Where Real Estate Gets Its Dirt

9 Listings

MRED cuts off listing feeds to Zillow

“Zillow has effectively decided not to display 99.98% of MRED’s listings on its platforms because it, in its own judgment, disagrees with the lawful marketing strategy associated with the remaining 0.02% of listings.”

Let that sink in. Nine listings.

That’s MRED’s line, and it’s a good one. But it works in both directions.

Zillow pulled 43,000 Chicago listings off its platform because it refused to display nine Compass Private Exclusives. That’s the hill Zillow chose. And honestly? I think it’s the right hill. Because if Zillow caves on nine today, it’s not nine tomorrow. It’s ninety. Then nine hundred. Then every listing that got pocket-listed first gets laundered through an MLS and shows up on Zillow like nothing happened. Zillow’s whole pitch to consumers is “see everything.” The moment they start making exceptions for Compass’s private listing machine, that pitch is dead.

But here’s the thing. Those nine listings? They’re not even in Chicago. They’re Compass Private Exclusives in California, Florida, and Georgia. MRED, a regional MLS in Lisle, Illinois, cut off 43,000 Chicagoland listings to force Zillow to display nine homes thousands of miles away. That’s also a hill to die on. And it’s a weird one.

MRED changed its own rules last October, after Compass CEO Robert Reffkin personally emailed MLSs across the country asking them to cut Zillow’s feeds. Then MRED went national with Compass as its first partner, with Compass subsidizing the first 100,000 agents. Then MRED demanded Zillow display Compass listings nationwide or lose everything. And when Zillow said no, MRED pulled the trigger.

That’s not rules enforcement. That’s a favor.

Now, Zillow isn’t doing this out of the goodness of its heart. Their “transparency” standards happen to protect a lead-gen business that made them $1.8 billion last year. They know that. I know that. But being self-interested and being right aren’t mutually exclusive.

The judge seemed to agree… sort of. The TRO put MRED’s listings back on Zillow but told Zillow it can’t exclude MRED listings either. Both sides claimed victory. Which means nobody actually won.

And that brings us back to nine.

Nine listings that Compass didn’t want on the open market. Nine listings that Zillow refused to display. Nine listings that MRED was willing to nuke 43,000 Chicago listings over. Nine listings that a federal judge had to sort out on a Friday afternoon.

Compass calls this “seller’s choice.” But when 72% of your private listings double-end and 68% of sellers say their agent never explained what private even means, that’s not choice. That’s a sales pitch wrapped in a permission slip.

I don’t know how this ends. But I know the number everyone will remember.

Nine.

MRED to shut off feeds to Zillow starting tomorrow

No Chicagoland Listings on Zillow

MRED Announces Potential Disruption to Listing Data Feeds to Zillow Group

“The rules of this MLS exist to protect every participating broker and every consumer who relies on a complete and accurate picture of the market,” said Rebecca Jensen, President and CEO of MRED. “Those rules apply equally to every participant, regardless of the size of their audience or the reach of their platform. MRED enforces its rules consistently and fairly, and hopes that Zillow returns to operating consistent with its longstanding agreements with MRED.”

Translation: Dracarys.

Seller’s Choice?

Inspired by a Facebook post on MRED’s website.

Dracarys

Compass International Holdings Gives a Data Feed of All of its Listings to MRED

“MRED is announcing nationwide expansion of its MLS service, including the Private Listing Network (PLN), to any licensed agent.”

“Compass International Holdings is also committed to subsidizing some of the cost of MRED access to the first 100,000 Compass International Holdings agents to join MRED as full members.”

Holy shit! A regional MLS in Lisle, Illinois just announced it’s going national. And the largest brokerage in the country is picking up the tab.

Let me back up.

A few weeks ago I wrote about Reffkin’s proposal for a brokerage-owned national MLS. At the time, sources told me he’d pitched the idea on stage of Brian Donnellan CEO, of Bright MLS leading the charge. Apparently that didn’t go anywhere. So Robert went shopping and found a willing partner in Rebecca Jensen, who has been running MRED for years and has never been shy about doing things differently.

I once compared Rebecca to Daenerys Targaryen from Game of Thrones on Industry Relations. She’s been building dragons for a decade with the Private Listing Network, quietly, while the rest of the MLS world debated whether private listings should even exist. Now she’s burning the map.

This is MLS consolidation, but not the kind we’ve been tracking. Not two neighboring MLSs merging to save on overhead. This is a single MLS going national overnight, powered by Compass’s inventory and Compass’s checkbook. MRED goes from 250,000 listings annually to… what exactly? Compass alone does over a million transactions a year post-Anywhere. That’s not expansion. That’s a whole new animal.

Now let’s talk about what they’re actually offering. MRED says agents can “manage price history, days on market, and automated valuation models.” That sounds an awful lot like suppressing information that buyers would find useful. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I’m not a fan of less information in real estate. Full stop. But here’s my real question: is MRED still capturing actual DOM and price changes on the backend, just not displaying them publicly? Because if the data exists internally but gets hidden from consumers, that’s one conversation. If it’s not being tracked at all, that’s a much scarier one. And will other MRED brokers like their MLS getting so cozy with Compass?

Then there’s this line: “MRED also commits to protect and safeguard agents who participate in its PLN from being banned or penalized by third party portals and IDX feed recipients.”

Bold. Really bold. But how? Zillow has already shown it will punish listings that get marketed outside their ecosystem before hitting the MLS. What exactly is MRED going to do when Zillow bans a Compass agent’s listings? Send a strongly worded letter? File a lawsuit? Kick them out of the MLS? I’d genuinely love to know, because that promise is either the most important sentence in this press release or the emptiest.

Look, I see what’s happening here. Reffkin has been playing chess all year. The Redfin syndication deal. The war on Clear Cooperation. The national MLS pitch. And now he’s found an MLS CEO willing to go full Dracarys with him. Rebecca gets to go from running a midwestern MLS to running a national platform. Robert gets an MLS partner who won’t fine his agents for pocket listings and will actually fight the portals on his behalf. It’s a hell of a deal for both of them.

Whether it’s a good deal for everyone else… that’s the part I’m still working out.

Zillow Has Receipts

Zillow economist calls out Redfin for ‘mischaracterizing’ research

Zillow Chief Economist Mischa Fisher wrote that the analysis is modeled around assumptions, not hard data: “The estimate works roughly like this: take a share of sellers assumed to be uncertain about pricing, multiply by an assumed share who would benefit from early feedback, then apply an assumed relationship between listing confidence and eventual inventory. Stack those fractions, add a ‘multiplier’ for sell-then-buy chains, and you get 6-12%.”

So let me get the timeline straight. In February, Compass signs a three-year deal with Redfin to syndicate its Coming Soon and Private Exclusive listings. Two weeks later (two weeks?) Redfin publishes a study claiming pre-marketing could boost inventory by 6-12%. And some of the data Redfin cited to support this claim? Pulled from Zillow’s own surveys… which Zillow says Redfin “mischaracterized.”

I don’t think Fisher is wrong. The methodology is basically: assume a bunch of things, multiply the assumptions together, tack on a 1.6x multiplier for sell-then-buy chains, and Boom! You get a headline that just happens to validate the business deal your parent company signed last month.

Look, I get it. Every company funds research that makes their strategy look smart. That’s not new. But most companies have the good sense not to borrow their competitor’s homework and then get the answers wrong.

Redfin’s response? “We appreciate the engagement with our research and welcome discussion about the model and its parameters.” Which is corporate speak for “we’re not changing anything, but thanks for reading.”

This whole pre-marketing war has been fascinating (and frustrating) to watch. You’ve got Compass trying to build a parallel listing universe, Redfin handing them a storefront, Rocket greasing the mortgage side, and now they’re publishing research to justify the whole thing while Zillow’s economist is out here doing peer review on LinkedIn! Meanwhile the MLSs are watching their relevance get chipped away one “Coming Soon” at a time.

Fisher also pointed out what should be obvious: pre-marketing creates “information asymmetry” — meaning the buyers who aren’t plugged into Compass’s network don’t get to see these listings. That’s not boosting inventory. That’s just moving it behind a velvet rope, but also what I would expect the incumbent to say.

But who can tell?

NWMLS Isn’t Just Playing Defense Anymore

NWMLS Files Counterclaim in Federal Court

“We are standing up for the principle that every family has the right to see every home for sale, because housing data belongs in the sunlight, not in a private vault.” — Justin Haag, NWMLS CEO

Well, that didn’t take long.

Two weeks after Judge Jamal Whitehead denied NWMLS’s motion to dismiss — ruling that Compass had plausibly alleged antitrust violations under both the Sherman Act and Washington’s Consumer Protection Act — NWMLS has done exactly what it telegraphed back in December: filed counterclaims against Compass in federal court.

And they didn’t come in with some polite procedural filing. They came in throwing haymakers.

The counterclaims allege that Compass’s “3-Phase Marketing Program” violates Washington’s Consumer Protection Act — calling it a deceptive scheme designed to manipulate and hide critical data from the public. NWMLS is essentially arguing that pocket listings aren’t innovation, they’re consumer fraud. The specific allegations are pointed: artificially resetting days-on-market and price history to deceive buyers, suppressing the natural auction effect that gets sellers the best price, and actively encouraging Compass agents to violate their professional agreements.

That last one, contractual interference, is a big deal. NWMLS is saying Compass didn’t just build a competing system, it incentivized its own brokers to break their commitments to the MLS. That’s not a policy disagreement.

Here’s the part that really changes the game: NWMLS points out that Washington’s Senate Bill 6091, which takes effect this June, codifies the exact transparency standard NWMLS has enforced for decades — brokers must market properties broadly to the public and all other brokers. In other words, the state legislature looked at this fight and picked a side. And it wasn’t Compass’s side.

For those keeping score at home: Compass sued NWMLS in April 2025, alleging the MLS was a monopolist wielding its listing rules to crush Compass’s private listing strategy. NWMLS tried to get the case thrown out. The judge said no. And now NWMLS is swinging back — not just with “we did nothing wrong” but with “what you’re doing is illegal, deceptive, and bad for consumers.”

This is the first time an MLS has gone on offense against Compass in court. For years, the industry debate around private listings and Clear Cooperation has been fought through rule changes, press releases, and conference panel shade. Now it’s depositions and counterclaims.

The trial is set for October 2026, and with SB 6091 going live in June, Compass is about to be fighting a legal battle and a new state law at the same time. In the same state.

October is going to be fun.

Zillow announces revenue share program with RE/MAX, HomeServices of America, Side, and United Real Estate for coming soon listings

Zillow launches Zillow Preview to bring pre-market home listings into the open

“Revenue participation: If a qualified Zillow Preview connection results in a closed transaction through Zillow’s Preferred agent network, the listing agent may receive a share of the revenue Zillow earns from that transaction, paid through their brokerage. This fee is paid by Zillow and does not increase consumers’ or agents’ costs. As always, commissions remain negotiable between consumers and the agents representing them.”

I’m at the Clareity26 conference in Tucson and have been heads down preparing for a big announcement, so I haven’t had time to fully process the Zillow Preview news—or the other news that broke today regarding eXp. But I will.

One thing that immediately jumped out at me: Zillow is now willing to share a portion of its revenue on these coming-soon listings.

That raises a bigger question… is this a preview of a new business model for Zillow across all listings?

🤔

Are MLS rankings by Compass a big deal?

How Strict Are the MLSs? Here’s How Compass Saw It

“As it prepared to scale up its 3-Phase Marketing Strategy, which includes two off-MLS phases, Compass set out internally to get a clear view of the rules that MLSs — big and small — had in place that might intersect with the plan.”

This story is from last week but I wanted to do some digging. I downloaded the spreadsheet the Inman story referenced. Compass ranked 171 MLSs on a 1-to-5 scale for “restrictiveness.”

Here’s what the numbers say:

ScoreMLSs%
5 (Most Restrictive)10.6%
4 (Highly Restrictive)74.1%
3 (Moderate)14484.2%
2 (Friendly)148.2%
1 (Wide Open)52.9%

Read that again. Only 8 MLSs scored a 4 or 5. That’s it. Eight.

Compass is betting they only have to fight 8 MLSs. The other 163? Either friendly or not worth worrying about.

The Score 5 club has one member:

  • Northwest MLS (NWMLS)

The same MLS that cut off Compass’s IDX feed. The same MLS Compass sued. No surprises there.

The Score 4 list:

  • CRMLS (California Regional)
  • NTREIS (North Texas)
  • Georgia MLS
  • First MLS (Atlanta)
  • SmartMLS (Connecticut)
  • Greenwich Association of REALTORS®

If my math is correct these MLS Organizations represent about 290,000 real estate agents. Which if we say there are 1.4M members of NAR, then that’s about 20%. Also, nobody pushes Greenwich in to a corner!

Meanwhile, the “Compass-Friendly” Score 2 list includes:

  • Bright MLS
  • MRED (Chicago)
  • Houston Association of REALTORS® (HAR)
  • ACTRIS (Austin)
  • San Diego MLS
  • MLSListings (Silicon Valley)
  • The MLS (Los Angeles)
  • San Francisco Association of REALTORS®

That’s a lot of major markets where Compass sees a clear runway.

The irony? MRED — currently in a standoff with Zillow over its Private Listing Network (PLN) — landed on the Compass-friendly list. Turns out you can fight one portal while enabling another.

84% of MLSs got a 3. The vast middle. Compass is probably betting these swing votes won’t put up a fight if the big dominoes fall.

So if you’re an MLS executive, you might want to know where you stand on this list. Because Compass already does.

Having a strategic plan is a good idea.

“You’re playing a game whether you realize it or not, and seeing the game helps you play it better” – Seth Godin

I was forwarded Zillow’s “strategy document” last week and was asked if I had any opinions on it. I read the document, as much as I could since a lot of it was redacted (blacked out), and put it aside. Later I called my friend telling him my thoughts. Here are those thoughts.I was forwarded Zillow’s “strategy document” last week and asked if I had any opinions on it. I read what I could (most of it was blacked) and set it aside. Later, I called my friend and walked him through my thoughts. Here they are.

First, I was surprised at how early this came out. December 2024.

Then I thought: of course Zillow would be drafting something like this early. They’re a big company, and big companies plan ahead. They have responsibilities to employees and shareholders.

The document read like it came from a team that didn’t give a hoot about optics. That wasn’t their job. And honestly, you don’t want anyone crafting a strategic document with those biases anyway. You want cold, hard, black-and-white suggestions.

Some of the ideas were smart. Some weren’t. I have no clue how senior or junior the authors were, or what context they were given.

I didn’t plan to write anything about it, and what I definitely didn’t expect was for people to lose their freaking minds over a strategic plan. Then again, most of them were just using it to push their own agendas.

Every business should have a strategic plan. Having one is a good idea. You should do one.

And in my opinion, if your plan doesn’t have at least a few crazy ideas, you didn’t push hard enough.

Happy Halloween!

Any guesses to what my Halloween costume is this year?

Sponsored By ICE