This morning I got a marathon voicemail message from an independent broker who is incredibly displeased with my recent post Look Who’s Whining About Open Listings, in which I chide those who are opposed to REBNY’s plans to put comprehensive listings online. (As background, I suggest that the opposition comes largely from small firms who tend to offer a lower level of service. I suggest they are scared, and calculate access to listings is a big part of the reason customers walk in their door. If the listings are freely available, those small firms will have to compete with big firms purely on marketing muscle and quality of service.)
Here’s a synopsis of the message I got:
As an Independent Broker with 16 years of experience, I and many of the small firms that I have spoken to feel that your article is “incredulously irresponsible, inaccurate, uneducated, and totally, totally, totally distasteful. Not only is it not the correct petition, but it is full of untruths. In fact, the majority of REBNY independent brokers are far superior to the agents of larger firms and as you know, all REBNY members must, by rule, make their listings available to all other REBNY firms within 72 hours.” This broker goes on to say that she has refused business with two agents in the past eight months from a very large firm because they were “inept and unethical.” She was forced to close the transactions with those agents’ managers. She also wants me to know that “dozens of agents whom she has spoken too, many more seasoned than me, at larger firms are NOT, that’s NOT in favor of the open listings portal.” Furthermore, she thought that I should know that she has been elected to serve on a special task force for REBNY and that she could provide me with “truths about deceptive press releases.” She continues to say that I have made “broad and false accusations” and that it is I who looks like I’m “ignorant and whining.” According to her, I have “lost respect of many of my colleagues” and I should be “more responsible with true facts.”
First of all, it’s a shame that we are cast as opponents here, because I feel like TrueGotham is on the side of any and all real estate professionals who have a lot of professionalism, integrity, and expertise, and it sounds like this caller is one of the good guys and gals.
And secondly, who does’t hate to be called a liar? I am trying my hardest to tell nothing but the truth as I see it. I can only speak from my personal experience.
Certainly I should have been more careful in how I wrote that first post. I have attempted to remedy that in the comments, and I will again here: Of course I never meant to imply all agents at big firms are ethical, nor that all agents at small firms are unethical. I believe nothing of the sort. If you read TrueGotham regularly, you will know that I don’t believe that to be the case. I have even spilled the beans on unethical behavior in the office where I’m sitting right now.
Let’s look at the big picture for a second: open listings are good for our people who buy and sell real estate, plain and simple. I have never heard anyone make a compelling argument otherwise. That is why I think open listings are both inevitable, and a positive development for our industry. In a world where listings are open, real estate customers will feel happier and less exploited, and for those of us who are providing real services beyond access to listings, there will still be plenty of work. (Who buys anything–a company, a yacht, you name it–for six, seven, or eight figures, without a consultant, advisor, or intermediary?)
In the long run, I believe the only people who are hurt by open listings are those agents and brokers who offer their clients little of note beyond access to listings. Unfortunately, those agents and brokers I described represent a pretty hefty chunk of the industry (which explains the NAR’s opposition), and some people will be looking for jobs. It’s no surprise to me that plenty of real estate professionals–yes, especially those who aren’t working with the various marketing advantages of a big firm, who get bulk discounts to advertise everywhere–would feel threatened by open listings.
I am convinced that the image of real estate professionals–which is, in part, the image people have of me and my colleageues–has been damaged for some time by the reality that for a lot of people a real estate license has been a way to make money without having to do a lot of work. That’s not how I have ever approached my job, and I’m resentful that it sometimes appears that way, by association. All those real estate professionals, from firms large or small, who see themselves as hardworking professionals with expertise, I encourage you to join me on the side of open listings, and I think we’ll all be better for it.
HousingPanic, one of those bubble blogs, is poking fun at the National Association of Homebuilders’ advice to, essentially, buy a house now, please.
Who can blame the National Association of Homebuilders for their “BUY NOW” campaign? After all, there is quite a bit of new inventory on the market that many builders fear they will get stuck holding. I happen to agree with two, and only two of their points… trading up in a declining market can absolutely make sense, and timing any market is damn near impossible.
But there are a thousand holes in the rest of the theories from the NAHB, and it seems a little desperate, especially as I can’t believe anyone would find the message convincing. In this age of savvy buyers and sellers and the increasing amount of information available to both, I believe that these campaigns (by “these” I’m including the recent NAR ads too) are probably not swaying a lot of consumers.
People who have to or want to move for some reasons will do so. It’s no secret that the market is almost never balanced and always favors either the seller or the buyer at any given time.
There is frustration in this moment, because it is difficult to weed through the numbers and make sense of the numerous housing markets across the country. Again, each is its own market and comparing Miami housing to that in New York City is nuts. For that matter, there are markets within markets. For example, the one bedroom market in NYC favors the buyer in my opinion with increasing inventory and more room for negotiations while the four bedroom market (below $4M) remains tight and sellers are still procuring multiple bidders on properties that are priced well.
How to read all those tea leaves? Very carefully, and with great expertise. Not with yet another big, bold claim that, essentially, it’s always a good time to buy.
Glenn Roberts, Jr. of Inman News reports:
The National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, the largest business development and economic advocacy organization for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, has formed a partnership with real estate giant Realogy Corp., according to an announcement this week.
As a part of the agreement, Realogy and its companies will offer a real estate certification program for LGBT real estate specialists. The designation is "given only to sales associates and brokers who complete the related training and certification and become members of the NGLCC, signifies expertise in understanding the needs of LGBT clients and counseling them through the major financial and life changes involved in buying and selling a home," Realogy announced this week.
Whoa. I don’t doubt that Realogy has good intentions, but what exactly will they be “teaching” in this “certification” course?
Ok, look, I understand that no GLBT person wants to buy or sell property with the help of a bigot–so this kind of certification may be a way to help choose a real estate professional who’s committed to fairness. I also get that, in theory, different treatment in inheritance, taxes, and benefits for gay couples (and, for that matter, unmarried heterosexual couples) can influence big decisions about money and real estate.
But all the same–maybe this is my Manhattan perspective talking–I can’t believe that in this day and age there is a necessity for a specialization in assisting the GLBT community with their housing needs. (Don’t make me start counting up the hundreds of GLBT clients I have served through the years.) It actually seems like a bizarre kind of discrimination to me, like these are "special" people who need uncommon kinds of help. Is Realogy suggesting that a high standard of professionalism won’t get the job done with the GLBT community? That just seems weird.
I especially liked one of the comments on the Inman site:
…as a gay man myself (thank you), geez … every guy in my old Coldwell Banker office was gay! What’s to learn?
Oh, yes, YouTube and blogs are part of the bright shiny future of real estate marketing, to be sure. But that doesn’t mean just by having some video on YouTube you are helping the cause. Consider:
We’ll see you after the break.
Remember the happy day when we learned that REBNY plans to make New York City listings publicly available online? We should have known it was never going to be that simple. Curbed has anonymous information that a mutiny of some independent and smaller REBNY members is brewing. Curbed was forwarded the following:
Petition
REBNY RLS PUBLIC WEB PORTAL
Whereas REBNY is organized to represent the best interests of its Member firms, and,
Whereas the proposed RLS Public Web Portal appears to serve only the interests of the largest Member firms, and
Whereas the decision to embark on this project was neither transparent nor democratic, therefore
We the undersigned REBNY Residential Broker Members hereby demand that the Board immediately cease plans to implement this Portal and instead seek further discussions with the members, after which the proposed plan would be approved or rejected by a majority vote of all Member firms.
My knee jerk reaction: I am so sick of these smaller firms bitching and moaning about the bigger fish. Smaller firms are SCARED!
Although the Real Estate Board of NY intends to make ALL member (including the small firms) listings available on one site, the smaller firms continue to resist. My speculation is that in many cases the smaller firms have little to offer clients other than “information," a reality that threatens to make them obsolete. They simply can’t compete with the marketing goliaths that have the largest part of the market locked up.
Now that the listings are becoming public, firms that aren’t good at much besides sharing listings are losing their sacred stronghold on information.
I suggest that these firms find a way to exploit their small size and focus more on the advantages (not many but some) of working with a boutique firm and release their information hostage.
By the way, I frequently see some of these smaller firms exhibiting larger firms’ properties on their web sites. To the opponents of public information… stop the bellyaching and start providing a significant service to earn your commission. Then, and only then, will you have nothing to worry about.
UPDATE: More on this topic.
This time with fancy graphics!
Christine Haughney reports that so many of those Manhattan condominium developments are morphing into condo/rental and condo/hotel developments to suit a changing market.
Gary Barnett, the chairman of the Extell Development Company, said that for some of his projects, he was still figuring out how many units he might turn into hotel rooms or rental apartments.
One building that he is planning to construct on Riverside Boulevard between West 62nd and 63rd Streets may have some rental apartments. He is planning to turn the lower half of his project at 135 West 45th Street into a hotel, and part of his project at 151 East 85th Street into rentals.
Jules Demchick, the chairman of the J. D. Carlisle Development Company, who is building 290 apartments at 23rd Street and Third Avenue, said he would decide within the next month what the breakdown would be between rentals and condominiums.
Converting projects to rental apartments is starting to make more sense because this sector has strengthened. The vacancy rate for rental apartments in Manhattan is a very low 0.8 percent, according to Citi Habitats, a Manhattan real estate brokerage. The borough hasn’t had such a small percentage of rental vacancies since before Sept. 11, according to Gordon Golub, Citi Habitats’ senior managing director of Citi Habitats.
This is not surprising to me as we saw signs of this last year when Related began construction of a hybrid rental/condo project in an attempt to hedge the market.
101 Warren Street also is a recent project that combines the two but at least this project separates the rentals in a different building. Tenants also don’t have use of the condominium amenities. Which brings me to the question I have as a real estate professional and a condominium owner… how will this hybrid structure affect the perception of the buildings by prospective purchasers?
I own and live with my family in a condominium that has very few renters. The building is not a hybrid, but a full fledged condo with some investor units that have been rented out. That said, it is an industry-wide belief that owners tend to take greater care of the building and its common areas when their own financial stake is rooted in the project. Renters typically are a bit more lax in caring about the building as a whole. So in a building that is structured to house a significant number of tenants among the home owners, what will the ramifications be both aesthetically and financially for the owners? Will these hybrid condo projects be perceived as less valuable because of the rental segment of the population? I suspect that many of my buyers will choose projects that are 100% condo versus the hybrid project.
Regardless of the high rents that tenants will pay in these buildings, their lack of investment in the building may indeed lower the perception of value for prospective purchasers. Something that absolutely must be considered when shopping for a condo these days.
