News Summary for July 7
The New York Times (free subscription required) ran a letter to the editor by Tom Stevens that stressed the competitiveness of the real estate industry. In the letter he stated “Brokers created, operate and own multiple listing services. They are not markets, or public utilities, as some would like. They are private exchanges and platforms for industry collaboration to facilitate cooperation among real estate practitioners representing buyers and sellers.”
Tom was also quoted by the News & Observer in Raleigh, North Carolina on the value of using a Realtor in an article about homes for sale by owner. The U.S. housing market continues to stabilize with pending home sales rising slightly by 1.3% in May. Reuters quoted David Lereah saying "We are entering the second phase of the transition from the housing boom, in which sellers are becoming more realistic about their expectations - sales are stabilizing and annual home price appreciation is returning to historic norms."
Comments
I have studied this issue for 3.5 years and see no better solution than the stall being implemented. I do not see the government backing down. I do not see the consumers putting up with limited access. I think it is foolish to seek to force all borrowers to Realtor.com or a few others for data. Its a tough issue the NAR will lose if staying the course I see. Larry Cragun
Posted by: Larry Cragun | July 7, 2006 03:25 PM
I feel there is an element of consumer protection that might be lost if we allow our information to be more open. Limited service companies are trying to establish a new business model which I think is great. Innovative business ideas are crucial for an industry to survive and grow. My concern is that to be an expert you need to be local and we are seeing companies trying to serve multiple markets. Real estate is a local business from building materials, to local building codes to sales trends. How can this better serve the consumer? Are we not allowed to regulate ourselves as an industry? Perhaps virtual offices will succeed but because they may not be profitable in just one market they want to serve multiple markets to try and be profitable. Obviously to sell a service for less you have to sell a lot more of it to stay in the black.
I'm all for improving and or/ changing the way we do business but not at the expense of hurting our consumers just so some Joe Blow can make a dollar.
Posted by: Jason B. | July 11, 2006 09:22 AM