If you believe that Distribution Trumps Destination at this stage of the evolution of real estate on the WWW, that the distribution of listing information to many consumer accessible and trafficked web sites is far more important than listing information appearing on any single web site, then it is difficult to question the value of a well run public facing MLS web site.
Seekers of real estate information will emulate water, taking the path of least resistance to find what they are looking for. The easier it is to find, the greater chance that it will be found. Listing data will also emulate water, finding its way to many destinations on the web, through a number of different sources. It is already happening and will continue to happen. Can MLSs facilitate this phenomenon while building a valuable asset for the MLS, its Subscribers and Participants, as well as a valuable service for buyers and sellers? While the jury is still out, indications are that the answer is yes…absolutely.
It is in a broker’s best interest that their listings can easily be found on the web. The best way to insure that they will easily be found is to put them in as many places as possible. A public Facing MLS web site is one more place, with many obvious benefits, not the least of which is information control and consistency.
It is in the home buyer’s best interest that listing information be easily and conveniently found on the web.
And, it is in the seller’s best interest that their home be found by as many potential buyers as possible.
With the above points in mind, why not add one more place for listing information to be found on the Web, an MLS Public Facing Web Site?
Now the questions (and feel free to submit answers):
Why not also publish that information on a web site controlled by the MLS?
What is the downside?
What is the upside?
What is the upside?
Does it truly provide brokers a competitive advantage to display their listings only on their web sites?
Some brokers insist that a Public Facing MLS Web Site competes directly with broker sites. Bob Hale, CEO of the Houston Association of REALTORS® will argue emphatically, with statistics to back up his position, that brokers and agents benefit when an MLS has a strong Public Facing Web Site, with leads being generated and provided directly to the listing agent with no intermediary. MRIS, another major MLS with a newly launched public facing web site seems to agree. As a matter of fact, at least 400 of the MLSs in the U.S. have created a public web site with listing displays for consumers. While the debate may not soon subside, the trend of MLS public facings sites will likely accelerate forward as more MLSs seek new ways to drive value to their members.
(Saul Klein is a REALTOR® and nationally recognized speaker and consultant who, over the last 16 years, has spent more than 15,000 hours in front of real estate professionals, consumers, association staffs and volunteers. Over the past 15 years he has traveled over 1,500,000 miles delivering a message on technology and its role in the future of the real estate industry. Saul was selected by the National Association Of REALTORS® as one of the “25 Most Influential People in the Real Estate Industry” in 2003 and one of the “100 Most Influential Real Estate People” by Inman News in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008.)



















Comments
Comment by: JohnPaulT.
- Jan 26, 2009 9:48:39 PMNo question about it, in my opinion. Public Facing Websites will be the norm in the Future. I believe eventually that directly listing with a Broker will slowly become a thing of the past. Consumers will have the choice to enter their own property data on line and market their own home in a totally user friendly environment. The reality is that anyone can set up a website right now and sell thier own home if they want to. The big question for Realtors will be " What is the Real Estate Agent or Brokers roll going to be in these all new totally online transaction." I remember when I first started in this business we were required to present all offers in person to the seller. Then came the fax and email, websites, Zip forms, online transaction monotoring. It's much more impersonal in many ways, but also more effecient. I think those who can find the secret to combining those two concepts of efficiency while maintaining that personal service will be the successes of the future.
John Paul T.
Comment by: Kevin McQueen
- Jan 27, 2009 3:34:23 AMSaul,
As an industry advisor to the Boards and MLSs, I am often asked, "what are others doing and what do you think we should do?" My frequent response is to write down the pros and cons, develop a simple written plan and consider 2-3 approaches, determine the costs and what you intend to spend to maintain and promote (advertise) the site. Many MLSs offer a very basic public site and don't spend very much to promote or advertise it. I don't have a position on this either way and there are no rights or wrongs here, but it's important to have plan which has been well discussed with your leadership and maybe your members. Online surveys are easy, inexpensive and useful to determine what they really want and will pay for.
I am currently creating a national database of the 1,472 local Realtor(r) associations and the 852 MLSs in order to link them together. I plan to map the results and I would also like to include other information about each including whether they have a public site, how many $ per member they spend to maintain it and how much to promote or advertise it. I believe that this information would be very helpful to decision makers everywhere.
Does anyone have information that would help me create this? What additional data would be useful to collect at this time? Would this be of interest to anyone?
Kevin McQueen, President Focus Forward
(248) 374-1045
Comment by: BrianLarson
- Jan 29, 2009 7:07:26 AMSaul: It is undisputed that HAR.com is an incredible success at garnering traffic for HAR.com. I disagree with your statement that HAR has statistics to back up its position that agents and brokers benefit from the site. The information (at least what has been published) fails to support some of HAR's claims and does not overcome the objection of some brokers that MLS public web sites take traffic away from brokers' sites.
HAR says it delivers leads to its brokers. I believe that, but would the brokers have gotten more leads with a robust IDX implementation in a market without the MLS site? We don't know. The only way to determine whether HAR.com delivers traffic to broker sites or detours traffic from broker sites is with an inter-market comparison study. To our knowledge, no such study has been done.
Regrettably, many MLSs are launching public web sites without clear measurable objectives. Is the goal to create a popular MLS site? HAR has unquestionably succeeded there. Is it to funnel consumer traffic to broker web sites and away from other aggregators like Trulia and Zillow? There is no public evidence HAR.com does that. Is it to get more "leads" (whatever they are) to the broker/broker's site? Again, we really have no public evidence that HAR.com delivers more traffic to the brokers than they could get on their own with robust IDX web sites.
If your MLS is going to spend money (more than $1 million a year, if you are HAR.com) to build, market, and maintain a popular web site, you should be able to QUANTIFY to brokers how it will make them better off. That means measuring traffic before implementing and then measuring traffic after implementing.
This is not a question of distribution vs. destination. It's a question of how the MLS can best spend money it collects from brokers. With $1 million a year, I think I could deliver tools to brokers to help them deliver terrific IDX sites, and I could 'sell' the consuming public on the idea that the best source for real estate information is a broker's web site.
-Brian
Comment by: Kathy Schwartz
- Feb 5, 2009 2:04:59 PMOur small MLS in SE MN (1,000 members) has had a publlic website for 13 years. It was started when most brokers didn't know what a website was!
Now it is still popular with the public (it was taken down for a week when we changed vendors and our phones rang off the hooks!) and linked to some of our largest employers company websites for their employees since it is considered to be a "neutral" source of information. (They would not allow links to individual brokerages.) There is no advertising. The public can contact any listing company directly from the site. Our brokers believe that it brings buyers and helps create more savvy sellers. Our costs are about 50 cents per member per year and we spend about $100 in advertising (local Chamber of Commece).
We also have 100% particiaption in IDX, participate in data syndication and are part of a state-wide MLS co-op, and of course REALTOR.com since the beginning. It's all good!
I don't think we need any studies to determine how or whether it is efficient or effective to have a public website. It is one of many, many tools the public uses to gather information in their real estate decision-making process. In today's world of "participatory real estate" and "real estate for entertainment" we can only give them the data in as many ways as possible. I submit that the public knows they must contact a real estate broker for information and real estate services, and not the MLS directly.
Post a Comment