Talk:Multiple Listing Service

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I took out the "See self regulatory organizations." since it didn't actually link anywhere

Contents

[edit] External links - their value

I see no point in having links (in an article called MULTIPLE LISTING SERVICE) to websites promoting the sale of COMMERICAL PROPERTY which is not usually represented on the MLS, a service for Realtors selling residential property.

Opinions on removing these as being simply promotional sites for commerical real estate??

I agree that commercial sites should be removed, but objectivaly I think external links to non-MLS sites should be added. Maybe a new wiki page containing a list of all non-MLS listing web pages should be created? It should probably be sorted by "Free" (such as craigslist.org/base.google.com/houseJockey.com), and not free such as forsalebyowner.com. Any thoughts on this?

REMOVE

Vivaverdi 22:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. WP:EL is pretty clear on this point. I removed them. Rkitko 16:52, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] MLS Relevancy

I don't think MLS is useful anymore. Most brokers will not put a good property on the MLS because it means they have to split commissions and once a property is on MLS, meaning any brokers can jump in and share the commissions, few will bother to pay advertising to sell that house. I think MLS was a good idea in the 80's but now it's irrelevant.

I wonder where you get your info from? Any search on http://Realtor.com in an urban/suburban area or on http://homesdatabase.com (for the Washington DC metro area) will reveal HUNDREDS of listed homes, all of which HAVE to be in the MLS to appear on these sites.
As the market has cooled in many of the major areas (East & West coasts), brokers need the MLS more than ever, since properties are not selling in a few hours and competition and inventories are now quite high. Viva-Verdi 20:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moving copy which really refers to IDX to more relevant section

Access to the actual MLS database is never allowed to the general public. By placing copy about a potential buyer's ability to search, it needs to be made clear on how access to some of the data is obtained.

In moving the copy, I've added a brief piece about the IDX Internet Data Exchange and added a link to that article.

Viva-Verdi 17:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NAR and limitation access

I have modified the sentence which implies that NAR is limiting access. That is NOT true. They are proposing to allow MLS members (i.e. brokers, companies, known as "Participants") to opt out of allowing their listings to be seen. That is very different.

Here is NAR's proposed policy on their proposed ILD sites, taken from their website - and there is a link to this in the article:

"Unless state law requires prior written consent, each Participant’s consent for display of that Participant’s listings on the ILD site of other MLS Participants is presumed unless a Participant affirmatively notifies the MLS in writing that it has withdrawn consent to such display (“opt out”).
A Participant that opts out may not display on its ILD site(s) (including by framing any other website), if any, the listings of any other MLS Participant provided by the MLS.
A Participant that opts out may not permit display of its listings on any ILD site of any other Participant. It may, however, display its listings on public websites of third parties, including but not limited to Realtor.com.
A decision to opt out may not be revoked for a period of ninety (90) days from the date the decision becomes effective."

Now, it is true that this policy is being challenged by the Dept of Justice and nothing has yet been decided. Viva-Verdi 01:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I think this is incorrect. I thought that the NAR is prohibiting online realtors from opting in as a measure which is seen by the DOJ as anticompetitive. CoolGuy 23:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, if you think that the above quotation from NAR's policy is incorrect (and I can only read it one way), please find some justification for your view. Prior to ILD being announced, there were 2 parallel, but different systems in place, IDX and VOW, the latter requiring registration and sign-in, etc., the former allowing free acess, but to more limited information.
As I undersatand it, the original NAR plan would have allowed selective restricting of access by full-service (or indeed, any broker) to Partipant A, B, or C (whether they were "discount" brokers or not) and it certainly may have been true that it was a measure aimed against the aggregators, discounters, and re-sellers (such as HomeGain.com) who simply used what many regarded as their hard-earned listings to troll for buyers and then refer those buyers to agents for 25% or 30% of their commissions.
So, again, as I understand and read NAR's policy in light of the DOJ lawsuit, it appears that NAR has junked the original concept and will only set up one form of public access - ILD - which will allow a "Participant" - a one-man broker or a huge regional firm - to say "No, my listings cannot appear on any website except those such as Realtor.com" rather than saying "No, I won't let Participant A have my listings, but it's ok for Participant B to do so".
Please correct me if I'm wrong. Viva-Verdi 00:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Addition of BLS section in this article

I'd like to see some examples of where this is happening in 2007. The way it is written here, it would imply that there is a parallel system in place. But where? By Boards/Associations of Realtors who operate MLS systems? By private organization?

Viva-Verdi 16:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Coverage

Do all areas in the U.S. have MLS coverage, or just big metro areas? -- Beland (talk) 02:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

My experience was in the Washington, DC region. But before the coming together of many of the separate county-wide MLS systems operated by a county Board/Association of Realtors in that region to form MRIS, each local Board/Association had its own MLS system and dues had to be paid to each one in order to work across county/state lines.
I would imagine that in smaller towns/counties, this system still exists as long as Boards/Associations still function. That is the case of Santa Fe, New Mexico (65,000 people / 120,000 in county); the local MLS is run by the SF Association.
Viva-Verdi (talk) 03:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)