Saul:

Our MLS is a Broker owned MLS and has been since 1991. I have been the Corporate Secretary for them since 2001, therefore, broker owned is all I know. But, in attending meetings at the state and national level and seeing what they go through, I can tell you I can't think of a better way to go.

First of all, we are NOT mandated/recognized by NAR, we do try to follow their rules and guidelines but are not required to do so. This is handy when NAR requires new VOW and IDX policies BEFORE they even get the kinks worked out. I know our neighboring boards have had to change their policies several times because of this. We were in a position to wait it out until NAR finally got it workable and then we implemented it without even breaking a sweat.

Enough of that, here are the answers to your questions in the order they were posted.

1. Generally, what is the Upside/Downside of Privatization of an MLS?

Answer: The upside is among too many to mention no NAR mandates/interference. Recently our MLS purchased a building. I know from experience that our neighboring boards had to go to the membership for a vote of approval for them to do the same, and it got ugly. We did not have that worry. The brokers found what they wanted, bought it and now they rent it back to the board of realtors thereby earning income. We are also able to grant "limited" access to non-REALTOR licensees/appraisers. This also generates extra income. These are just a very few examples of the advantages.

The downside is that we are not recognized by NAR therefore our MLS is not insured under them. Our Board of REALTORS is but not our MLS. Our brokers didn't see that as a huge risk in 1991 and they don't now. Suing an MLS is extremely difficult to do unless that MLS blatantly denies access to someone for all the wrong reasons. In that case, that MLS should be sued, broker owned or not.

2. What MLSs in the country are "private" and what form of "private" (based on 1 to 3 above) are they?

Answer: Our Brokers own our MLS. It is a for profit corporation, with equity and non-equity shareholders. The shareholders elect their own directors at the annual meeting and those directors HAVE to be shareholders as well. They do, for consistency usually ratify the Board of Realtors president.

3. Where are we seeing or have we seen "privatization" movements and what factors are driving factors towards privatization in these specific cases?

Feel free to e-mail me on or off list (Saul@InternetCrusade.com).

Answer: I haven't seen a movement of privatization here, I do know that we are the only MLS in our state that is broker owned. I do know the reason our brokers decided to own and operate their own MLS is because the Board of Realtors ran it into the ground. The MLS was constantly in the red and there was no excuse for it. 14 years later, we have funds in reserves and CD's, a building, a full time employee with benefits, current office equipment and supplies,such as computers, copiers etc and over 200 users.

4. What has happened to MLS' in markets that have privatized? (Historical

Review)

Answer: I honestly don't have an answer for you here.

5. What has been the impact on MLS participants and subscribers?

Answer: The impact on our users is, we are currently one of the least expensive MLS's to be a member of in our state. We do not charge an annual fee to our users only a monthly fee. And the "broker fee" is a one time charge to purchase stock. (I will not get into exact amounts here). One thing I have noticed in my monthly meetings is, the directors of the MLS being brokers have an incredible ability to see the big picture and make intelligent, comprehensive decisions based on that picture. Mix that with their extreme forward thinking and they have put our MLS ahead in many ways of our larger neighboring boards. Our little board (approximately 120

members) has been ahead of the curve and our neighboring boards for years. I think that is due to the vision brokers tend to have. (But that is just my

opinion)

6. What has been the impact on both costs to run the MLS and on MLS fees)?

Answer: Please refer to questions 3 & 5

7. Has the MLS' become more competitive and able to offer lower fees or increased services for MLS participants?

Answer: YES we are extremely competitive in our fees, and the ability to not require REALTOR membership for certain "limited" levels of access has been a financial advantage.

8. What are the liability issues?

Answer: Is there a fear of not being covered by NAR's E&O for MLSs? We are not covered by NAR E&O but I explained our reasons above.

9. Any/all other questions or observations that you deem appropriate or that I missed in the above?

Answer: I am not a anti-NAR person. I think the organization does wonderful things for our members and the public and I would recommend anyone thinking of getting licensed that they join the organization as soon as possible. On that note, with my 4 years experience with a broker owned MLS and in dealing with other board owned MLS's I honestly don't see why anyone would want a board owned MLS. I just don't see the advantages other than insurance. If there are others, please fill me in I never said there weren't any, I just don't know what they are.

Contributors Name Withheld.

Saul