Robert E. Litan contributed an excellent article to the New York Times in which he calls for legislation that “should make clear that multiple listing services must provide all properly licensed brokers access to the marketplace on equal terms.” This is something the Realty Freak is all for. I would even go a step farther and say that multiple listing services should provide the public access to the marketplace on equal terms.

Mr. Litan did however miss an important fact in comparing the securities markets to multiple listing services and it is the same fact that most Realtors fail to comprehend; efficient and transparent markets along with the rise of discount brokers like E*Trade did not bring about the end of full service, full price stock brokers and money managers. I personally pay my broker for his expertise, not his ability to make trades.

A national real estate listing service that was transparent and fair to all would certainly lessen the overall number of Realtors, bad for the National Association of Realtors coffers. The Realtors that could survive that type of market place would do so only because of their skill and expertise in helping people realize the best possible terms for their real estate transaction.

Litan’s quote of Arthur Levitt, the former chairperson of the Securities and Exchange Commission, is so poignant it deserves repeating: "Markets of fairness, markets of integrity and markets of quality should not be the most investors hope for — but the very least they should expect."

As long as the "broker" is a dues-paying member of the local MLS - I'm ALL FOR IT. If not, the non-mls broker can get their information from REALTOR.com

Then the very least that I should expect is I can use MLS for free, too.

Who said anything about free? An equal term doesn't mean free. The stock market was not opened to day traders for free, it was just opened.

I must have misread you. Sorry.

Why should the MLS which is a method of broker to broker cooperation in selling property offer public access? Most MLS systems offer IDX to the broker. Let the broker use the IDX feed to the best of their ability and open the competition. MLS is only designed to offer properties to other brokers and the compensation for selling those properties.

For the same reason the commodities markets were opened to the public.

I don't think public should have access necessarily, but having to be a Realtor just to join an MLS to me is totally absurd. I don't want to be a Realtor. It is a waste of time and money.
I am already a broker, and follow the ethical guidelines of the state(s) in which I am licensed.

Most agents find value in belonging to their local board and NAR and pay their dues. The benefit is a co-op MLS, continuing ed., an MLS that works, a body of contemporaries who take care of problems between agents and the public, political involvement for the benefit of it's members and the trade, and a list that could go on and on and on.
By not being a member, you probably don't know all the benefits.

Mls is OLD, Broke, and should be put out to the pasture.
The only entity that ever adn continually wins or amkes money is the Mls organization. Not the Listing or selling agents.
All mls systems are BAD for the sellers.

Sorry about typing too quick.

Should be "and" or makes money.

"All mls systems are BAD for the sellers."
So, how were the "good old days" when there was no MLS? Do you remember? How did you run your business then?
The MLS was established for the benefit of the seller, the buyer, the listing agent in selling the property faster and the buyer’s agent knowing where a property is for sale and having compensation offered for his time and effort.
But than, maybe you are too young to remember?

the fact that realtors pay for the mls is reason enough to have to be a member.


think about a mls that let anyone put homes on there. the homes would not be updated, and you would go to a house that is marked as active and the seller could say "oh no i changed my mind 3 weeks ago" but because they have no accountability or liability the mls would not change. if you dont believe me check out many of the fsbo sites. once they get the cash to get the house on there it makes nice filler material. i work with alot of fsbo's and my number one complaint is seing them in an exclusive right to sell that started a month ago, but they are on the fsbo site still. adn it is not cause the agent put them on therem, they ahve been on that site for 9 months. they are not going to go and change it, because it is to much work.


how is a system that puts everyone on the same page broke?


the fsbo sites are a dime a dozen and all over the place. not updated, and you cant get the general public to get on the same page (pun intended)