{"id":6681,"date":"2016-02-08T08:26:30","date_gmt":"2016-02-08T15:26:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/therealdaily.com\/?p=6681"},"modified":"2016-02-08T08:59:33","modified_gmt":"2016-02-08T15:59:33","slug":"mls-condolidation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/theamericangenius.com\/housing\/editorials\/mls-condolidation\/","title":{"rendered":"If brokers don’t push for MLSs to consolidate, business will suffer, as will consumers"},"content":{"rendered":"

Whether you are someone that belongs to two MLSs, seven MLSs, 29 MLSs, or know someone who is, you may understand how truly problematic this challenge is. Is it really feasible for the broker to sit on several MLS boards of directors and participate in all their committees \u2013 and still run the brokerage? <\/p>\n

Is it reasonable for the broker to have to manage all those data license agreements and download data from multiple MLSs to bring together for their website, app, and back-office systems? Not really. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n

How about markets where the data is split between multiple MLSs (and agents have to belong to multiple MLSs) learn to use multiple MLS systems, and run multiple prospecting searches for a single client just to make sure they\u2019re seeing all their options? Or brokers and agents having to deal with different MLS rules and inconsistent compliance departments \u2013 that may even conflict with one another – for the same listing? That\u2019s just crazy.<\/p>\n

<\/i> Read also: Thoughts on why panic around Upstream is unmerited<\/a><\/strong><\/div>\n

\"bar\"<\/p>\n

MLS “data shares” are only the beginning<\/h2>\n

We\u2019ve all heard about MLS \u201cdata shares,\u201d which solve some, but not all of those problems. And some brokers are working on a project called Upstream<\/a>, but that doesn\u2019t solve all of those problems either and is a long way from completion. <\/p>\n

While the aforementioned initiatives have merit, to really solve these problems, brokers need to take a more active hand in MLS consolidation or, as it\u2019s sometimes called, MLS regionalization<\/em><\/strong>. <\/p>\n

The goal of this article is to explain the benefits of MLS consolidation so brokers in leadership positions can better articulate them, then look at why the consolidations aren\u2019t happening, and finally explain what brokers can do about it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

A strong business case for MLS consolidation<\/h2>\n

First, let\u2019s articulate the potential benefits of MLS consolidation:<\/p>\n

1. Reduction of arbitrary information barriers<\/strong>
\n a. Reduce need for multiple memberships
\n b. Reduce number of data feeds for participants\u2019 use
\n c. Provide more comprehensive \/ accurate statistics
\n d. Provide wider listing exposure for sellers<\/p>\n

2. Reduce number of systems some users need to learn<\/strong><\/p>\n

3. Improve MLS rule and data accuracy compliance<\/strong>
\n a.\tProviding uniform rules and enforcement<\/p>\n

4.\tProvide efficiency for governance involvement<\/p>\n

5.\tImprovement in scope of MLS products and services<\/p>\n

6.\tAssociations can focus more on association functions<\/p>\n

7.\tReduction in cost (balanced against improvement in scope)
\n<\/strong>
\nThat\u2019s a lot of potential benefits \u2013 for brokers and agents, as well as for associations and MLSs themselves to stay strong and relevant. There\u2019s a clear business case for MLS consolidation.<\/p>\n

Most common excuses for MLSs not consolidating<\/h2>\n

Next, let\u2019s look at the most common excuses for MLSs not consolidating, which as CTO at Clareity Consulting<\/a>, I hear when facilitating MLS consolidation meetings:<\/p>\n