Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tradelite who wrote (6762)	11/13/2002 7:17:53 PM
From: bozwood	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 306849

Of course, Tradelite, you are always right. Why, then, has the NAR fought to keep the network proprietary? Why does a person need to be a realtor to access it (don't say for legal reasons because realtors can't act as lawyers, even though they over-step at time doing so)? If that is not the "crux" of anything, why not allow anyone to place properties for sale on it? Give me the ability to list properties on the MLS, access the properties on the MLS, and a lawyer, and I think I would do just fine without a realtor. Heck, people do just fine without one anyway, even without access to the network. What could be a better business than to have almost complete control to "list" inventory on the market? That is what I call an economic barrier to entry and, most surely, the crux of the business advantage that realtors/brokers enjoy.

To: Tradelite who wrote (6762)	11/13/2002 7:20:40 PM
From: Elroy Jetson	Respond to of 306849

Tradelite, you are an embarrassment to to real estate industry. Even after years of working part-time on the weekends as a real estate saleswoman, you still know less about real estate than any consumer who has even given passing consideration to buying or selling real estate. I can excuse your ignorance of even the basics of real estate economics or the business and technology of brokerage, as your day job prevented you from attending even the sales meetings at your employing broker. But your hysterical arguments, which would embarrass even a swamp-land promoter, could lead the naive into believing your views reflect those of the industry which gave you an opportunity for occasional weekend employment.

To: Tradelite who wrote (6762)	11/13/2002 10:18:02 PM
From: Doughboy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

"It takes TIME TIME TIME" Hope you don't mind my jumping in on this argument. I usually just lurk on this discussion but I just had to respond to the tripe that a realtor paid by the hour would have unhappy customers. Absolutely not! Let's say you're paying a 6% commission on a $400,000 suburban home. The agent is splitting a commission of $24,000. Assuming we pay the realtor the outrageous sum of $100 per hour (remember, realtors don't even have to college degrees; they just take a test that an idiot could pass with about a week's worth of study). At $100/hr., the realtor would have to spend 120 hours to sell the home. That's three full-time 40-hour work weeks. I'd like you to tell me whether you really believe that a realtor spends anywhere near that time, on average, on a sale. Face it, the real reason that realtors are able to hold the line on the 6% is because of a monopoly on the MLS and the collusion by brokers. Their time is finally coming, and I can't wait until the realtors go the way of travel agents and other dinosaurs.