertising doesn't show. But on the list pages, all kinds of advertising - other agents, some "flaky" ads about foreclosure, and more - appear. Things I don't agree with, and don't want to purchase the space. It seems REALTOR.com is not what I thought it would be when they started. It has become just another advertising avenue.

 
Submitted by Don Stewart on May 23, 2012 - 8:08am.

The real estate business is organized around the fact that individual real estate agents have little power - so they will pay fees, do what is asked of them so they are not drowned out, left behind.

It's the agent that finds new clients and gathers their listing data that becomes so valuable to everyone as soon as it leaves the agents hands.

Agents are the engine of this industry, but because they are individual small businesses, they are easily (and routinely) taken for granted.

 
Submitted by Vincent Spoto on May 23, 2012 - 8:14am.

Vincent

Hooray for Edina.

Let me add an additional mind boggling affront to our lively hood perpetuated by these third party sites.

We all know that getting high organic search results is critical to lead generation. We spend time and money trying to archive high rankings.

Then along comes Zillow, Trulia and others, they take our listing information and generate meta information with landing pages that compete directly with us.

This scheme is not in the best interest of our sellers. Why would it be when you click thru to a site with a recommended agent that knows little if anything about the listing?

Clearly, our interests and the interests of our sellers are not being protected.

 
Submitted by Nate Scott on May 23, 2012 - 9:57am.

Timothy English nailed it, and the other Tim had some great points though the delivery was...interesting.

NAR screwed us by giving away Realtor.com, and we pay for it today. What if NAR took back, or still had Realtor.com, charged each member a one time $100 fee (raised more than any other online aggregator's IPO) and built a website to rival Zillow, Trulia, etc... but maintained the data in a professional way, with no ongoing charges to it's membership. Each listing only had the listing agent, and listing company listed - nobody else. Period. No fee's charged for leads. Just a top notch site, owned and run by NAR, that actually was a benefit to it's members rather than the joke we have today. IF this happened, and maybe it's unlikely or impossible now that NAR has so screwed it's memebers, but IF it did happen, and the membership pulled listings from all the aggregators guess what would happen? They would go away. IF they lost the at least 1/2 of the content available in the states they would no longer be relevant and the traffic would go to the only place that was....Realtor.com.

NAR created this problem, I'd like to see them solve it in a way that is an actual benefit to it's members.

 
Submitted by Nate Scott on May 23, 2012 - 9:57am.

Timothy English nailed it, and the other Tim had some great points though the delivery was...interesting.

NAR screwed us by giving away Realtor.com, and we pay for it today. What if NAR took back, or still had Realtor.com, charged each member a one time $100 fee (raised more than any other online aggregator's IPO) and built a website to rival Zillow, Trulia, etc... but maintained the data in a professional way, with no ongoing charges to it's membership. Each listing only had the listing agent, and listing company listed - nobody else. Period. No fee's charged for leads. Just a top notch site, owned and run by NAR, that actually was a benefit to it's members rather than the joke we have today. IF this happened, and maybe it's unlikely or impossible now that NAR has so screwed it's memebers, but IF it did happen, and the membership pulled listings from all the aggregators guess what would happen? They would go away. IF they lost the at least 1/2 of the content available in the states they would no longer be relevant and the traffic would go to the only place that was....Realtor.com.

NAR created this problem, I'd like to see them solve it in a way that is an actual benefit to it's members.

 
Submitted by Nate Scott on May 23, 2012 - 9:57am.

Timothy English nailed it, and the other Tim had some great points though the delivery was...interesting.

NAR screwed us by giving away Realtor.com, and we pay for it today. What if NAR took back, or still had Realtor.com, charged each member a one time $100 fee (raised more than any other online aggregator's IPO) and built a website to rival Zillow, Trulia, etc... but maintained the data in a professional way, with no ongoing charges to it's membership. Each listing only had the listing agent, and listing company listed - nobody else. Period. No fee's charged for leads. Just a top notch site, owned and run by NAR, that actually was a benefit to it's members rather than the joke we have today. IF this happened, and maybe it's unlikely or impossible now that NAR has so screwed it's memebers, but IF it did happen, and the membership pulled listings from all the aggregators guess what would happen? They would go away. IF they lost the at least 1/2 of the content available in the states they would no longer be relevant and the traffic would go to the only place that was....Realtor.com.

NAR created this problem, I'd like to see them solve it in a way that is an actual benefit to it's members.

 
Submitted by Jonathan Bowen on May 23, 2012 - 12:03pm.

I really like what Edina Realty is doing here. Like Abbott Realty Group in San Diego, they are taking the lead in regaining control of their listings. And isn't control most important for a real estate broker to properly market their listings? Isn't that what a seller hires a real estate broker to do? To take leadership and control in order to sell their property for the most money possible? I currently market on the Realtor, Trulia and Zillow but am thinking strong and hard about paying for their "services" and syndicating my listings to these sites. I've been selling real estate for 13 years now and know that breadth of marketing isn't nearly as important as depth of marketing.

 
Submitted by Dennis Martino on May 23, 2012 - 12:13pm.

I'm sure we can all agree, that as Realtors we are held hostage by these third party websites. My hat off to Edina for taking a stand, and not doing business as usual.
Nate Scott hit it out of the park, with an amazing idea, for realtors to get back what we have lost through these 3rd party websites, and yes Realtor.com is one of them, weather you believe that or not. I have spent thousands of dollars through these companies to maintain control over my listing, only to be set up with them selling the same info to other agents. Why do I need to spend money to keep what I have worked so hard to get, my listings. With 23 years in the business as a Realtor, I have seen that we as Realtors have lost all control, with companies attaching themselves to information that the MLS,CAR,and NAR should have never released.
Its time to take back what we lost, the ability to put the correct information out there for the seller and the buyer. I'm not looking to "double pop" my listing, but I'm not looking to have some agent bring in an offer from a buyer, who neither knows the area, local pricing,( ie.. Zillows value on a property)or the community. I have received offers from agents, who live a 100 miles away, never been in the area,will never see the property, and sell to a buyer who will not be represented in their best interest. This has all become possible only through the likes of 3rd party websites.
I love what I do and when a sale closes I want to know that a seller and buyer have both made the right choice in a home. Not because of 3rd party websites "fast and Loose" information.

 
Submitted by Gary Balanoff on May 23, 2012 - 12:13pm.

The genie is out of the bottle. Some of the comments above remind me of when there was an MLS "book" with all listings, and it was marked "Confidential" and it was a violation to disclose MLS info to the public. Those days are gone, they are not coming back, so let's all just get over that. The thing I object to is that we were all sold a bill of goods when Realtor.com came out...you don't have to pay anything to have your listings distributed because it is all part of MLS and Realtor membership, a service paid for through membership. Now, we are all paying a boatload of money to run this system and if we want enhancements, those are running into the thousands per year for companies and individual agents. Shame on NAR for selling out our interests to make a buck off their own hard working members.

 
Submitted by Bruce Ailion on May 23, 2012 - 1:09pm.

Bruce Ailion,
RE/MAX Greater Atlanta
CRS, CRB, ABR, MSRE, CDPE, e-PRO, ESQ
Certified Residential Specialist
Certified Real Estate Broker
Accredited Buyers Agent
MS Real Estate and Urban Affairs
Certified Distressed Property Expert
Certified Int

 
Submitted by Bruce Ailion on May 23, 2012 - 1:09pm.

Bruce Ailion,
RE/MAX Greater Atlanta
CRS, CRB, ABR, MSRE, CDPE, e-PRO, ESQ
Certified Residential Specialist
Certified Real Estate Broker
Accredited Buyers Agent
MS Real Estate and Urban Affairs
Certified Distressed Property Expert
Certified Int

 
Submitted by Grant Hammond on May 23, 2012 - 1:21pm.

The true owners of the listing information, the originating real estate brokerages and MLS providers, are upset their information is being sold back to them. At the same time, these same real estate brokerages want their listings to accurately reach as many potential buyers and sellers as possible in order to sell as many properties as humanly possible. But, the reality is that the syndication model is based in an era that is no longer applicable. Realtors no longer need 3rd party aggregators to disseminate listing information as they did 15 years ago. Almost all real estate brokerages and real estate agents have websites with a direct MLS feed. This was not the case 15 years ago.

These aggregators will perish as soon as Realtors reproduce the same search experience.

Grant Hammond, Owner/Broker, ABR, SFR, ePRO
Grant@GrantHammond.com
mobile: 615.945.7123
office: 615.200.8422
wk fax: 615.246.4282
hm fax: 615.298.2618
www.GrantHammond.com

5-Star Rated for Excellence in Client Satisfaction:
2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011
Awarded for Exceptional Service, Knowledge, & Integrity

Metropolitan Brokers, LLC
Luxury Home & High-Rise Specialists
TN Firm #261980

 
Submitted by Bruce Ailion on May 23, 2012 - 2:38pm.

I am surprised by the level of concern in this area. I continue to believe the focus should be on the seller's goals to have their property broadly marketed, and sold at top dollar quickly, not the REALTOR's rights to and ownership of the listing information and the buyers for that property. We serve the seller; truly it is there information, their buyers we are given the privilege to serve. REALTORS are conduits, purveyors, not owners.

I was intrigued by the agent that commented it would be a violation to put his competing sign in my listings yard therefore it should be a violation to put his competing advertisement next to a photo of my listing on line. If putting a competitors sign next to mine would get my listing sold faster, at a higher price and earn me a commission, I'm not so certain the seller or I would be crying on our way to the bank. There is a legitimate concern that if a buyer wants to speak directly with the listing agent, they may end up talking to someone else with less information about the specific property. It is distressing that when you search an address on Google everyone but the listing agent's contact information is displayed. Even so, I would rather buyers find my listings whether I receive credit or not than buyers not find my listing.

There are few REALTORS who would advise a buyer, “only deal directly with the listing agent”, in fact, most would advise a buyer they be represented by a REALTOR, not the listing agent. Face it buyers took that advice; they look for homes, and then call any number of agents till they find one to represent them. In fact while it is less financially enriching, the far better practice is for the listing agent to represent the seller and buyer to be represented by a buyer’s agent. In a way the present system encourages that policy.

I was not practicing real estate in the 50's and early 60's but I'm told that there was not an equal division of fees between the listing and selling agent. The listing agent received substantially less and the selling agent received the vast majority of the commission. Hording keys, hording listing data increased the probability that the listing agent received more compensation. The online marketers have picked up on the power the buyer has in the market and the days of simply getting the listing and waiting for a fee, particularly a double sided fee are all but over. If you are not paying for enhanced marketing on these 3rd party sites that buyers are using, someone else will be capturing those buyers. Pulling listings is like not putting your listings in the MLS for fear another agent will find the listing and perhaps sell it.

We are in a new world, staying in bed and pulling the covers over our heads is not a strategy it is a fear based inadequate response.

Bruce Ailion,
RE/MAX Greater Atlanta
CRS, CRB, ABR, MSRE, CDPE, e-PRO, ESQ
Certified Residential Specialist
Certified Real Estate Broker
Accredited Buyers Agent
MS Real Estate and Urban Affairs
Certified Distressed Property Expert
Certified Int

 
Submitted by Ronny Geenen on May 23, 2012 - 3:05pm.

There is one more thing that most Realtors are not aware. In our MLS Rules and Regulations item 12.16 says: Sold/Leased listings may be displayed by Data Exchange participants for the period of 1 year follow the sold/lease date of the subject listing. The intend of IDX is to allow participants that represents sellers and/or buyers to permit other to advertise their listings on their public web sites. What about the authors and copyrights of the professional photographers who are the owners of the pictures.
The pictures were taken to sell/lease that property through the MLS and when the deal closed, the right to use the photos by syndicators should be over or pay a fee to the owner photographer.

 
Submitted by Tina Fine on May 23, 2012 - 5:36pm.

Tina Fine CEO/homingCloud
I think Edina's decision makes a great deal of sense. All brokerages should stop feeding listings to third party sites, and realtor.com and create one national MLS. All those advertising dollars are wasted and just keep prices high to consumers of brokerage services.

 
Submitted by Veronica Hicks on May 23, 2012 - 10:33pm.

As the owner of a small brokerage I totally support the pulling of REALTOR listings from Zillow, Trulia, REALTOR.com, Listhub and every other overnight pop up site that wants to sell me some premium subscription to display the very listings that I have had to work so hard to get.

In my experience with my own local association, I have to tell you that the Associations are their own worst enemies. They aren't business people, they are political in nature, and aren't skilled or quipped to make decisions, let alone such significant decisions as to how to handle listing syndication. These are the people who make our decisions for us .. and I have to tell you it is VERY scary. The first thing that needs to happen is to have business people running FEWER associations that have a fiduciary responsibility to it's members. So we can actually get things done! People actually skilled and qualified to make these decisions.

I applaud Edina Realty and all the others who are withholding their listings from REALTOR.com - I am sick of getting that weekly call from some REALTOR.com sales associate who has the next greatest program for my ZIP CODE (note that I work about 20 zip codes) for only $200 / month - for 1 zip code .. and not ONE of those programs is tested and in fact they can't even give you their own performance statistics! And probably half the traffic that REALTOR.com promotes is from REALTORS! Not consumers!

REALTORS are the source of the content .. why do we give it away? What a goldmine for companies like Zillow who has really only been around for 6 or 7 years and they created their company off the backs of REALTORS ..

Perhaps there should be a Nationwide member vote with an online petition on syndication and see what the members want.

It is time to take the listings back - let the members benefit .. let the syndication services pay for the listings they get ..

 
Submitted by Michele Kitchin on May 24, 2012 - 10:20am.

If, we all priced our houses right... we would not need Realtor.com and the others... Agents using our MLS is the best source of advertising.. Personally, and professionally, I don't like any buyer viewing my listings unless they are PRE-APPROVED buyers. Since, I do not due "duel agency," I am happy to work with any agent and their pre-approved buyer. NAR, The National Association of Realtors, teaches us that approximately 74% of our sales come from agents using the MLS. 15% come from calls off our yard signs, 8% of our buyers come from any and all advertising (this includes internet entities,) and the remaining 4% of buyers are the neighbors. I recommend all those working as a realtor read the NAR annual and detail statistic report. You will save a lot of out of pocket advertising expense, and when pricing your seller's house "right," based upon the most recent comparable sales, your seller in getting his house sold with a ready to go ~ pre-approved buyer that is working with their buyer's agent. A win~win for seller and buyer. Advertising makes the phone ring, you capture a buyer, and the percentage is very low that you will sell the house the buyer called on. You will switch to selling that buyer a different house. Most buyer's are savvy to overpriced listings. Not to say, i don't advertise; I do. I like to remind those... I am working in selling real estate ; sharing a property I am representing, and hopefully will get a call to list or sell a house.

 
Submitted by Dustin Kuschel on May 25, 2012 - 7:01am.

Veronica,
I couldn't have said it better my self! The entire business model of giving out our information for free so we can have it sold back to us is so unbelievable. We have been out of Zillow and Trulia for some time now and I can tell you that I have never had one seller ever second guess our decision to not send listings to those sites. As one comment suggested the only people that benefit from these sites are those that pay the most and not the seller. When I have been hired by a seller to sell their property, they are trusting me that I am going to advertise their listing accurately. When a listing is displayed on a third party site that I cannot control and inaccuracies are displayed, I'm sorry, but that is NOT working for your seller! I don't think there is a REALTOR out there that wants to be responsible for a lawsuit that may arise because of inaccurate information that is being disseminated through these sites. I can assure you that these sites are not going to take that liability!! These sites are a the byproduct of a real estate boom that took place and people wanting a piece of that pie.

Dustin Kuschel
REALTOR | CDPE
Edina Realty

 
Submitted by Fred Strickroot on May 26, 2012 - 5:45am.

I have mixed feelings about the recent movement of some brokerages to pull their listings from syndication, but I agree that the inaccuracies of the 3rd party sites is out of control, and these 3 party site seem to care little about doing anything to improve that. Recently, a "BOGUS" user whom I had never worked with, went onto my Zillow profile and posted a maliciously defamatory review. I know that I never worked with this person, and I flagged the review as "FALSE" but Zillow refuses to remove the review. I can only imagine that this has happened to other Realtors as well. I shall hope that we will all be able to formulate something that will keep the best interests of the consumer in mind.

Fred Strickroot, MBA, CDPE
HomeNet
Florida Lic. Real Estate Brokerage

 
Submitted by KR SCHRADER on May 26, 2012 - 6:43am.

ALL of this "LA vs SA" goes away when "both sides"
becomes passe and you must either be a Listing Broker/Agent or Buyers Broker/Agent and not handle both sides. Greed destroys and real representation for your client can not be accomplished when you handle both sides. Be honest...would you purchase from a listing agent? Do you really think you can be unbiased doing "both sides" ??? I know I am going to get a lot of play on this opinion....!!

 
Submitted by Timothy DeWein on May 26, 2012 - 6:47am.

realtor.com is OWNED by NAR, the folks who doubled our dues and now charges an additional $5 for a membership card that we used to get for free. Without Realtors, realtor.com would have no data to display on their site and no data means no advertising income stream.

realtor.com constantly provides misinformation about my listings and don't get me started on Zillow's way off Zestimates.

I applaud Edina's move.

 
Submitted by Brian Vaillancourt on May 26, 2012 - 7:48am.

I am not surprised by Edina Realty's move at all. My wife and I are very active agents in North Idaho and got tired of Realtor.com excessive charges for Showcase listings and really getting no results. We dropped our paid participation with Realtor.com and have not felt any effects at all in our business.

Victoria and Brian Vaillancourt
SKE Realty Group LLC
Post Falls, ID.

 
Submitted by Lester S on May 26, 2012 - 8:48am.

In response to Matthew Rathbun.....I suggest no, banning dual agency would not change Edina's position because as much as most agents do like to get both ends of a sale occasionaly, it is more likely that a buyer/prospect inquiring about a listing will end up buying something else. As much as branding/marketing yourself as an agent is valuable, I suggest that buyers are looking for homes not agents, so it is important to remember this as you market your listings (listings draw buyers).....and the more exposure your listings get on these sites the better (for seller and agent), yes, but I agree with Edina that our efforts/listings should not be sold as billboards to other agents.....let them sell marketing space elsewhere....it wouldn't work, the fact that they are selling these "billboards" only proves my premise that listings draw buyers. This would of course drive the cost of posting listings on these sites way up, or, we wouldn't subscribe and bingo, these sites would dry up and traffic would flow back to our own sites/listings. "Lester the Lister" @ RE/MAX 1st, Elmhurst, IL

 
Submitted by John Barelli on May 28, 2012 - 3:58pm.

The simple question here is, does the listing agent work for the seller, or for him or herself?

If the listing agent is working for the seller, with the seller's best interest in mind, then he or she will want all the exposure possible.

If, however, the listing agent is working more for him or herself, then I can understand the adverse reaction to having listings show up where some other agent might bring clients or even (through IDX and similar systems) get leads.

Listing agents work hard, and that is why they get paid a commission. Most listing agents consider a listing to be a contract to market and sell a property, and an obligation to put the seller's interest ahead of his or her own.

Some see the seller and the seller's property as little more than a tool to develop more business.

I wonder if they mention that to the seller during the listing presentation?