Well, no, maybe your OWN buyers who are receiving your own mailings and emails are not going to need to go on REALTOR.COM to find it...but there are other agents out there who, amazingly enough, have loyal buyers who visit REALTOR.com themselves and find listings they like and then call their agent and say they want to see it...my buyer did that. In addition to what I sent her, she was constantly going onto REALTOR just to see for herself.

Navarac is right - you really have no guaranteed way of finding out if the realtor.com enhanced listings really work or not. The best thing to do is drop it and see if you do as well without it. If you do, then great...you're saving yourself a lot of money.

For me, it's worth it to be able to put it in a listing presentation...so if I get one good sale from it then it pays for itself. I don't like that they charge so much. It's like they just keep asking their members to bend over a little further.

I will say this, one of the top producers in our entire MLS (ranks in the top ten out of over 400 agents) has used REALTOR.COM enhanced listings for years and has no plans to stop.

There seems to be substantial misunderstanding of NAR's relationship with REALTOR.COM.

First, a little bit of history. In 1996, NAR had a problem. They knew that the Internet was going to be terribly important. At that time, Microsoft was preparing to launch HomeAdvisor and there were a multitude of national real estate web sites popping up.

The Board of Directors was concerned that REALTORS to survice would be forced to partner with these various sites, paying fees to a multitude of different enterprises.

The problem: They realized it would take literally hundreds of millions of dollars to compete (FYI: REALTOR.COM has cost $2 billion over the past decade to develop the site -- that has been the cost of marketing the site, updating the technology, etc. --- I know of a national web site that ran $11 million just to get it launched -- these things are not cheap). They thought about going to the membership to generate those huge dollars --- and decided it was just too expensive.

They decided to find a partner to develop a site and raise the capital necessary. That was the birth of what was then Homestore, Inc. (now Move, Inc.).

Obviously, they were limited what they could negotiate given the fact that NAR wasn't putting dollars into the deal. So, they licensed the REALTOR name and were able to get the following: 1) Every REALTOR listings would appear for free with a basic listing. 2) FSBOs would never display on the site (without NAR's permission) 3) And, NAR would permanently have 2 board members on the 11 person HomeStore board.

The deal worked. REALTOR.COM became the destination site (branding our profession). Its traffic is enormous: 5.5-6.0 million visitors a month. Of note, 68% of ALL time spent searching real estate (including company & agent sites, local mls sites, other national sites) is spent on REALTOR.COM. NAR members have not had to cough up $2 billion to create the site. Members who choose to pay for enhancements have footed the bill.

Move, Inc. has not been highly profitable. They made $22 million last year. Their stockholders have lost more than $1 billion over the past decade. In contrast, NAR dues generated just $161 million last year.

Every agent who ever has a listing benefits from this enormous investment. Remember, nearly 70% of all time looking at real estate is on the site. It is not on your local site. It is not on your mls site. Nor, is it to national sites like REMAX.COM, YAHOO, Craigslist, etc. The vast majority of the public spends their time on REALTOR.COM. Now the other sites have value. They just aren't as critical as REALTOR.COM. And, for at least basic visibility, the cost is zero. Thousands of homes have sold because they were seen on REALTOR.COM.

REALTOR.COM could be free. But, the cost of doing so would be to more than double NAR dues (to generate the required $200 million each year to just cover the expenses). Would you rather have the entire NAR membership do that or have those who choose to pay for listing enhancements pay the bills?

I personally think that the NAR Board of Directors made a wise choice, one that has significantly benefited NAR members.

Without that decision, I suspect we would each be forced to pay substantial fees to numerous national web sites to get any visibility. Or, they might be charging us referral fees on each transaction (kind of like HomeGain and HouseValues do). REALTOR.COM's basic listings have prevented those models from taking hold. And, that, in my opinion, is the key value of REALTOR.COM.

One other tidbit.

Sure. NAR built a big building in D.C. But, do you know how much of NAR's revenues go towards its buildings (D.C. and Chicago)?

Only 4%. The rest is spent on lobbying, association support, PR, research, education, etc.

I wish my company budget only allocated 4% for occupancy costs.

I know people love to gripe about anything that is large and out of area. But, to be brutal, NAR is an asset to our profession. It is our advocate in Washington. They provide a voice for our profession in the national media (particular important in these challenging times), and provide an infrastructure for education, ethical behavior and networking.

Imagine for a moment that we were like accountants. They have associations. But, there is no powerful national one. We'd be virtually voiceless and endowed with little clout. Instead, NAR is one of the premier trade associations in the United States.

In a former life, I was a Chief of Staff to U.S. House Member. In my experience, I can tell you that NAR was far more powerful than groups like the homebuilders, nurses, etc. And, it was on par with the major lobbying powers like the banks and financial institutions.

Folks, there is some real value here. And, unsurprisingly, it costs some money.

P.S. There will be those who think I'm some kind of sycophant for NAR. I was formerly on my MLS board. Now, I have no position. And, I am critical of several elements of NAR, primarily inconsistencies in the Code of Ethics area (I'd create an appeals process to create consistency between boards). I am also an advocate for frugality at the local association and MLS level.

Actually, this would be a great start to a new thread. Consumer product companies (and others, I'm sure) use what is known as a decision tree model to help marketers understand the flow of decisions used in the purchase of their product. Basically, it could start the recognition of a need, then how much money is to be allocated to the purchase, then where to purchase, then which brand and so on all the way through to payment at the register. I'd love to see the results of research like that in the home purchase cycle.