Any guesses to what my Halloween costume is this year?
Happy Halloween!
Not so fast Compass…
Exclusive Inventory Update And Zillow’s Catch-22
“Assuming the goal is to change agent behavior and reduce exclusive inventory in the market, the metric to watch is the number of Compass exclusive listings.
And here’s where it gets interesting: the number of Compass exclusive listings since Zillow began enforcing its policy is UP – by over 1,300.”
Interesting article by Mike DelPrete. His data shows a decline in Compass exclusive listings when Zillow announced the “ban,” and an increase when Zillow started enforcing the “ban” on private listings. I realize there’s a lot of nuance around which listings are actually “banned” from Zillow, so bear with me.
At first glance, it seems pretty weird and counterintuitive. Rob and I, on our latest Industry Relations podcast, argue about what’s happening. He thinks this means big trouble for Zillow. I think the opposite (big surprise).
My take is it isn’t very clear what data Mike is showing. Are these just new exclusive listings? Or are these total exclusive listings? The title of the chart says “Compass Exclusive Inventory,” so my assumption is it’s all exclusive listings, old and new. If that’s the case, then my argument would be that the reason the number of exclusive listings is rising at Compass is because exclusive listings aren’t selling that quickly. Therefore, stale listings are sticking around longer as new exclusive listings are added, which shows up as an increase.
Are they not selling quickly due to not being on Zillow or just the overall market shifted during the Summer?
Either way, the takeaway is that the data doesn’t always tell the story you think it does — and in this case, it might just be telling us more about Compass than it is about Zillow.
“Feeling around in the dark”
Adieu, house hunting! –
America may be copying the worst part of Europe’s real estate market
“In Italy, Boero says, he ended up having to carry out much of his search on foot, hoofing around town to peek at home listings posted in the windows of various brokerages. His real estate agent spent a lot of time on the phone, calling around to see what was available. For Boero, the whole thing felt like “feeling around in the dark.”
Great article from Business Insider.
It’s rare that a journalist outside our industry understands the nuance of the organized real estate market, but James Rodriguez gets it. I was especially glad to see the narrative shift from “banning listings” to something more constructive. Here’s another standout excerpt from the piece:
“In France, they’re laughing at the situation at this moment, honestly,” Ali Attar, a real estate tech executive in Paris, tells me. The system in the US, he says, is more fragile than people realize. “They are taking it for granted in the US,” Attar says. “And as soon as they destroy it, bringing it back will be extremely difficult.”
This is one of the best overviews I’ve seen of the real consequences of the infighting that’s dominating mindshare in the real estate industry.
Reffkin pitches his fever dream idea of sharing exclusive listing data
Compass agrees to share its exclusive listings, with 2 caveats
“However, the NYC-based brokerage that has fiercely championed private listing networks said its offer comes with two conditions: The brokerage or MLS agrees not to alter or monetize the homeowners’ listings in any way, keeping the listing agent front and center, and the brokerage or MLS can ensure agents won’t be fined or banned for sharing listings with the brokerage or MLS.”
It sounds like they’ve closed the book on their Private Exclusive Book. That was quick. And now it seems they’re launching a new narrative about sites and MLSs that “monetize” listing data. I thought this was all about “seller’s choice”?
Honestly, it’s hard to keep track of how much shit they throw at the wall. Will they ban Google from showing their properties next, since Google monetizes search traffic? Are they banning all forms of referral compensation, or just the ones from people and brokerages they don’t like? MLS orgs are not allowed to charge vendors data licensing fees? Well maybe that last one might work ; )
And what’s this nonsense about not wanting listing data to be altered? The reason Zillow and other portals stopped taking direct feeds from brokers is because the data was garbage. Why should Compass get to issue non-compliant data to the MLS while everyone else has to play by the rules?
And don’t even get me started on this idea of “ensuring agents won’t be fined or banned for sharing listings with the brokerage or MLS.” Who is going to take that risk?
Behind the scenes of the Zillow listings “ban”
Oh to be a fly on the wall….
COMPASS AGENT: Hey Bill, I just wanted to give you a quick call. Our CEO is in a fight with Zillow and I just wanted you to be aware your house won’t be listed for sale on Zillow.
Bill (Home Seller): Not on Zillow? Why? A fight?
COMPASS AGENT: It’s part of our “3 Phased Marketing” Agreement, remember the agreement you signed when you listed with us?
Bill (Home Seller): I never signed anything that said our house wouldn’t be on Zillow. That’s crazy, we found our house on Zillow ferchistsake…
COMPASS AGENT: Umm, well, we wanted to test the waters, remember, find the right buyer, our CEO says its the best thing eve……
Bill (Home Seller): Are you fucking serious?? I can tell you right now if you don’t put our house of Zillow I’m gonna fire you…
COMPASS AGENT: But what about Days on Market and…
Bill (Home Seller): –click—-
COMPASS AGENT: Bill?….Bill? Bill??? Shit.
Compass: An iBuyer by a different name?
A thought hit me this morning while reading (yet another) piece about Compass suing Zillow over their “three-phased marketing strategy.” You know the one, start off with an “exclusive listing,” then open it up to Compass agents, and eventually put it on the MLS when the seller realizes they’d like actual offers.
It occurred to me: this whole thing smells a lot like the pitch we heard from iBuyers.
Think about it. What were iBuyers really selling? Convenience and certainty. “Skip the open house.” “Pick your closing date.” “Avoid strangers in your home.” That kind of thing. Compass’s exclusive listing strategy is, in many ways, pushing the same emotional buttons. It just has a better front man. Don’t get me wrong. I understand the appeal. I have more Opendoor stock at $22 per share than I care to admit.
But here’s where it gets interesting: Compass says that 94% of their listings end up on the MLS anyway. That stat feels oddly familiar—probably because Opendoor said the same thing when they quietly started syndicating to the MLS after realizing selling homes off-market wasn’t exactly a winning proposition. Hell, they recent shifted their strategy to sending seller lead to agents!
So if Compass listings are eventually going to land on the MLS… what’s the point of the detour?
Offering sellers a “soft launch” gives them a sense of control. Maybe they think their perfect buyer will materialize from Compass’s magical internal network before they have to show the place to the unwashed public. But just like the iBuyer promise of certainty came with a service fee and a haircut on price, the Compass pitch has its own catch: fewer eyeballs, fewer offers, and usually—eventually—a trip to the MLS anyway.
Call it what you want—three phases, soft launch, “concierge listing”—at the end of the day, broad exposure still wins. Everyone eventually runs back to Mama (the MLS).
Exclusive? Maybe. But if the final destination is still the MLS, it starts to feel more like a layover than a luxury.
Compass add new lawsuit, this time its Zillow
Compass sues Zillow over private listings policy
“Compass filed a lawsuit in New York on Monday, alleging that Zillow is breaking federal antitrust laws by permanently banning any listing that isn’t put on an MLS within a business day of being publicly marketed.
“To protect its market dominance, Zillow has retaliated against competitive threats by enacting an exclusionary policy,” Compass argued in its lawsuit.”
Compass is already suing MLS organizations like NWMLS. Even in this industry the blustering that Reffkin is performing would put a carnival barker to shame.
All MLSs already have mechanisms to protect sellers who need confidentiality. To suggest otherwise is just false.
The real question is: does limiting exposure to a handpicked group of “right” buyers help most sellers? Maybe—if the home is ultra-unique. But for 99.9999% of listings, broad exposure is what gets results.
Remember the story of a seller using Compass’s “three-phase plan” who got her “magic number,” declined, then went public—and sold for $100K more.
Compass is selling a marketing strategy that only works in a hot market. As things cool or shift to a buyer’s market, that approach collapses.
Also worth noting: per NAR, 1 in 6 minority homebuyers reports facing discrimination. Does anyone really think keeping listings hidden improves that?
Hobson’s Choice
The Truth Behind the Private Exclusive Listing Shell Game
“The term “Hobson’s Choice” indicates something that provides the illusion of choice but is not a real choice. And that would most accurately describe the “consumer’s choice” the real estate industry spends so much time discussing. Various theoretical reasons are presented for the choice that Refkin suggests consumers want. Those reasons for choosing a private exclusive listing have been easily addressed by the real estate industry for over 100 years with the existing rules set. In this new model, consumers are introduced to the program through manipulation disguised as concern and counseling, which contradicts the obligations of agency under which most real estate practitioners receive their licenses.”
Can’t believe this is the first time I’ve linked to Bill Lublin’s excellent blog.
Hoby Hanna don’t like the rules
Howard Hanna in open rebellion against Clear Cooperation Policy
“We won’t pay the fines,” Hanna said. “We don’t think our agents should pay the fines if a seller has choice.
“What does that lead to, if we don’t pay the fines, then, okay, they’re going to say we can’t participate in the MLS? Well, is that really what they want to do? They want to have less inventory in the MLS? Do they want to destroy the MLS?”
Hanna has previously said his company was considering leaving the MLS due to NAR’s mandatory MLS policies.”
Maybe I’ve been watching too much basketball lately, but in my opinion, the concept of brokers wanting to change the rules because they have a new “novel” strategy is akin to an NBA team saying, “We don’t think that ‘shot clock’ is valid, so we aren’t going to follow it, and if you don’t change it, we are going to start our own league.”
Maybe not the best analogy, but as Sam DeBord elegantly stated in his LinkedIn post,
“The MLS ruleset is the lever that creates the marketplace for better seller outcomes. Like laws that make for an organized society, these rules create an organized marketplace that benefits those who participate.”
Mr. Hanna has every right to leave. If he has a better idea for what an MLS should be he should pursue it.
CRMLS helps agents showcase the power of the MLS
“Your clients may not always see the behind-the-scenes effort you put into delivering an exceptional real estate experience. The expertise, dedication, and tools you leverage—especially your connection to the MLS—are key to providing outstanding service. “
I love this. It reminds me of the Making the Market Work campaign that CMLS and 1000watt put together, but this effort feels more localized and broader in the range of assets being delivered. It’s designed to be easy for agents to incorporate into their listing presentations or social media campaigns.
What I especially appreciate is that CRMLS is both talking the talk and walking the walk. CRMLS CEO Art Carter and General Counsel Ed Zorn have long been leaders in championing the value of the MLS, and they’re backing up that commitment with real tools their members can use to demonstrate that value.
