NAR’s IDX Rule Changes Need More Study
Filed under: Breaking News, Midyear Meeting, Technology
By Brian Summerfield, Online Editor, REALTOR® Magazine
The NAR Board of Directors voted Saturday to send two recommendations regarding acceptable use of IDX data back to the Multiple Listing Policy Committee because the committee is currently reviewing all IDX policies with an eye toward updating them. The action came at the board meeting that concluded the national association’s 2009 NAR Midyear Legislation Meetings & Trade Expo in Washington, D.C.
IDX, or Internet Data Exchange, refers to a system and process that allows multiple listing service participants to display each others’ property listings on their web sites.
The recommended changes to the IDX rules were as follows (underlined sections indicate proposed additions, strikeouts indicate proposed deletions):
1. Multiple Listing Policy Statement 7.58, paragraph 2, Policies Applicable to Participants’ IDX Sites, Internet Data Exchange (”IDX”) Policy: “Participants must protect IDX information from misappropriation by employing reasonable efforts to monitor and prevent “scraping” or other unauthorized accessing reproduction, or uses. of the MLS database. This requirement does not prohibit indexing of IDX sites by search engines.
2. Section 18.2.2, model MLS rules: “Participants must protect IDX information from misappropriation by employing reasonable efforts to monitor and prevent “scraping” or other unauthorized accessing, reproduction, or uses. of the MLS database. This requirement does not prohibit indexing of IDX sites by search engines.
In discussion of the issue at the board meeting, an NAR director from Indianapolis rose to suggest the recommendations be sent back to MLS committee, since this group is already reviewing all aspects of the IDX policy, first implemented in 2002, with an eye toward updating them. The move to refer back was driven not by any objections to the actual proposals, the speaker said, but rather by the fact that neither the MLS committee nor NAR directors had sufficient time to review the changes and consider their implications.
The IDX rule on scraping — a term that refers to the harvesting of Internet data, often for unauthorized use — was passionately discussed on the Agent Genius real estate blog and others last week after a local board of REALTORS®’ interpretation of the rule that was backed by NAR found that the rule prohibited property listings from being indexed on search engines such as Google. In response to the concerns about this interpretation expressed by hundreds of REALTORS® on the blog, NAR’s MLS Committee took up the issue at its meeting earlier this week.
In that meeting, a majority of the committee agreed that “scraping” and “indexing” are different forms of data use and approved the revisions to the IDX rules that specifically allow the “indexing” of IDX data rule by search engines. Revisions to the rule were prepared just days before the committee meeting, so that the committee could consider them at its upcoming meeting.
The NAR director who spoke to the board expressed concern at the speed at which these changes were about to be implemented, possibly without full consideration of their implications.
The vote of the NAR directors to refer the IDX rule changes back to the committee was closest of the meeting, requiring board members to hold up placards after the typical voice vote proved inconclusive.
What do you think of these proposed changes? Would they significantly impact the way you do business on the Web? Let us know!
I strongly support the change. Ask any seller if they want their property information hidden from Google. Ask any seller if they want their property information limited. I also have concerns that limitations have legal implications in restraint of trade. A decision by NAR to limit, as the referral does will result in negative PR for all Realtors. For that, I am very disappointed.
Indexing and scraping are just naming conventions. It comes down to use. The zilliws, trulias and every other site that allows data and property search could get the data via they’re indexing definition.
I’m extremely disappointed that the Board of Directors didn’t pass the recommendation. I attended the MLS Forum and addressed the Committee as I strongly believe that this rule, and the subsequent clarification by the NAR and the action taken by MIBOR, could have a tremendous impact on the NAR membership and the real estate “consumer”.
To equate indexing by search engines as “scraping” and “misappropriation” is ludicrous. As a broker, I understand completely the need to make sure listing data is protected from misuse. But I also understand that the ability for the general public to find information on the internet is critical in today’s day and age. We can’t hide the information from consumers any longer.
No one ever proposed “misusing” MLS information. All other IDX rules would still apply — listing broker identification, MLS logos, etc. This was simply a clarification of an outdated policy.
And now it will be another six months before it can be changed. In the mean time, third party listings aggregators, who are not subject to these arcane rules and policies, will continue to separate themselves from dues paying NAR members. It’s already exceedingly difficult to compete against these companies and their nearly unlimited piles of venture capital.
The NAR BOD’s decision to defer this change for at least another six months puts the membership at a competitive disadvantage.
Six months in “internet time” is an eternity. The NAR had a wonderful opportunity to take swift action to help not only its membership, but the home buying and selling public. Sadly, that opportunity just went away.
I was surprised that the Board of Directors didn’t pass the suggested change to the IDX rules, since the change was effectively a clarification which confirmed the business purpose of the original rule. Due to a change in the understanding of the term “scraping” this rule had the unintended effect of creating a situation where properties listed by agents in the Indianapolis market area may find that the broker and agent sites will not be indexed on google, while non REALTOR sites, will be, driving consumers away from the brokerages and agents and to 3rd parties.
I was impressed and pleased at the quick response of the MLS committee, the concerned agent community, and, as always the staff at NAR who worked together to provide an incredible, quick and informed response to the issue.
I just explained to a consumer why Zillow could index their address and why Realtors, overall, did not. His response……”That’s pretty backwards.” The consumer questioned whether I was confused. At the end of the conversation, the consumer was confident that I knew what I was saying. It’s just too bad that NAR didn’t hear.
Many Realtors active on the internet felt an enormous pride in our organization and its ability to respond to concerns raised so quickly. To delay that decision for 6 months is a huge disappointment and only feeds those who feel that the organization is not responsive to the needs of its members.
At what happens to Paula Henry (MIBOR Member that started the agent genius thread discussing this) or her broker Mike Taylor of http://www.reddoorindy.com (Both of which are very loyal customers of Real Estate Webmasters and innocent victims of these politics) – I have already had our programming team block our /idx/ folders from being spidered in response to the very heavy handed MIBOR tactics (after trying to no avail to appeal the issue) – are they now expected to keep their listings blocked (This question is for MIBOR I suppose) until such time as this fully supported change is implemented?
6 months (or more) of competitive disadvantage due to processing time and due diligence? That just isn’t fair to these dues paying, rules abiding members.
MIBOR I will be contacting you directly but I am going to post it here as well – would you consider a “stay of execution” (perhaps not the best choice of words in the surface but actually quite apt) until such time as this ruling has been passed or denied?
If it would help, I would be more than happy (at no charge to anyone) to not display / de-index the listings of any broker of MIBOR that specifically requests in writing that we not allow Google to index their clients listings. All we need is the broker name or associate ID, it is certainly not something that is technically difficult and I think would make a fair compromise.
This will pass – everyone knows it – why let just a few suffer (or risk a potential lawsuit) when everything negative about the future of this process can be avoided with a little common sense, and some fair compromise.
It does appear that the REALTORS are finally waking up to all of the issues surrounding the data bases they have created that are being harvested and used by everyone else.
For the last 15 plus years we have been our own worst enemy. We REALTORS have put rules on ourselves thinking we were keeping others out of our industry, when in fact; all we did was fence ourselves in a box.
This issue is only one of MANY where we REALTORS are shooting ourselves in the foot. Other issues are:
1. Having overlapping boards and MLS’s in the same geographical area. This requires companies and agents to pay multiple dues and fees in order to competitively service their clients.
2. IDX feeds are allowed by our competition – i.e. the Zillows of the world. Many MLS’s have barred their membership from doing the same thing. In wanting keeping others out, we REALTORS have put ourselves in competitive handcuffs. Check out the ramifications of the COMINGLING rules in most MLS’s.
3. Charge large fees to REALTOR members to reuse the MLS data on member firm’s or agent’s websites. This policy can make it financially difficult for smaller brokers to offer the same information to the public as the larger brokers are offering.
These are just a very FEW of the issues that REALTORS are facing today; and all of these were created by the REALTORS.
To say I am surprised is an understatement. There is absolutely no logic to the Boards decision, since, from the beginning, it was a clarification issue of the existing verbiage.
The fact is, no where in the current rule does it state Google or any search engine is a scraper, but when the question was presented to the NAR, they agreed with the local Metropolitan Indianapolis Board of Realtors interpretation that Google was a scraper site.
And now at the pleading of an Indianapolis board member, (who obviously didn’t understand the fact Google is not a scraper in the first place), they decide they did not have enough time to evaluate the new rule.
We don’t need a new rule, we need logic which understands the difference between malicious scraping and Google indexing. My fear is the ignorance which led to the original interpretation will now lead to years of trying to educate the same ignorant people who refuse to live and work in the 21st century.
One more time – Google does not misappropriate information or reproduce data – it INDEXES the data so it can be easily found by a search query.
Now NAR tells me to go back to my board and put heat on them – thanks NAR – you guys just keep sending me back and forth. I finally know the true meaning of rat race.
For the original question – no this will NOT affect the way I do business, except, I will personally NOT give power to the third party aggregators whose hand is being fed by the data of MY clients.
I left DC on Thursday feeling very positive, believing maybe, just maybe all the negative implications about this being a “dog and pony show” to appease REALTORS was surely a misunderstanding of how NAR works.
I was wrong! and I so wanted to be right about this.
I agree with what everyone has said so far. Deborah’s last post points up the real issue here. While MIBOR and the NAR leadership may not like or use Google, the rest of the world does. NAR is embarrassing its members by forcing them to explain this issue to consumers.
As a current 7 year member of the Ann Arbor Area Board of Realtors, member of the local MLS committee and past President of the MLS Committee in 2008, I am extremely disappointed in this decision.
To allow 3rd party vendors to have the right to post “our” listings and not the Brokers is absolutely wrong.
I was one of those that followed this case with great attention over at AgentGenius and various other blogs. In fact, I just finished up a post on ActiveRain about the issue and the decision to defer this until November. I am a great loss to comprehend all of this at the moment.
The “concern at the speed at which these changes were about to be implemented” is an argument that I have a hard time swallowing. Why? Didn’t MIBOR go to NAR and get an immediate interpretation of the rule that was then the basis of this whole deal? Didn’t MIBOR’s quick reaction to the interpretation change the game overnight? Weren’t the rules that we’re fighting for clarification of enacted in 2005? It’s 2009 last time I checked.
If we as an association can’t keep up with the pace of technology, then we need to get out of the game or create a new system. The internet moves at a faster pace than the pre-internet world. If we can’t keep up with it, we’re going to lose. Just ask any record industry executive or the RIAA (Recording Industry Association Of America). Right or wrong, they got burnt by being slower than molasses when music came to the internet. Now, they have to fight back to remain relevant and they have a long road ahead of them. Truth be told, Apple saved them all by finally giving them a decent business model to build off of.
The worst part? An agent who’s trying her hardest to be the best agent she can be has become caught in the middle of a battle. The best part? She has inspired many of us to take action. I count myself amongst on those people.
I personally agree with Jay Thompson.
As professional Realtors, we are supposed to be the “Experts” that people go to for real estate advice.
If we were to be limited by the material and information one can find on a property, it allows giants like Trulia and Zillow to become the “Experts.”
This is something that unfortunately, I already have to fight with, especially with inaccurate pricing and sales information.
Even Relocation companies have been using them as a basis for some of my listings ,and I personally have had to fight for listing pricing already.
As a professiona Realtor, my instinct on pricing was right and the other sources were wrong.
Are we driving business to third party non Realtor sites, or are we to promote the professional Realtor as the ultimate source for real estate information?
If we are to remain in business as a profession, then we should be fighting for Realtors as a whole to be competitive in the Internet Marketplace.
The market has changed to an online advertising portal, instead of newpaper, magazine and direct mail.
Supporting Professional Realtors in being competitive in a changing market is essential.
Our business has made so much progress over the last decade when it comes to working in the best interest of the consumer, and this situation has moved us all 10 steps backwards.
What makes this even worse?
The fact is that our industry has been dragged through the mud during this economic downturn, and the main task the National/State/Local Boards should be working on today is the rebuilding of our overall image, finding better ways to create value for the consumer, and moving into the internet/social media age!
Jay made a great statement above showing that 6 months in internet time is an eternity! (Example: Where was Twitter 6 months ago?)
This deserves an “Emergency” meeting. The membership is making noise, but the good news is we have the power to fix this before it becomes a very large issue with the consumer.
Let’s work together and repair this misunderstanding so that it does not further damage the industry we all love so much.
I don’t know what I could add to what others have already said. This decision to defer the change is not in the best interests of our profession and certainly not in the best interests of the public. This kind of non-decision leaves me bewildered and wondering if anyone at NAR has a clue what’s going on down here in the trenches.
Seems like again we face the “land of unintended consequences”. Much like the prohibiition of usage the MLS in agent’s websites…so agents won’t be “misleading” the consumer. So now who owns the MLS domain? One of the largest vendors SELLING LEADS TO THE REALTOR COMMUNITY! What’s generating those leads? REALTOR LISTINGS.
Absurd!
If NAR doesn’t allow individual agents to put listings out to be indexed and yet allow sites like Zillow and Trulia to market our listings and our local realtors then they are supporting the wrong people.
Our job as Realtors is to get as much advertising for our clients listings. The internet allows us to do that and for just our time investment in many cases. (And a small cost for our websites.)
I understand that thought of trying to control data but it is impossible to “control” data without hurting the NAR’s membership, the Realtor’s income, the Realtor image, and the clients best interest.
NAR is doing right by re-examining the issue. We are moving so fast forward into the technology age. We have to examine decisions on the side effects. I once had the same issues as a father. New situations came up with raising our son and we had to make “new rules” to govern situations that we had never seen before.
Realtor.com has been passed up by so many other sites that provide “free information” such as sold data. If we as NAR members don’t move forward to promote our organization’s and our websites…. to have better websites than non-Realtor websites that sell leads back to us (from our listings) We have a whole new group of Realtors that are embracing social networking, blogging, and new improved websites.
That’s what it is all about ….getting our clients home advertised, marketed and sold.
Just a real estate internet geek from Detroit, MI (WWOCAR)
Our leadership does not seem to understand that future of our industry relies on a professional level of service to the consumer. The consumer will get the information from other sources if we do not provide it for them. IDX rules protecting listing agencies are already in place. Don’t let those outside our membership have a marketing advantage.
I think the new changes in real estate policy are very exciting. I am looking forward to having one of the most progressive property search websites in St. Louis
Any seller I have worked with definately wants their home found on Google. Calling Google a scraper site is ridiculous. I think Jay Thompson, who commented above, captured my sentiments on this issue exactly.
I find it amazing that the NAR and local boards find it acceptable to limit the ability of THEIR OWN MEMBERS to compete with 3rd party listing aggregators. There is NO way that the BoD could not figure out that the exact same data that is being indexed by the 3rd parties is the data that they are denying to dues paying members.
If anything, one would think that the NAR would be trying to allow the members to be the ones to have the listing data indexed while stopping the 3rd party sites from using the same data to get between consumers and agents in order to sell the agents back the leads.
Shameful.
We as a nation, have been led to believe that “supply and demand” principles are allowed to innocently exist in the marketplace without much interference with the supply and/or demand. Not true…
“Plenty” is the arch enemy of “profits,” therefore American sellers and their agents don’t spend much time injecting quality in plenty (as Japanese tend to do). They actually invest in manufacturing “necessity out of thin air”, “hype of scarcity”, “financial engineering,” etc. to move their products at a good profit levels.
What does that have to do with the real estate “sales” business? Plenty [pun intended.
]
The real estate brokerage industry manufactures scarcity through their MLSs.
Engineers, Google, IDX vendors, Zillow, etc., on the other hand, are hell-bent in creating “data plenty” for reasons of their own. [Suggested reading: The Longer Long Tail, Cluetrain Manifesto, What Would Google Do?, The Search, etc.]
So the battle is on between Flintstonish MLSs supported by their sugar-daddies aka listing brokerages, and the Google Generation’s quants [mathematics wizards, currently the top most cushy job holders in America] who need massive amounts of data about not only real estate, but also about every other online line and off-line activity Americans get involved in.
The privacy argument coming from the Flintstonish MLSs is lame. Their argument is the last ditch effort to hide their production of scarcity. REALTORS would be better off flexing their 1.3 million member muscle against Google and its ilk with what they are doing with those gazzilion bytes of data. [Suggested reading: Numerati, Click, etc.]
The real privacy battle must be waged against Google, Optimum Online, Comcast, AOL, etc., who are selling the data, they are gathering about all of us, to other marketing quants [http://www.jdpowerwebintelligence.com/, AOL wasted $275 million on Tacoda] to sell us things we don’t need [e.g.,we don't need Coke but it is one of the most loved products and brand] with financing products [e.g., GM's financing of Hummer, banks giving loans to anyone who could fog a mirror, etc.] we could live without.
As I say often, “But what do I know. I am just a guy on the Internet.”
As realtors, we are dedicated to promoting and protecting our clients’ best interests. My sellers want their homes sold. I advertise my listings everywhere I can. If someone else wants to advertise my listings on their site, great! The more people who are aware that the house is for sale, the better chance we have of selling the home quickly. Search engines are our friends; not our enemies.
How sad I was to hear that this motion was tabled, and what a true shame for the members of NAR to not have had this dealt with at the meetings this past week. I wonder how many of those who voted in favor of tabling this motion just really don’t understand the issues at hand.
Kudos to the efforts of all those who had put so much into this issue being worked out in time to have been dealt with in DC. And now, how ridiculous to think that it will be at least another 6 months before the next opportunity to resolve this. That 6 months, as Jay pointed out, is FOREVER in the internet world. And that just gives all the aggregators out there that much more time to be putting our own members, whose hard work brings in those very listings, at a terrible disadvantage.
Once again, the huge lumbering machine is way behind the eight-ball and getting even further behind…… sadly, especially on this particular issue.
As an NAR director I am extremely dissapointed that the clarification of this outdated rule was sent back for further study. Waiting until Nov. to taken action is ridiculous.
Jay Thompson said it best “Six months in “internet time” is an eternity. The NAR had a wonderful opportunity to take swift action to help not only its membership, but the home buying and selling public. Sadly, that opportunity just went away.”
NAR needs to put the REALTORS who pay for them to support and help us, foremost, forefront and pass the ruling without delay. REALTORS are at a disadvantage of being able to advertise their OWN LISTINGS throughout the INTERNET whereas the 3rd party sites are given free rein. This is so backward even a child can see it and ask what is going on here. Who is it NAR SUPPORTS? 3rd party sites? Hmmmmmmm?
Obviously the majority of current NAR directors are unqualified to review this issue. To be able to do so would require that they first understand the fundamentals of Internet technology. Indexing by search engines is NOT scraping. I call for a special session in which this ruling is overturned. Waiting six months to re-review this issue is unacceptable. The Board should take a crash course on the Internet and reconvene to overturn this ruling. Dues paying member unite and revolt!
Having attended the MLS Policy Committee meeting and talked with Paula Henry afterward, I thought this decision was a no-brainer. I thought if the policy change was approved by MLS Policy Committee (it was) and by NAR’s Executive Committee (it was) that it would be approved by the Board of Directors as well.
It seems everyone in this discussion agrees that MLSs should enable search engine indexing of IDX feeds. So why wasn’t one NAR director prepared to stand up and explain why it was important to pass the change now rather than referring it to a work group? Is it possible that there’s concern about the ambiguity of the language “unauthorized use” that’s going unspoken here? What’s really behind this delay?
Someone here asked what MIBOR’s plans are in the interim. That’s something we’re going to investigate.
I’m extremely disappointed that the Board of Directors didn’t pass the recommendations. I have to say that the board in Indian should have its leadership scrubbed off of it since they don’t seem to understand what our customers want and deserve.
I think it’s very simple. How can this decision help/hurt consumers? How can this decision help/hurt Realtors? If you think about those two questions, the decision should be obvious.
Representing our sellers requires maximum exposure of their property and any effort by NAR or a state association to interfere with this is flat out unethical. If google or anyone else helps expose our listings to the market place, or helps buyers find the “right” home for them, I’m all for it! I don’t care if they call it scraping or indexing or pooh-poohing… any interference in maximum exposure is foolish, as well as unethical – especially in this market!
The more exposure my listings have, the better. Search engines (all of them; not just google) – good. Scraper sites – questionable. Depends on their intent and what their doing with the data.
NAR members could be offering the general public better information than they can receive from Zillow or any of the other internet companies that “compete” with realtors. The associaiton should continue to protect personal info but general property info that can normally be found in public records should be easily available. That just makes us look smarter, more knowledgable about the industry we represent. I am embarassed that my sister turns to Zillow to find proeprty info she cannot obtain through a realtor website.
I certainly applaud the efforts of the NAR to reach out to web savvy real estate Professionals such as Jay and Paula for their input. While it may be unfortunate that the guidelines have not yet been revised to clear up the controversy, it is a step in the right direction by NAR in listening to it’s actual practicing members.
I personally don’t think the indexing of individual home detail pages provided by an IDX is misappropriation of MLS data… and I’m not sure of how much of a really big deal it is in the first place.
Should potential real estate buyers be selecting anybody to help them just because they have good search engine rankings for 123 Main Street, Anytown, USA?
No.
Unfortunately… we have to compete with so many third party middlemen in search engine rankings and many buyers just click on whatever shows up and gives up their contact information. Certainly not good for anybody so unless the third party sites can be controlled, it certainly is not in the best interest of the consumer holding back actual REALTORS from having a chance to compete.
Does the actual home seller care if another REALTOR’s IDX page is showing their home up for sale for added exposure to their listing? I don’t think so…. (None of my Home Sellers would be upset.) If 15,000 REALTORS in Las Vegas want to put up banners advertising one of my listings for sale with their contact information… Please do.
From what I understand, this whole issue began because another member of MIBOR did not want to put in the work to have the same thing Paula has remarkably accomplished… and punishing the hard work of a REALTOR to accomplish what Paula (and several other REALTORS) has accomplished…. is punishing hard working, forward thinking REALTORS.
That’s not in the best interest of Anybody…
(Except for third party sites more interesting in selling advertising and collecting information.)
NAR had the opportunity to do the right thing, and they blew it. If they want to wait until November to make the right decision they should also allow agents to keep their listings indexed, until a decision is made. By forcing the agents to block the search engines sounds like your guilty until proven innocent.
NAR’s updated position is as follows:
——————–
The NAR Multiple Listing Issues and Policies Committee’s recommendation clarifying that the IDX policy does not prohibit indexing of IDX sites by search engines was referred by the Board of Directors back to the Committee for further consideration. There will be a work group of Committee members convened (pursuant to the Committee’s request) to review the unrelated, staff-developed IDX proposed enhancements that were given initial consideration by the Committee last Thursday, and Chairman John Smaby has made the “indexing” proposal part of the work group’s overall IDX enhancement review.
Based on the Committee’s deliberations last Thursday, it was clear that the Committee had not considered indexing when the IDX policy was amended in 2005, and that the Committee had not – then or since – taken a position on whether the existing requirement that IDX site operators prevent “scraping” also prohibits “indexing” of those sites by search engines. Since the applicability of the current IDX policy to indexing by search engines was, at best, unclear, the Committee recommended that the IDX policy be amended to expressly provide that it does not prohibit indexing of IDX sites by search engines. The practical effect of the Committee’s proposed clarifying amendment being referred back to the Committee by the Board of Directors for further consideration is that NAR has no position on “indexing” of IDX sites at this point, and likely will not until the Board has a further opportunity to act.
———-
So, in a nutshell, the above statement from NAR means that until the policy is clarified, whether an MLS requires participants to prevent indexing of their IDX sites is a matter of local discretion.
Matt Stigliano’s updated position is as follows:
Maybe NAR needs to take one lesson from the music industry. When we received contracts it always contained language referring to future marketing tools, delivery methods, etc. (ie, internet sales which didn’t exist when I signed my contract, internet radio which wasn’t even a reality, websites (barely any band had a website when I built our first one), my first record came out on cassette still, etc.). By allowing for “the future” in the language, cases like this could be avoided a little better. By the time NAR gets done shuttling this back and forth, there will be a new technology that brings up a whole other set of issues.
I still say that this is a case of no one (NAR or MIBOR) wanting to act first or step up and be the game changer. The interpretation is flawed and that’s clear as a bell to me in Cliff’s comment to Jay (which he allowed to be published on AgentGenius):
Part of the frustration with organized Real Estate is that it takes time to make change. However, that is also the good side of it. The Board of Directors sending it back for further consideration is not necessarily a bad thing. After years of Board work, I am always amazed at the myriad of ways that members and 3rd parties circumvent our rules. Make sure that it is done right in the first place and that may take some time. It looks like NAR wants to make the change but wants to do the due diligence. Sounds OK to me.
Folks, IDX performed its function. It’s time is up.
Long Term – All the MLSs in the US should be consolidated into one web-based MLS.
Short Term – All MLSs should just be populating Realtor.com with all kinds of listings not just home listings. We can then have links from Realtor.com to agent’s websites.
Therefore, I envision massive consolidation of MLSs and elimination of IDX.
Define “index site”. Sure, Google is one. So is Yahoo. But what if Trulia starts an indexing site? What if Google buys HouseValues? THEN who is an indexing site and who is not?
Look, it is very clear that NAR and MIBOR are tilting at windmills here. And it appears NAR is unable to move at the speed necessary to keep up with the advancing technology and business models.
Sure, I would LIKE to be the only game in town. Fact is, however, that technology has moved WAY beyond the average REALTOR. The survivors will be those who learn, adapt, and change to fit what the CONSUMER wants and needs.
If we, as an association, cannot keep our policies and technology up to date… how can we instill confidence in our potential client-base? Blocking ANY indexing of listings is not only a head in the sand move, but it is also a detriment to OUR business models when competing with alternative business models.
If I am hamstrung by rules that handcuff me when it comes to utilizing ALL technologies that are available, then I will eventually lose out to those who can produce the technological results our clients will demand.
Depending on the technological savvy of a potential client, one of the first questions out of a seller’s mouth is “How many websites can you put my house listing on?” Even the most technologically backward client understands the impact of the internet in today’s home search processes.
I can sit and wax for days about the reasons a client SHOULD utilize a Realtor in the very beginning of the home search process. And it would be EXACTLY that… waxing. Reality is that our home buyers have masses of information available to them via the web. Our association needs to LEAD the way to provide that information, and to encourage our membership to adapt to the changing environment created by the very technology that so many seem to fear.
NAR has shown tremendous “old time” thinking when it comes to the advancing technologies. It seems the board is trying its hardest to put the genie back in the bottle and “return to the old days”. It’s not going to happen. NOW is the time for NAR to ADVANCE technology and ENCOURAGE new innovations in client service.
Realtor.com WAS the resource everyone turned to for information on the web. Sites like Trulia and Zillow simply exploited the weaknesses of NAR’s bureaucracy and the complacency of the website vendor in improving the site. Technologically, at this point, Realtor.com is desperately trying to keep up. And there is NO EXCUSE for this, given the resources that we have at our disposal.
Lee Iaccoca said “Lead, Follow, or Get out of the Way”. NAR must decide which of those three models they wish to adopt. HOPEFULLY, it will either be “Lead” or “Get out of the Way”, because the current course of “Follow” will eventually lead to NAR being part of the problem… and not part of the solution.
Why, when the horse is already out of the barn, are we now visiting this? NAR has sold our birthright to a for profit organization (REALTOR.com), and now wants us to keep google from helping buyers find our seller’s property.
I have never felt it was my responsibility to KEEP buyers from buying my listings, but it was my responsibility to HELP my seller’s sell the property.
REALTORS are responsible for the data. It is important that the Directors do what is inn the best interest of its members. While it would have been nice to move forward in the May meeting I am confident the Directors will get the issue resolved in November.