Craig Cheatham, CEO of The Realty Alliance posted some brokerage positioning on social media that WAV Group was granted permission to republish. The Realty Alliance is composing a document for MLS. I think of it as a Bill of Rights, but I expect them to accommodate a softer name. When they composed the Fair Display Guidelines – available at https://fairdisplay.org/ – they took a softer tone. So maybe the future document will be something like the Fair MLS Guidelines when they publish. Cheatham has shared some of the items on stages at CMLS, Clareity, RISMedia and others.
Here is the post that caught my attention and is worth reading. I believe that he shared this with Realtor volunteer leaders:
“In general brokers continue to consider their MLS their most valuable business solution provider. That hasn’t changed despite all the upheaval in our industry in the last several years. Their primary need remains the same: a business-to-business framework that has as one key component a repository of the most reliable, accurate, and complete market and property data.
So, MLSs keeping a relentless focus on the core mission continues to be priority number one and will earn California MLSs support from brokers going forward. And brokers want MLSs to view their customers as being actual real estate practitioners, NOT the consumer public.
Brokers these days are questioning all the existing frameworks and systems in our industry like never before because relying on them cost them a lot of money – and with the onset of AI and the appearance of some legitimate MLS alternatives being pitched to them.
From the brokerage angle, the question for MLSs to be asking is, ‘Do brokers see your MLS as an obstacle or as a valued business partner?’
The comments I’m seeing and hearing about replacing the MLS come from a viewpoint that the MLS is ‘in the way’ – an impediment to doing business efficiently. If your brokers see your MLS as an impediment, then there’s real risk there to that MLS going forward.
A newer thought I’ve been sharing for about two years since I first started hearing it, is that perhaps MLSs should focus their rules, regulations and policies around data utility and not try to regulate business practices and business models.
With associations and MLSs trying to “derisk” their policies, this is a great place to start, and we’re even seeing state legislatures and state regulators display a willingness to address those, so MLSs should be able to hand that off.
Brokers now really are thinking out loud about developing a more stringent definition of PARTICIPANT.
I know trying to discern who the real brokers are and the ‘paper brokers’ are always has been a challenge, but it seems brokers are looking to MLSs to differentiate and enforce that.
A huge frustration brokers have felt for more than a decade and honestly should not still be dealing with is the inability to get the data to which they’re entitled. Sometimes this is because their MLS simply does not have the technical capability to deliver, but most often it is because the MLS does not have the right license agreement language in place and refuses to do the work of updating these documents to current needs and use cases. This puts brokers at a disadvantage versus outsiders, when brokers should have the best access to data, not outside vendors.
Brokers also are wanting their MLSs to look again at their financial models, considering ways to levy necessary fees based on who contributes the data and who just takes the data and even providing rebates to those who contribute the most and make the MLS so valuable.
And right now brokers are seeing an opportunity to set things right in terms of the consumer experience. With search moving to AI platforms instead of traditional search engines and portals. If consumers aren’t getting listing data directly from the source – the listing broker – they at least should be getting it from the MLS.
A great question to work on would be: ‘What can MLSs be doing right now to ensure the data source AI is using to assist consumers is the listing brokerage and/or the MLS, not interlopers?’”
In his live presentation, he continued: “Fair, enforced rules and policies and quality data remain top priorities even in this new world. What HAS changed is how brokerages expect to use that data. My CIOs would tell you they’re looking for a clean, open data backbone. That means, among other things, MLS data delivered through modern, consistent RESO APIs, bulk feeds, and event-driven updates — not fragmented access, outdated policies, or licenses that restrict legitimate business use.
Large brokerages increasingly operate data warehouses, analytics platforms, and internal AI tools. They need MLS data to flow cleanly into those environments, in near real time, across multiple MLSs. We don’t need out-of-touch attorneys or out-of-date licenses agreements to bog down (or even PREVENT) data access in this day and age.
Perhaps the other items on the brokers’ need list goes beyond data, rules and access.
On an operational level, my firms’ CIOs would tell you they believe the future platform is NOT another front end. They envision a broker-owned intelligence layer that sits on top of MLS data and other sources — quietly powering agent guidance, manager visibility, and operational efficiency.
They don’t want more dashboards. They want decision support at the point of work:
- Pricing scenarios and time-to-sell estimates
- Smarter comps that reflect functional similarity, not just field matches
- Clear explanations of buyer and seller performance
- Natural-language search and “tell me what to do next” guidance
Going forward brokers want performance intelligence, not just market stats:
- Listing win rates
- List-to-sell ratios
- Buyer agreement coverage
- Profitability by office and agent
Our firms are big enough to utilize administrative professionals for handling listing data, so these admins want automation that reduces error and compliance risk — standardized fields, real-time validation, better use of public records, and fewer manual fixes that drain skilled staff time. But even medium-sized and small firms would benefit from this kind of efficiency – perhaps even more so than my mega-firms.
Our brokers are VERY excited about the possibilities of the Broker Public Portal (sometimes appearing as Cribio.com) and so I would encourage all MLSs to go all-in. The potential is more in better data management as an industry than it is in the leverage we gain over outside portals. If MLSs participate in the BPP, we believe it will deliver great benefits for agents, brokers and consumers.
Brokers continue to want fewer MLSs. As firms grow their market footprint and as the pace of consolidation picks up, more and more brokers are facing the need to deal with multiple rule sets, data formats and duplicate fees.
If you want to dig more deeply into what brokers around the country think when asked about MLS, go visit ‘FairMLS.org.’ At some point later this year a shorter, more concise list of broker expectations will appear there.
If MLSs will PRIORITIZE SUPPORTING BROKER SUCCESS, double down on your core purposes, stay out of business practices by enabling fierce, efficient competition but not regulating how brokerages operate, if you will let brokers alone deliver business tools to agents to allow them to differentiate and to avoid competing with brokerages (or subsidizing broker competitors) and invest in being that layer upon which brokers can innovate independently, the entire ecosystem gets stronger, more defensible, and more valuable.
That’s the future your broker participants are planning for — and they see MLSs at the center of it.”
— Craig Cheatham, president and CEO of The Realty Alliance to a state association of Realtors MLS work group.
The post Guest Post from The Realty Alliance on MLS Strategy appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.
Leave a Reply