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: bozwood who wrote (14500)	10/24/2003 2:38:48 PM
From: Tradelite	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Boz, the antitrust-in-real-estate issues that I was referring to have been around in various forms for decades. They predate the arrival of the internet or e-commerce. There have been antitrust allegations and investigations regarding commissions, for example, and indeed some individuals in real estate have been severely punished for violating antitrust law in that regard. I'm assuming you're interested in this subject because you'd like to have some major new changes made--whatever those might be. However, if you had read the story I saw a few weeks ago, NAR reportedly says its legal staff has been working very closely with DOJ to avoid antitrust problems. I realize the problems look simple and NAR probably looks like a consumer's worst nightmare in all this latest stuff. But it's not that easy for brokerage firms to accept a world in which they and their staffs go out and list homes, bear all the expense and legal liability in doing so, and then post their inventory up on the internet to be used by people who do not have the same expenses, accountability, responsibilities, etc. Some brokers would like nothing more than to have free access to inventory so they can advertise and market it as if it were their own. Also, when a company puts a listing in the MLS, it is extending a very specific offer of sub-agency and compensation to other brokers, subject to terms written in legalese. Some people have a real problem with the idea of extending these offers to brokers who decline to pay dues and subscribe to the requirements of NAR and local boards. Lockbox access to homes is involved, too. That's a security issue. Some things are just not that simple. I don't pretend to understand it all. But again, maybe it's because I don't care enough to learn. Let the mega-sized brokerage firm executives figure it out. Maybe you could post the WSJ story? I let my subscription lapse and keep forgetting to renew.