Financial Estimates
CALMLS will generate $13.8 million in revenue in its first year of operation (2009), growing to $24
million in its third year (2011). Operational losses will be $720,000 in 2009, in addition to the
$500,000 previously authorized to pay for MLS working group costs and start-up costs, business
planning, and brand development. By year three, CALMLS will generate revenue in excess of
expenses of $1.53 million and will be positioned for continued growth for the benefit of its
participants, subscribers and participating AORs, having built a user base of more than 110,000
members. After suitable reserves are established any excess revenue can be used to reduce
wholesale costs to AORs and/or enhance benefits to members. CALMLS anticipates an additional
cash requirement of $3.0 million, of which $1.75 million will be utilized for its planned acquisitions.
3 Year Projections (1,000s)
2009 2010 2011
Revenue $13,861 $22,623 $24,101
Expenses $14,582 $22,119 $22,573
Potential Net Income ($721) $504 $1,528
Year-end CALMLS Users
Total CALMLS Subscribers 99,000 105,000 110,000
Conclusion
There has never been a more critical time for C.A.R. Directors and leaders to support an initiative
that will fundamentally improve the most critical service for its members. Leveraging the skills and
experience of existing regional MLSs and combining these with an exciting new MLS technology
utilizing standardized rules and enforcement makes this statewide dream a reality. Countless hours
of thought and work have gone into developing this proposal and the CALMLS Directors believe this
approach will most readily achieve the six principles adopted in 2005.
Recommendation
For all these reasons and in order to implement this next step, the CALMLS Directors are
requesting a loan of $3 million, to be repaid to C.A.R. within 7 years fully amortized with 6% interest,
to support its operations under the nonprofit statewide MLS model adopted by the C.A.R. Directors.

Number of subscribers:
CARETS – 95,000 to 100,000 (50-65% of CAR membership)
calREDD – <1000 (less than a .05%)

Number of listings:
CARETS – 4 million
calREDD – 20-40000k

Where is the accountability for CAR (a trade association) to funnel members dues to this project? If the original press releases stated a reduction in member fees as the goal, wouldn't a refund from CAR back to its members been a better use of the money as opposed to 'creating' a solution for a now non-existent problem. Where is the $3m? Or is the number bigger now?

Disclosure: My company, Clareity Security, is a technology partner to several CARETS member MLS organizations. With that said, my posts and opinions are mine alone and are not to be construed as the opinions or positions of Clareity Security.

If I was a CAR member (which I am not), wouldn’t it be time to question whether or not the entire project should be mothballed in favor of spending the remainder of the $3m money on education, training, and development of technology standards? $3M to serve the needs of less than 5,000 members… hmmm…..

“One would be hard pressed to identify a single vendor that guarantees their software will be completely error free, never have any outages whatsoever, and have absolutely zero downtime”

Have you never heard of Service Level Agreements(SLA)?? Many vendors (including MLS Software vendors) have much more confidence in their system’s performance, than this, and back them up with an SLA!

I can’t imagine anyone (including C.A.R.) would agree to this disclaimer for any service they contract with. It’s not only arrogant, it’s down right ignorant!

Unbelievable the arrogance of you guys.

Who are you now the Vice President, General Counsel and Chief Technology Officer??

Madera and Merced Really?

Madera and Merced have about 500 agents….maybe. That’s what your gonna hang your hat on? 500 agents? REALLY??

Instead of making any public statements or unfounded outlandish claims (See above) just implement. Walk the walk.

And just so you know implementing an MLS system for 500 agents isn’t walking the walk. It’s pathetic and shows weakness that you would even mention it.

Another piece of advice. Don’t comment on blog posts. It opens you up to a lot of crazies. And I’m not talking about myself.

Regarding copyright: Every MLS owns the compilation so that it can protect its intellectual property rights. calREDD™ is positioned to be a statewide MLS and ensure that the data only is licensed in accordance with the interests of the brokers served and to protect the intellectual property. It is anticipated that there will be more than one vendor, providing members choice of front end, with the local authorized providers (the AORs or regional MLS) still providing the servicing, and every other function, including MLS Committees and active participation in the process. Please see the FAQs on the calREDD™ Web site that further explain the concept. Think of calREDD™ as a vendor with standard rules and access statewide, similar to other models that have elements of this same structure.

June Barlow
Vice President and General Counsel
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®