Listing Syndication: "If you can't beat them"

After you last post about ARG I read the discussion about it, and sort of attacks of Jim Abbott. They were most probably coming from someone in the real estate industry, but I am no longer sure of that.

For me a clear sign on figuring who is a pro and who are around was the jargon. But when licensees, who pary to NAR use REALTOR instead of agent, i have trouble taking them seriously.

When they write about us as "professional REALTORS", I chuckle. it sounds worse than professional politicians.

And another point that surprised me was the statement that the customer wins if s/he has his/her own representation by an agent with their best interests in mind. I often deal with both sides as transaction broker and I find that in majority of cistuations these deal are more fair than when there are two agents each representing their Principal. Best interest in mind do not replace the expert in the neighborhood. I have people coming here from Jakconvilee, and maybe they have the best interest of their client in their mind, but unfortunatley, there is nothing else in their mind to support this best interest.

Would in this situation contacting the listing agent a bad idea?

Maureen - I brought it up as Jim was castigated for saying that syndicating was not working for them, and though it sounds weird, I can see merit in it. And when critics say that it is BS because of the benefit of being represented by someone else, it is not really cut and dried. It is all based on the assumption that the other agent is great or at least is very good, which is so often is not the case.

Check Trulia and see who is answering qustions. It always stunns me to see the responsed from agents for other areas jumping in and offering advise and help. Someone asking about a particular property in Daytona gets garbage answers from people out of the area and even out of state. If these people pay, they will be the ones getting the calls.

What is good about them?

I'm still new to AR so can't really comment on the background noted in this blog but have to agree with some of the points that have been made.

Jon raised some good points about transactions brokers and I agree with his remarks. The comments about the questions on Trulia are spot on. Recently I saw a question posted by someone in my area that was responded to by an agent from up north and the response was only partially correct.

What disturbs me most when I see out of state agents attempting to answer questions like above is that unless they are actually licensed in another state, it should be a prohibited practice.

I don't know that there is any right or wrong answer to the syndication issue, it seems to boil down to personal preference. What concerns me about stopping syndication is that a listing agent has an obligation to do their best to market the seller's listing and that requires giving them the most possible exposure. If we refuse to allow syndication, that does not occur so...are we really doing our job?

Maureen as always very thought provoking and controversial post.  Being a Realtor in the Greater Los Angeles,CA market, we have a larger per cent of agents who happen to be Realtors and the aggressive Marketing by NAR and CAR and some of us have created a "definition" of Real Estate sales as Realtors...just like when you say "spa" you interchange it wit "Jacuzzi"  it does not make it right but that is how it is.

As far as being on both sides of the transaction, sometimes some agents do it intentionally by not responding to co-broker calls or emails.... I do a lot of double ending when it comes to "vacant land" listings because I am a Land Specialist and many times developers and land buyers have seen me for over 15 years and come directly to me. On the other hand I have never been on both sides of a Condominium or Single Family Residence, since I make my listing available to all....

Maureen - It's DianA...not "DianE"...

Consumers do not regard either of the sites (TZ) as entertainment - that is the problem. Think about it - one of the biggest complaints from other agents is that consumers see old listings still showing on those sites and think they are still available...so, they obviously don't consider the sites as entertainment but as reliable sources of information.

SO, by the same token...when an agent from out of state responds to a consumer's question with erroneous information, the consumer does not consider that answer to be "entertainment" but assumes that since it came from a licensed real estate agent, it must be true.

I would much rather field inquiries from consumers about expired/sold listings that still appear on the sites than have to spend time explaining to a consumer that the answers they received to a question they posted were not entirely correct and why.

"All 50 states should monitor sites?  For others answering questions in their state who are not licensed?  Or police their licensees?"

I did not say that...I said it should be "prohibited", not "monitored". At a minimum, I think anyone responding to a post that is not from someone in a state where they are licensed should be required to include a disclaimer such as "I am not licensed in your state of residence so the information in my response may not be correct or accurate in your state".

Good morning Maureen - 

This was a big topic at our AR meet-up Saturday. 

Hope you enjoy a great day in Ohio my friend.

John

Maureen, I agree with Endre. This is a thought-provoking post. I think what's good for our listings may not always be as good for ourselves if we hope to capture a buyer from our listing. And for sure, some of the agents who are called are not as skilled as the listing agent in answering questions. Perhaps there will be a backlash, and there is already with some brokers. A Team in Texas just took their listings off Trulia.

Sharon