Whether it’s refining your business model, mastering new technologies, or discovering strategies to capitalize on the next market surge, Inman Connect New York will prepare you to take bold steps forward. The Next Chapter is about to begin. Be part of it. Join us and thousands of real estate leaders Jan. 22-24, 2025.
Robert Reffkin’s op-ed on Oct. 8 left us scratching our heads.
The Compass CEO has been clear he doesn’t support Clear Cooperation, which is his prerogative. However, he made several points that are disparaging and misstatements of fact about our company and our industry, along with the clear suggestion that he thinks less transparency is a good thing for the housing market.
While many of his claims seem to be leveled at MLSs in general, several defame Bright, and we are compelled to address each one to set the record straight from Bright’s standpoint.
Reffkin’s argument: Agents lose choice how to market sellers’ property by being forced to adhere to conditions to access the MLS.
FACT: This statement is incorrect. Bright’s rules don’t have the restrictions he’s referring to. We are crystal clear as to the options agents have to market a property at the seller’s instruction. Should they wish to market a property as an Office Exclusive, that is their choice. Or they can market it within the MLS system and not on the Internet. Or they can market it through the MLS with only a single photo. It’s up to them. And there’s nothing about “access” to the MLS that is inconsistent with their plan to market a property.
Reffkin’s argument: MLS disclosures do not properly inform the homeseller that “days on market” become part of the permanent record of their listing, are not features of the home, and provide an incorrect data point for negotiating.
FACT: This is a false (and confusing) statement. The time a property is on the market, and how price adjustments have been made, are simply an element of market transparency.
In the hot housing market of the last four years, it stands to reason that prospective buyers would want to know more about why a property is not selling: Is there something wrong with it? Is it just a personal preference why buyers are passing on it, such as location on a busy road? Agents earn their value helping sort out what’s real, like structural damage, and what’s personal preference; they help clients identify pricing and proposal strategies. Is he suggesting that Compass agents should not be required to disclose to prospective buyers facts about the home’s sale?
Reffkin’s argument: MLS syndication leads to security risks from property details being disclosed online.
FACT: Incorrect. There is nothing about the homeseller that must be disclosed to the MLS. Again, the seller is in the driver’s seat here. They can choose how many photos appear, what parts of the home are featured, and how they want the property marketed. If they only want a picture of the front of the house, they can. And if they want nothing to go out to the Internet, they can choose that, too.
If an office exclusive make sense for them, they are free to proceed that way as well. Only the MLS provides these options and allows agents and their clients to choose – for no additional cost – to immediately have the property marketed on thousands of websites. Or they can choose to keep the information limited to MLS-participating agents and not on the Internet. The choice is theirs.
Reffkin’s argument: MLSs often get kickbacks from the sale of homeowner data, and use it for their betterment by selling it.
FACT: This is completely and utterly false. Bright MLS does not sell data or use it for our own betterment.
Reffkin’s argument: Four of the top MLSs are for-profit companies, and the MLS trend of monetizing homeowner data will increase over time.
FACT: Bright is a for-profit entity, owned entirely by not-for-profit owners.
Reffkin’s argument: Bright has a venture capital arm that has participated in the investment of over 100 companies many of which use homeowner data to operate, creating a conflict of interest.
FACT: This is categorically false. Bright neither has nor participates in any venture capital activity.
Reffkin’s argument: MLSs make millions of dollars from selling homeowner data.
FACT: Bright does not sell homeowner data. There’s been no “millions of dollars” in sales.
Reffkin’s argument: Homeowners are required to list their property on the MLS, or their agent is subject to a $5,000 fine.
FACT: Agents can and should market a property at the seller’s direction, and a property being marketed publicly should be Active in the MLS. But that is the seller’s choice. If the seller directs an agent to market their property as an Office Exclusive, our rules are clear: The agent simply needs to enter that information, and the agent can then market as they are instructed. There’s no fine, just choice.
Reffkin’s argument: MLS cooperation in modern form has evolved into a mechanism to monetize homeowner data by MLSs, aggregators and third-party data providers.
FACT: This is again false.
Reffkin’s argument: Clear cooperation forces a homeowner to list their property and relinquish control over their personal information, and represents broad risk to sellers.
FACT: False. What, how much, and when a property is marketed is at the discretion of the home seller. They are in the driver’s seat on these issues. And, again, no personal information is submitted to the MLS. To the extent Robert is referring to photos, that’s up to the agent and home seller to decide.
What concerns us the most is that these false claims are trying to harm us and benefit primarily the brokerage through sellers not getting the widest exposure for their listing.
In our view, it could put homebuying and selling in the hands of a select few agents who could choose with whom they want to share information. Ultimately, we think getting rid of the norms and protocols about how information is shared would slide the real estate industry down the mountain into a heap where buyers and agents are forced to pore through online marketplaces and thousands of brokers’ sites to weed out scams and find possible properties. I am confident no one thinks that’s a good idea.
Having said all of this, we still believe we have more in common than we don’t, and we are looking forward to continuing a dialogue to see how our companies can work together for the ultimate benefit of the American real estate consumer and the industry as whole.
Brian Donnellan is President and CEO of Bright MLS.
