Dear NAR, AAR, PAR et al …

Stop.

Please.

Enough is enough.

NAR, stop making ridiculous predictions of the direction of the real-estate market. At this point, a quatrain from Nostradamus would carry more credibility. It’s not just that no one believes a single word of any press release. It’s that those of us who carry the distinction of the big R (r) are the ones who have to answer for your fiction.

I am not a REALTOR (r) by choice. I am a REALTOR because the local associations own the MLS. You - the NAR leaders - are the main reason why I likely would stop paying my dues if I had the option. Because you don’t represent me. Hell, you don’t even represent a fair slice of reality much of the time.

You talk about the important of looking for the revered big R and then you spend the rest of your time discrediting it through spins, falsehoods and short-sightedness. It’s a joke.

At Connect SF, the concept of an NAR-sponsored national MLS was raised. It’s not a new topic by any stretch. There seems to be a public outcry for a national MLS, for reasons I have yet to understand. Realtor.com carries a large percentage of the listings, and local sites serve the purpose in local markets.

And going back to the original purpose of the MLS, to allow MLS members to advertise homes to other MLS members, a national MLS is worthless. Maybe it provides value to someone in Connecticut, where it’s a short drive to Rhode Island. But I’m not going to be selling homes in Rhode Island. Or New Mexico. Or California. I’m not licensed there. So advertising with an offer of cooperation is worthless.

Except you’re going to raise my dues anyway.

Our local MLS now fines its members for typos in addresses. Yet they’ve had the same typo in the warning message for months. Put even one-tenth of the focus and time spent catching agents trying to manipulate the Days on Market into something useful, such as a public listings site, and enter the 21st century.

By definition, a trade association is supposed to protect the best interests of its members. Through the constant effort to paint a smiley face on tough market conditions and through the constant effort to constrain the flow of information whenever possible (ask the DOJ), you have done far more harm to the vast majority of us than good.

Enough is enough.

Stop.

Please.

Technorati Tags: NAR, Arizona Association of Realtors, national MLS

Popularity: 11% [?]

Share This

Tags: General Real Estate, MLS by Jonathan Dalton
2 Comments »

It happens like clockwork. A seller calls trying to figure out why traffic through their home has been slower than they anticipated (largely because their friends and relatives have told them there should be two showings a day.) Within a day, I receive a call from an agent who wants to show the home.

The reason for this, as I explained, is we real estate agents have a secret signal we send out after a seller has called demanding showings. Rather than the shape of a bat, a big “R” from the Realtor trademark flashes across the sky and we instinctively know one our kind is in need. Works every time.

Lack of showings usually concern me less than they do the homeowner because I know what to expect in any given market. Back in 2005, if the phone didn’t ring within the first hour and if I didn’t have an offer before sundown, something was wrong. Not so in this market, though well-priced homes still receive multiple offers from time to time.

I try my best to bridge the disconnect between seller expectations and market reality. I talk about what to expect in terms of showings, which homes are selling, what needed to happen for those homes to sell. But the message seems to get lost from time to time.

And, in truth, I’ve allowed it to happen. Twice recently when a seller asked if “we could try” listing their home at a higher-than-recommended price, I said yes with a caveat - I wrote an automatic price reduction into the listing agreement.

Truth be told, that wasn’t a firm enough stand. My answer should have been no. And if it cost me the listing, so be it.

Why did I bend? Not to plant a sign in the yard and pick up the alleged ancillary business from sign calls and the like. Not to harvest buyers who come through open houses with no plans of actually purchasing the home being held open. No, I bent because I believed I had set expectations properly, as signified by the automatic price reduction.

“If you want to try it fine,” I would say. “But if we don’t have any offers in two weeks, we are going to drop the price.”

My sellers would nod and agree. I only learned later they were looking at that original price and despite everything I was saying still were convinced a miracle could occur. In my mind, writing the price reduction into the contract was better than what could happen if they ran into an agent ready to list at all costs and at any list price with no regard for reality. They’re out there. In numbers. Say what you need to say, set false hopes, then pound the seller for price reductions later down the line.

Looking back, my strategy was in error because sellers still expect buyers to look at their home regardless of list price. Even knowing they have priced their home too high, they assume someone will come in with a lowball offer - not understanding that the buyers writing lowball offers are doing so on homes already priced thousands lower. Why try and move a seller $50,000 when you can move a lower-priced seller $25,000 and pay the same price?

“No” often is the most difficult word to say in real estate, especially when you know there always is someone around to say yes. You try your best to educate and you hope that the message gets through.

But more and more, it seems like “no” is the only realistic answer. If sellers don’t believe the numbers, let them choose someone else at their own peril. It happens. Take it from someone who twice has watched listings expire only to see the new agent come in and immediately raise the list price.

Do I need to tell you how that story ends?

Popularity: 7% [?]

Share This

Tags: Phoenix Market, Marketing, Tips for Sellers by Jonathan Dalton
3 Comments »