[My engagement with Compass concluded at the end of September. I still have confidentiality requirements, and I have been meeting those throughout the engagement. These remain, as they have ever been, my own opinions only.]
I did not attend CMLS and based on what I've been hearing from friends and colleagues who did, as well as media coverage of the event, I am filled with JOMO. Not the first time with real estate conferences, and it won't be the last time.
I am somewhat limited as to what I can discuss as I am privy to confidential information that I cannot disclose. Nonetheless, as noted above, my engagement has concluded and this topic... simply cannot be ignored. I would have written about it even if I were still engaged because it is an important conversation.
I suppose that a certain amount of drama is inevitable now. Once there are mutual threats of litigation, emotions tend to solidify. I have been hopeful for some time that we as an industry might avoid a fight, and come to agree on a path forward. I think it's safe to say that opportunity is likely behind us now. Perhaps it was inevitable that brokerages fight with the MLS just like the Zillow v. MRED fight was inevitable. Because truly important principles and questions of power are at stake.
So perhaps we will have peace, but after the war determines who wins and who loses. I hope not, but... it is what it is.
Let me give you the high-level perspective. This fight, whether it escalates to actual lawsuits or not, is ultimately about the role of the MLS. I have been writing on it and speaking about it for quite some time now. The central question is whether the MLS is a broker cooperative, or a marketing and data platform? Both was the answer for 25 years; it can no longer be the answer.
Robert Reffkin might have articulated his points somewhat inelegantly (and based on media reports, his message did not land as he might have hoped) but that is the actual issue.
While I recognize that the coming drama will tend to obscure this fact, because people will be arguing about marketing, about office exclusives, about fiduciary duty, about power, personalities, consolidation, etc. – about all kinds of related but peripheral things, perhaps there is value in at least articulating what the real issue is here.
I may be somewhat uniquely positioned to say this to both sides. I wish the two sides would come to recognize something important: this is a fight between two institutions who are fighting for their survival. They have both been backed into a corner, sometimes by each other but more so by larger forces of technology and macroeconomics. Perhaps the way out is not more bellicose rhetoric, chest-thumping, and bringing in the lawyers... but sitting down and being vulnerable with each other.
Let's get into it, with sadness and reluctance and a tiny sliver of hope.
