Housing News
National Association of Realtors membership drops 2.4% in February
NAR membership declines by nearly 24,000 real estate professionals in the month of February, but why? Is this a natural decline or is it fueled by the continually crumbling housing market and shifting housing policies? Some say it’s simply natural attrition, read on to find out more.
Trade group membership levels
In January, the National Association of Realtors’ membership numbers dipped below one million for the first time in roughly 8 years, although the march below one million has been a gradual decline. The month of February ended with 964,886 dues paying members, down 2.4 percent from January, representing a loss of 23,989 Realtors for the month. The nation’s largest trade association relies on membership dues and over the years has done a considerable amount of cost cutting in the form of reducing their print publication, reducing the executive work force, and doubling dues.
Some will point to natural attrition while others will match declining housing performance with the declining appeal of struggling as a real estate professional. Some will blame the current administration for failing housing policies that have kept the buyer pool restricted, while others will point to a long road toward the crash that is a natural (albeit exaggerated) economic cycle.
An unknown portion of licensees are inactive yet continue to pay dues at NAR in the event that they get a buyer or seller interested, which a portion of membership loss could be this group simply not maintaining dues, yet it is also normal every day Realtors beat down by the economy, particularly agents whose expertise is new home construction or geographic areas that have caught the foreclosure virus. In some of these cases, simply coming up with a few dollars and they’re back in business, but in other cases, some are leaving the business altogether.
In almost all years this decade and in most years past, it is common for membership to dip from December to January and from January to February, typically increasing slightly again in March going forward. NAR spokesperson Walt Molony told AGBeat, “Monthly membership fluctuates because local dues cycles vary, and outside of the boom years there generally has been a seasonal dip from December to January.”
Austin
Austin tops the list of best places to buy a home
When looking to buy a home, taking the long view is important before making such a huge investment – where are the best places to make that commitment?
Housing News
Average age of houses on the rise, so is it now better or worse to buy new?
With aging housing in America, are first-time buyers better off buying new or existing homes? The average age of a home is rising, as is the price of new housing, so a shift could be upon us.
The average home age is higher than ever
(REALUOSO.COM) – In a survey from the Department of Housing and Urban Development American Housing Survey (AHS), the median age of homes in the United States was 35 years old. In Texas, homes are a bit younger with the median age between 19 – 29 years. The northeast has the oldest homes, with the median age between 50 – 61 years. In 1985, the median age of a home was only 23 years.
With more houses around 40 years old, the National Association of Realtors asserts that homeowners will have to undertake remodeling and renovation projects before selling unless the home is sold as-is, in which case the buyer will be responsible to update their new residence. Even homeowners who aren’t selling will need to consider remodeling for structural and aesthetic reasons.
Prices of new homes on the rise
Newer homes cost more than they used to. The price differential between new homes and older homes has increased from 10 percent traditionally to around 37 percent in 2014. This is due to rising construction costs, scarcity of lots, and a low inventory of new homes that doesn’t meet the demand.
Click here to continue reading this story…
Housing News
Are Realtors the real loser in the fight between Zillow Group and Move, Inc.?
The last year has been one of dramatic and rapid change in the real estate tech sector, but Realtors are vulnerable, and we’re worried.
Why Realtors are vulnerable to these rapid changes
(REALUOSO.COM) – Corporate warfare demands headlines in every industry, but in the real estate tech sector, a storm has been brewing for years, which in the last year has come to a head. Zillow Group and Move, Inc. (which is owned by News Corp. and operates ListHub, Realtor.com, TopProducer, and other brands) have been competing for a decade now, and the race has appeared to be an aggressive yet polite boxing match. Last year, the gloves came off, and now, they’ve drawn swords and appear to want blood.
Note: We’ll let you decide which company plays which role in the image above.
So how then, does any of this make Realtors the victims of this sword fight? Let’s get everyone up to speed, and then we’ll discuss.
1. Zillow poaches top talent, Move/NAR sues
It all started last year when the gloves came off – Move’s Chief Strategy Officer (who was also Realtor.com’s President), Errol Samuelson jumped ship and joined Zillow on the same day he phoned in his resignation without notice. He left under questionable circumstances, which has led to a lengthy legal battle (wherein Move and NAR have sued Zillow and Samuelson over allegations of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and misappropriation of trade secrets), with the most recent motion being for contempt, which a judge granted to Move/NAR after the mysterious “Samuelson Memo” surfaced.
Salt was added to the wound when Move awarded Samuelson’s job to Move veteran, Curt Beardsley, who days after Samuelson left, also defected to Zillow. This too led to a lawsuit, with allegations including breach of contract, violation of corporations code, illegal dumping of stocks, and Move has sought restitution. These charges are extremely serious, but demanded slightly less attention than the ongoing lawsuit against Samuelson.
2. Two major media brands emerge
Last fall, the News Corp. acquisition of Move, Inc. was given the green light by the feds, and this month, Zillow finalized their acquisition of Trulia.
…Click here to continue reading this story…
-
Opinion Editorials1 week agoDeclutter your quarantine workspace (and brain)
-
Opinion Editorials2 weeks agoMinimalism doesn’t have to happen overnight
-
Business News4 days agoEveryone should have an interview escape plan
-
Opinion Editorials2 weeks agoOnline dating is evolving and maybe networking will too
-
Business Entrepreneur5 days agoSmall businesses must go digital to survive (and thrive)
-
Tech News4 days agoHow to personalize your site for every visitor without learning code
-
Business News3 days agoYou should apply to be on a board – why and how
-
Tech News2 weeks ago4 ways startups prove their investment in upcoming technology trends
Randy
March 2, 2012 at 12:47 pm
Sometimes I think NAR simply doesn’t get it! Losing agents? ….let’s raise the dues! Fewer transactions and higher cost of doing business, fewer REALTORS. Loss of income…let’s raise the dues some more! I really believe the NAR business model needs revamping.
Lani Rosales
March 2, 2012 at 1:47 pm
Randy, as noted above, February is always a month of natural member loss. Do you think it is NAR’s doing, a down economy, or natural attrition?
Dorothy
March 16, 2012 at 7:35 pm
No its called I can do it myself.
Innovation-internet
Mike Pennington
March 2, 2012 at 6:35 pm
Lani:
IMO We are in a recovery in regards to housing but even so, there is not enough recovery to keep the number of REALTORS over 1,000,000. I’d like to know peoples thoughts and what the water-mark will be in 2013-2015.
It would be great to see NAR, State and Locals financially prepare for a membership number closer to 800,000 for the next 3 years. We had a huge influx of REALTORS in the good years that I cannot see remaining in the business.
Lani Rosales
March 2, 2012 at 11:18 pm
Mike, that’s an interesting question about 2013-2015… it seems that the influx of REALTORS will increase again closer to 2015 as housing improves, but this time not because of the economy, but because the appeal of self employment has increased over the years and has become attainable, and with the visibility of real estate agents online, more could join in as housing recovers. Thoughts?
Teresa Boardman
March 2, 2012 at 6:46 pm
Hard to imagine anyone leaving all this. Short sales and foreclosures are so glamorous.
Lani Rosales
March 2, 2012 at 11:20 pm
Teresa, well when you make it sound all sexy….
Russ Bergeron
March 2, 2012 at 8:32 pm
Year end billing. 30 days to pay. Cut off in February.
Good theory about fewer practitioners.
1,000,000 Realtors (many more licensees but we’ll work with round numbers), 10,000,000 sides equals 10 sides each.
100,000 Realtors, 10,000,000 sides equals 100 sides each.
How many sides would you want to do?
The flip side is that many times I have heard people say that they would love to have fewer competitors and would be willing to pay more for services. Would love to test that theory. 🙂
Lani Rosales
March 2, 2012 at 11:21 pm
I think a lot of people have been waiting for a thinning of the herd. I don’t think we’ll hit that iconic 800k mark this year though, do you?
Fred Romano
March 3, 2012 at 7:56 am
NAR should focus on making better use of our money. One thing I have been saying for years is that they should stop killing trees with their print magazines and just publish it online. They could cutout all the bull-crap advertising and focus on the content.
Our local MLS sends us PDF magazines instead of paper. They started that a couple of years ago and it’s saving money and the environment.
Sig Buster
March 3, 2012 at 8:29 am
NAR is surely a 24k SpinMeister. Yes, the economy has something to do with attrition but NAR won’t admit that the dues increase had a lot to do with it. It’s not so much the money as the slimy way they went about it. They said they wanted our input but when every pol out there said NO! they voted for the increase anyway. Proving they don’t care what we think. They wanted money to funnel to their friends in Congress for their own profit and aggrandizement.
Richard Eimers
March 3, 2012 at 8:32 am
Let’s keep the numbers falling, there are too many part timers waiting for one or two deals a year, they continue to dilute this industry. I have never seen a part timer execute a good transaction. Increase those fees to professional levels and provide REAL BENEFITS from our associations.
Corwyn Melette
March 4, 2012 at 12:53 pm
NAR is undergoing changes, just like the rest of us. During a conference I attended last year, the discussion is what will the NAR of the future be. The consensus among the brokers was that they felt that NAR should focus on advocacy for the membership. I am involved with our local and state associations serving on multiple committees. I see where we are effective and that is getting in front of government officials to fight for property rights and against anything that is harmful to free trade. That is where your dues dollars are best served and those involved get it. That along with your Code of Ethics is what sets REALTORS apart. The membership will always change. That is the one thing constant. However, it is up to the membership to set themselves apart from those who are not members and let the public know what is different about them. NAR advertises for it members, but we let others reap the benefits by trying to carry our name when they are not members.