Brokerage slapped for Web violations
CondoDomain runs afoul of MLS rules
By Glenn Roberts Jr., Friday, June 6, 2008.Bookmarking Sites
UPDATE: The word "not" was added to the sentence explaining that MLSPIN rules have not been changed recently, where it previously was erroneously omitted.
In January, the owners of condo-search site CondoDomain.com overhauled their business model and launched brokerage operations.
But joining the region's multiple listing service had the unintended consequence of knocking the company's online search tools out of compliance with MLS rules.
To address the violations, CondoDomain.com has pulled back some of its Web site's features behind a registration wall so that only registered members of the site can have access to them.
"We're going to keep all of the content that we can publicly available and transparent," said Anthony Longo, who is founder, CEO and broker of record for CondoDomain. "And the things we have to put under lock and key -- we will do that."
For example, the company formerly allowed all unregistered users to view information about sold properties, though that data is now only available to registered users who log in at the site.
Also, unregistered users can no longer search by address or view mapped properties at street detail or individual house detail -- those tools also require that users be registered and logged in.
Among the other details that require users to register and sign in: price per square foot, year built, builder source, name of complex, number of units, heating, cooling, taxes and tax year, the company reported.
Longo said that he met with MLS Property Information Network officials last month, when he was changing the brokerage company's name from his personal name to CondoDomain.com.
While he said he had studied the MLS guidelines "very closely" in designing the site, he also realized that "I was floating in a gray area" with some of the site's features.
"Every feature that we've had will still be available once you've logged into the site," he said.
What is a thorn in Longo's side is that real estate search sites that are not MLS members -- he referred to them as "the 'Trulias' of the world" -- "currently don't have to abide by the same rules, which took me by surprise. I thought we all had to abide by the same rules."
Because CondoDomain must put some of its tools behind a registration wall, that will inevitably have a negative impact on its Google search rankings, as Google won't be able to index some areas of the site that are closed off to unregistered users, Longo said.
Also, as a Web-based brokerage company "every bit of our marketing is online," and the MLS requirements "will hurt us immediately" and put the company "at a great disadvantage on the Web."
The company's approach, Longo said, will be to notify consumers using the Web site that the required registration to access some property information and search features is specifically related to MLS regulations, and "is not a tactic of trying to get you to register so we can spam you. We're going to make that crystal clear."
In a blog item at the CondoDomain site, Longo referred to the company's rule violations as getting its "hand slapped," and noted that the MLS officials "are awesome and just doing their job. We have always had a great relationship with them. These rules and regulations don't reflect negatively on MLS. Even though some rules I do not agree with personally, we all have to live by them and we hope other competing Web sites will do the same."
Kathleen E. Condon, president and CEO for MLS PIN, said that MLS rules have not changed recently relating to registration requirements to access property information.
Despite its Web site hiccups, Longo said the company is marching ahead with plans to expand its brokerage operations into new markets.
"We hope to see another one or two open in July," he said, and perhaps dozens more offices across the country. The Web site had previously served 33 urban market areas, he said, and is aiming to launch brokerage operations in those markets.
The company has a very specialized niche in offering flat-fee buyer's brokerage services in downtown areas. Under the company's flat-fee business model, CondoDomain keeps $5,000 of its commission and refunds the remainder to buyers.
CondoDomain is not the first online real estate site to launch brokerage operations: Redfin.com and RealEstate.com are among its predecessors.
***
What's your opinion? Leave your comments below or send a letter to the editor. To contact the writer, click the byline at the top of the story.
All rights reserved. This article may not be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever, in part or in whole, without written permission of Inman News. Use of this article without permission is a violation of federal copyright law.
You must login or register to post a comment.
Submitted by Terry Shortt on June 6, 2008 - 5:48am.
Here is another example of real estate industry obstruction (in this case a local MLS).
In this we have a broker employing technology that’s about ten years ahead of the industry.
What consumers want is information. They want it by visiting a web site (exactly what this broker was offering).
None of the information that he was offering was detrimental to either the seller, the buyer , MLS members or other broker members.
In spite of that, MLS rules placed outdated and antiquated restrictions on him.
Until the real estate industry culture of protectionism (and fear of becoming obsolete)evolves to catch up with technology, the public will continue to distrust real estate agents.
Terry Shortt, CRS, GRI
Broker, Instructor
TW Shortt and Associates
Fl. Real Estate SChool
And Training Company
Key West,Florida, USA
Submitted by John Rowles on June 6, 2008 - 6:38am.
You got that right, Terry.
One more point: The longer MLS holds onto these fear-based, protectionist policies (and the MLSPIN has one of the most restrictive IDX policies we deal with), the more attractive the "Trulias of the world" become to Homebuyers and Sellers.
Its the nature of the network. Information really does want to be free, and the network will naturally route around artificial road blocks. The internet was originally developed to route around cities that were obliterated in a nuclear attack. A protectionist MLS Board is not much of a challenge -- ask the recording industry.
While the MLS restricts access to to useful data, the MLS's own members are making sites like Trulia more useful than MLS sites by supplying data they can't show on their own sites sans login, data that Trulia then mashes up with other data to create an excellent user experience.
The only advantage the MLS data has is market coverage, but the longer this goes on, the more brokers and sellers will give up the data to third parties. There is no choice: Are you going to let your competitor take all the Trulia traffic in your area uncontested? Of course not.
In other words, a policy meant to protect some perceived advantage in "controlling" data is having the exact opposite effect.
John Rowles
Managing Director
MainRhode LLC
Google Search Powered IDX Solutions
Submitted by Ralph M on June 6, 2008 - 6:56am.
Wow, how the old dinosaur (MLS entity) has reared its ugly head again. Lets allow the trulias to advance forward and remove attention away from the mls system and handcuff any/all members of the mls system from advancing themselves......EVOLUTION at its finest..
Congrats to all of the mls (who complain but still follow the cow into the slaughter mill) members who pay for what???? Keeping reology in the top 500 fortune ranks! Where would they be without you paying members?
www.aarsteam.com
www.nosellercost.com
www.weuuzit.com
www.iuuzit.com
Submitted by Mega Broker on June 6, 2008 - 7:28am.
We face this same crazy issue. MLS's impede innovation by brokers while Trulia and Zillow gain online market share.
Talk about the tail wagging the dog. Hefty fees on our agents pay for the cushy jobs at the MLS, then the MLS turn around and restricts the hand that feeds it from competing.
Don't the idiots that run the MLS's see that it is Trulia and Zillow they need to fear, not their own brokers?
Submitted by John Keith on June 6, 2008 - 7:52am.
To clarify a couple of points:
There are two levels of information offered by our MLS (MLSPIN). The first is "general" data. Any agency in Boston can show this information on its website. Any buyer can look at it, without providing any personal identification - no email, etc. The property listing won't include address, but it will include square footage, number of beds and baths, and neighborhood (if it's within the city of Boston). It also includes the name and company of the listing agent.
If the buyer is willing to provide an email address, then he/she can get much more detailed information, including address, property description, condo fees, tax data, assessed value, etc.
The advantage for most buyers' agents is, by asking for an email address, agents are able to create a relationship. The buyers aren't able to look "for free". The first-level of information is the bait. If the buyer likes what he/she sees, he/she will give up an email address to find out more.
By having two levels of information, MLSPIN is also protecting its listing agents. If a buyer sees the general information and the listing agent's name, the buyer has the option of contacting that agent, directly. In this way, the seller's agent is "rewarded" for having the listing. Because, at this point, the buyer's agent has done nothing to create a relationship with the buyer, beyond advertising the listing.
Our MLS (MLSPIN) is very progressive. It has cutting-edge technology. Most agents and brokers in Boston are very happy with it. (It's also the deal of the century, at only $27 per month.)
It is also very clear on its rules and regulations. It should be no surprise to ANY brokerage in Boston what you are required to do.
All of the information a buyer would like to see is available. The only requirement is that a buyer sign-up with an email address. Not too much to ask.
The contracts that Trulia (and other companies) have signed allow them to pull all the data, including addresses. But, if a Boston brokerage wishes to share all its information with Trulia, the brokerage must "opt-in" to allow access.
At some point, we all assume MLSPIN will make the rules "universal", meaning that listing agencies can "opt-in" to provide all information to all agencies.
If you read the above article and come away thinking there is some sort of obstructionist policy going on, you're mistaken.
Oh, and to the commenters: some of you work for companies that compete with MLSs, etc. Well, of course, you're against any MLS rules or regulations. It's because of these rules that you can't take MLS information, for free. You want access to the data, even though you aren't real estate agents.
Real estate agents pay for MLSPIN; shouldn't we be allowed to decide who gets access to our listings?
I mean, really.
Submitted by Kathleen Condon on June 6, 2008 - 8:10am.
I'd like to point out that Mr. Roberts and I never spoke but I did leave him a voice mail that stated the MLS PIN had NOT made any recent changes to our rules and regulations regarding office web sites. I have asked that a correction be made.
Submitted by Jessica Swesey on June 6, 2008 - 8:21am.
Kathleen -- we have updated your statement in the story to reflect that there have not been recent changes to MLSPIN rules. We apologize for the error.
Jessica Swesey
VP of Content
Inman News
Submitted by Anthony Longo on June 6, 2008 - 8:36am.
Hey Kathleen - We should connect. As you can imagine this story is hot to trot with the recent outcome of the DOJ / NAR suit.
As you know we are a big fan of PIN and its progressive nature and are proud to be members! I guess what the larger of the issues at hand is the dual standards of raw data IDX feed's for non-broker sites to broker sites.
Best example is what everyone has been talking about - Trulia gets to display information more transparent than I can with CondoDomain.com as a licensed real estate broker.
PS - We love Trulia & their biz model and all of the guys there too. So we are trying to keep this conversation positive and on the up & up...but do need an understanding not necessarily form PIN but from MLS officials nationally as to why the dual standards.
Isn't their a piece in the settlement about non-broker sites who aren't practicing brokerage and their limitation on data access? Anyone dig into this yet?
Anthony Longo
Founder & CEO, CondoDomain.com
Visit the all new http://Boston.CondoDomain.com
Submitted by Ralph M on June 6, 2008 - 11:02am.
Limitation on Data-access? Did anyone hear of county public records that are already online.....for FREE??
If their is an agent Out their with knowledge and a little due diligence, ANYONE can access the county’s real estate info for FREE.
Why would anyone pay for real estate sales information whenmost countys offers it for FREE online?
John Keith, “Oh, and to the commenter’s: some of you work for companies that compete with MLSs, etc. Well, of course, you're against any MLS rules or regulations”
Most MLS members do not even know your own mls rules because they change on a spur of the moment. Didn’t you see the point about the “GREY AREA” of the above article? Your Mls is dying....Wake Up!
I am for the MLS. Without your REALTOR MLS, we wouldn’t have better real estate search websites for the public to view, see trulia, zillow, and 100 others. It is the thinking of real estate associates like your selves that can’t see through the woods and can not belive their mls is dying and better companies are rising up with superior websites.
Other than, your local county real estate records not being available online, why would you or ANYONE pay to be a member to get real estate sales data or to “search” real estate for sale?
And what information do you have in your MLS that someone would want to OPT IN and no other MLS companies or free real estate search companies do NOT already have?
Do you offer Actual Video capability for all of your MLS members to utilize?
What does your MLS offer that others do not and why don't you offer your mls link as a url as other members here? Promote it!
www.aarsteam.com
www.nosellercost.com
www.weuuzit.com
www.iuuzit.com
Submitted by Richard Greenwood on June 6, 2008 - 11:32am.
Old ways of doing business are
www.GoneWithTheWeb.com
It's clear that Trulia gets that...
why can't we?????
Submitted by John Rowles on June 6, 2008 - 12:28pm.
With all due respect, Mr. Kieth, my clients are MLS member brokers and agents, and policies like these impair my ability to innovate on behalf of my clients or compete with third party sites as a destination.
Perhaps you hand out your email address all over the Web like a Real Estate agent passing out business cards at a Chamber of Commerce mixer, but the Gen X and Gen Y 'ers that are already 80+% of first time home buyers, in fact, do not.
Registering for something they can get elsewhere without the hassle is just not something most of them are going to do. I hate to be the one to break it to you, but that is the reality of the Web as it exists today, as opposed to how you seem to wish things were.
I get it -- traditional Real Estate had a nice run for as long as the MLS was the gatekeeper of the market information, but that is over. The entrepreneurs who are innovating around you, free of MLS restrictions, are counting on you to cling to the vestiges of control instead of meeting them head on. Do you really want to be their patsy?
I see from your statement "By having two levels of information, MLSPIN is also protecting its listing agents" that you agree with me that this is a protectionist policy.
Protectionism can only work when customers do not have access to the market through other means. Since Trulia and others can already offer a better user experience in the Mass. market than I can offer using IDX data, that toothpaste has already left the tube.
If the policy protects exactly nothing, and has the effect of hurting the people who fund the organization that enforces it, why have it?
John Rowles
Managing Director
MainRhode LLC
Google Search Powered IDX Solutions
Submitted by John Keith on June 6, 2008 - 3:41pm.
The vast majority of agents who use MLSPIN are extremely happy with the procedures and policies in place. Information is as free as can be expected - listings show up in all local newspapers, on Realtor.com, on Trulia, Zillow, Google Base, etc.
Those "third-party" websites are not agents, so they are not in direct competition with local agents. Perhaps this is why MLSPIN has two policies - one for brokerages and one for national website companies. I'm not sure why they have this rule.
There is no shortage of information available to buyers. You are all arguing something that does not exist, at least in Boston. I cannot attest to what happens elsewhere in the country, or the rules and regulations of the other 899 MLSs.
The third-party websites are not run by agents. These sites include links back to the listing agents' (brokerages, actually) websites. This is one reason why these sites are allowed to include all identifying information - because the only way to schedule appointments, etc., is to contact the listing agents.
Compare this with a site run by a competing broker. In fact, I don't want to include the listing brokers' contact information on my site - if it's there, then visitors to my site might just search online and contact the listing brokers, directly. It's better that there is a step in-between, where the buyer has to request full access. It gives me a chance to start a relationship.
Those of you who are running third party sites don't like this, because it allows agents to continue to control their business. You want a slice of the pie, and are looking to find any way in that you can.
Sorry, we pay for the listing services, we decide what's going to happen.
Submitted by Tom Miller on June 10, 2008 - 5:58pm.
Flat fee web sites are all over look at what we find on google.
www.mlsflatfeefsbo.com and other sites like FIZBer are all over.
I do not see webs influence stopping in real estate any time soon. Maybe 100 years.
Submitted by Eric Cunliffe on June 14, 2008 - 9:10am.
It seems as if the industry will never learn. Buyers are demanding information without having to jump through hoops and expose themselves to aggressive sales tactics. Industry after industry has proven that to give the buyer what they want without hassling them is what endears buyers to their business. Please tell me how much extra it costs an agent to have a "lookie-loo" go onto their web site, review information, receive standard pre-formatted emails etc.? I'm sure that it is so costly that they are right in allowing the MLS's to front their protectionist activities for them.
Maybe these MLS's and agent will not go extinct as fast as the dinosaurs did but they will go out the same way as the public finally begins to realize what has been happening to them for years.
Now I'm waiting to see what the various backward MLS's do with (look at forward thinking MLS's like Bob Hale's in Houston if you want a comparison)the new NAR/DOJ settlement rules. I guarantee that many of them are already huddling and dreaming up ideas to maintain their status quo.
Submitted by Jerry Hoffman on June 17, 2008 - 7:54am.
This arguement has been going on for a long time. The first thing to keep in mind is, the MLS IS NOT A PUBLIC UTILITY! It is a membershipp service by licensed professionals (mostly) for the purpose of facilitating real estate sales.
For your "free" data, please go to your county sites. If that sales price is all you need to determine your value - have at it. Zillow, Trulia, and the rest are like having Ray Charles score Dancing with the Stars! You want to know your true market value - ask a realtor. Third party sites displaying real estate data without the benefit of the licensed agents who know how to properly value property and interpret the data is like throwing a bunch of pills and candy in front of a child and telling them to pick one.
The only interest of all NON-Real Estate vendors is to make advertising or membership money off the efforts of real estate agents, WITHOUT paying for the servie. The MLS data, is far superior to "public records", otherwise this wouldn't be a discussion. So have at your public records.
You do not have a "right" to a private membership oranization's information. You do have a right to "public" information sources.
Submitted by Alex Gman on September 5, 2008 - 12:11pm.
I can believe their still fighting for this. This is an old topic, its about time they get over it.
Broker Price Opinion
reo companies
free foreclosure listings
Submitted by Alex Gman on September 5, 2008 - 12:13pm.
I can believe their still fighting for this. This is an old topic, its about time they get over it.
Broker Price Opinion
reo companies
free foreclosure listings