There are many comments here about the useless of Trulia and Zillow and I agree with those comments – these companies COMPETE directly with individual agents who have local website – yet we are foolish enough to continue sending them listings. How stupid is that?

Realtor.com is also a competitor, and using PPC in local markets to find position and clients online. What is to stop a national MLS from doing yet the same thing. As it is now, we even have to compete against our local MLS board for space online.

Yet there will always be those who insist that consolidation is the way to go. In most cases they are the one with little or no web presence in their local markets.

Saul says that his ES says nothing about NAR control, so in that vein, who would operate it if not NAR? Would it be the same 50, or are we talking something newer and bigger for R.C to completely fly into the side of a mountain? More questions than answers seems to be the rule here because as per usual real engagement isn’t taking place.

Come on Saul, we know you’re reading- close the deal…

OK, with just the example of Foster and Weichert I get your meaning better. Sorry, I needed it in a local context. I agree that numbers do yield power….

So, in essence your saying franchises have a great influence than brokerages – got it. I agree.

SOMEONE is still going to make money at the MLS.

Might it be less? Yes. What industry has not had to deal with the web economy.

Fewer employees? Yes (…see above parens…)

More info, faster – and for free? Yes. The consumer demands it.

And hats off to the Wisconsin Realtors Associaton beginning to unite MLSs with the WIREX project.

Steve
Obeoman

If the “thing” is the best destination and resource for consumers, then the value will be there for Realtors. My request has always been the same – get the best, most comprehensive and accurate data/information and let the Realtors innovate from there.

The driving force behind this is not the big companies, but the smaller ones in my state. There are several big Regional MLS’s in Mi and the “elephant in the room” is NOT behind it.

The bottom line for most MLS boards is their members having to pay MLS fees to belong to different boards in order to get to the data. Everyone I spoke to and heard from is tired of that. To belong to 3 in my area is at a cost of 120.00 per month in MLS fees.

At this point, the Boards are in survival mode, they don’t want to lose their “identity”, and if this occurred they would be laying off staff. We would only be paying around 33.00 per month instead of the 120.00.

With the advent of IDX and agents selling homes far out of their area, here is what I am seeing. Potential buyers find a home on Trulia, or Zillow, calls agent with MLS number or address, agent can’t find it, we look stupid. Consumers can find it, but the Realtors can’t.

As an agent you look it up on r do com or Trulia, have to call the broker who has it listed. Many times it is sold or been off the market for years. Now how is that selling our value proposition to the consumer? How is that saving time?

IMO, NAR is trying to take back control that they lost many years ago by claiming the data again. Anyone know how it is working out with State wide MLS’s ?

IMHO, NAR is trying to perserve it’s identity, but the reason agents will go for it is access to all the data through a reliable source with rules for sold listings, compensation etc… They gave it away, now they want it back.