One MLS? Comments

Comments in support of a merge- These comments are from MLS subscribers.  Comments from outsiders have been requested but they have been attributed to the contributor.   Additional feedback can be provided through this link. Editorial comments have been added in red to comment on factual or information.

  • Access to more services for agents and greater exposure of our listings which equals better service to our clients.
  • Greater expansion, more services, uniformity across the state, and better opportunity for agents.
  • Access to more data, Removes local political barriers, Allows brokers across the state to share information, Possible cost savings
  • Absolutely should happen as soon as possible
  • In a business climate where our customers and clients have access to huge aggregator's websites to seek data and information, we too as the vanguard of private property rights, should have at least the same volume of data to compete. Change is inevitable if we are to survive in today's business technology wind tunnel. This appears to be a change, a growth needed to keep our industry in this game of real estate.
  • It better equips the agent.
  • Technology is advancing so rapidly. Our industry is going through major changes whether we like it or not. Trying to keep our market isolated is futile because the information is all out there anyway for anyone, anywhere to see. The time is coming quickly to either compete or fade away.
  • In my view the pros outweigh the cons. I have not spent much time with CRMLS matrix, but I cannot imagine it is worse than Paragon. Paragon is not user friendly, is not stable, is browser-sensitive and DOES NOT work well with the two most common browsers (IE and Chrome), and its client connect features are inferior to what Tempo could do. An opportunity to move away from Paragon would be a big plus. Regarding out-of-area agents doing more business in San Diego, I think it is unrealistic to think that has not already happened. I do not see this as a concern. If we can get a better, more powerful MLS as a result of merging, I am all for it. (note Paragon would remain and there would be an option to use the Matrix system)
  • It better equips the agent.
  • Sound like a great idea
  • Crmls is 7000% better then sandicor..i have both because i work temecula and north county
  • Lets do it.
  • From the President of the Orange County AOR Rita Tayenaka was part of a Regional MLS called SoCalMLS. Socal MLS merged merged with CRMLS in 2011. "We merged with CRMLS and there was not an influx of out area agents coming to interfere with our business it just really made getting data to our clients seamless. Clients already have the info so it made it nice to be able to answer questions with one login."
  • As a broker/owner I like the fact to join one association and adhere to their rules and regs , not 10 or more. I see the advantages out weigh the negative. Equipment being inferior, do not know about that, but that issue seems to be an easy fix, if needed. I know all the broker web providers and IDX feeds will seem to be more manageable as well with one easy application software. Our IT is in favor. He handled mergers throughout the United States and believes them to be more efficient.
  • Customer and to serve them well, come first in any industry and in order for us to excel in our own industry, the idea of merger seems to be the way to go. Currently, the various elements needed to post one's listing and/or search for properties for R.E. seller/buyer Clients become tedious. Several factors that pose issues are as follows. 1. Different format in the MLS posting 2. Different lock box access 3. Delay in the release of information to client 4. Redundancy on information 5. Since CA B.R.E. covers the entire state of CA, it does make sense to pursue the idea. 6. With advance technology, the idea of merger can easily be accomplished. 7. R.E agents traveling across the U.S. can serve clients who are moving from one state to another. 8. Additional fee for same kind of work is incurred / and the idea to reduce cost is a vital factor to realtors who continue to pay membership fees with or without sale.
  • I dont even no why we went to Paragon once tempo ended. We should have gone directly to CRMLS. It is much more user friendly, has a better layout for clients to receive listings, is much cheaper and finally will allow uniformity for agents and brokers that work both areas
  • Connecting the power of the Realtor community as a collective community which is already governed by a single code of ethics is beneficial. This connection of a technology platform should unite us as an industry. The ability to use leverage of our mass to connect and reduce the cost of technology should be apparent. Technology is simply a tool. What each Realtor does in interrupting data and how they provide service is what differentiates us.
  • I believe the benefits out weigh the disadvantages mentioned. There are already out of area agents listing properties in San Diego.
  • Although information is still coming in, it seems a merged MLS would give us greater power and access to information ultimately allowing us to grow and become of better service to our clients.  Our clients are required to us Redfin, or Zillow to access out of area listings which takes our ability to help away and gives it to a 3rd party provider.  I would support the idea of a merge statewide MLS.  
  • I believe will help and be beneficial for everybody, remember our license is for the state not for the county or region.
  • Jeremy Lehman Love this conversation. I'm the 2014 President of Pacific West Assoc. In Orange County (and outspoken critic of MLS's) and went through this merger a few years ago. For what it's worth; CRMLS, is the most progressive MLS in our industry. There's a big difference between data integrity/MLS services and the user interface we access them through. I'm very happy with the direction things are headed at CRMLS, and although I'd love to see it all happen faster, they're making great strides year after year. The big concern agents and brokers should have is being more connected than consumers. Our real estate apps only show us data from the systems we subscribe to but consumer apps show it all. In 2015, it doesn't make sense that we let MLS and association politics handicap us from having what we need to do the best job for our clients.
  • We need more access to data. Period. We live in the Information Age. We should collaborate with a progressive MLS that provides the technology & information to its subscribers.
  • We need more access to data. Period. We live in the Information Age. We should collaborate with a progressive MLS that provides the technology & information to its subscribers.
  • I'm Steven Meade, the 2015 President of the Pacific West Assoc. in Orange County and in fair disclosure, I am also our association's representative on CRMLS's rules and operations committees. I am struggling with words here because I feel like I'm trying to describe the color red to someone who is blind. This isn't a conversation about Paragon or Matrix (they both have their flaws), this isn't just the future of the MLS for Sandicor members, this is the future of the MLS for California agents. Participating in MLS committees at the NAR level, I can say without a doubt that CRMLS is ahead of the curve, not just in what agents see, but in what they don't see. Things like pioneering a system that will prevent vendors from "leaking" MLS data. Or not only participating in, but leading the discussion at the Real Estate Standards Organization, so we can have a future of agent tools that are better because software developers won't have to develop for umpteen different systems and data dictionaries. Wouldn't it be awesome if your CRM and MLS could talk to eachother? It will. But it takes resources and is considerably easier when your MLS has more subscribers to spread that cost over. Do you want a an MLS that just keeps on plugging away with the same goals as 10 years ago or one that leads the nation in innovation? The best part is, if you choose the latter, you save significantly in the form of lower MLS costs. Is CRMLS perfect, absolutely not, but I have yet to come across a more visionary, agent-focused MLS anywhere else in the country.
  • The MLS is our biggest and best marketing tool. A statewide system would allow for the best exposure for our CLIENTS. Selling their listings is and should always be our biggest goal. Referring our CLIENTS to a statewide consumer portal will also insure they have access to information (without steering to other agents) regardless of what happens to Trulia, Zillow, etc. Having lower MLS fees is also a perk but more than that, we could eliminate the corruption, greed and graft that is currently present in our non transparent system. Sign me up!
  • As both an active Agent and an active Appraiser (don't forget, appraisers are members too!) And, as someone who has been a member of both SDAR and SBAOR I have first-hand experience of both. The differences in data quality and customer service are insignificant. The coverage is similarly comprehensive and the service is good. Is there value in SD Agents being able to access OC and Los Angeles Data? The crossover is probably very little and the utility of out-of-county data sharing is probably small. Real Estate is still a local business where nose-to-nose contact and knowledge of individual neighborhoods is what provides value. After wrestling with the issues for the past few weeks, I am coming down on the side of Merger. What are the benefits of a Merger? More resources on the back-end to keep our technology up to date is certainly important, but not the most critical. The MOST important thing has to do with the power to shape the marketplace. We need an MLS that is big enough to stand up to Zillow, Trulia and Realtor.com. These syndicators are not your friends. I vote for Merger. Keep power in the hands of the Agents. Our profession should not be for sale to the highest bidder. Did you notice that when you type in real tor dot com, it AUTOMATICALLY drops a preview link in your post??? That's what I'm talking about. We need an MLS that will help us compete, not sell us out!
  • I operate offices in San Diego and LA, it would be a plus to use one IDX for our website.

Comments in opposition to a merge
  • I believe that real estate is local and the MLS should be too. California is a huge state-too big to have someone in Sacramento (CRMLS is governed by a Board consisting of Brokers and Agents from around the state. The headquarters is in Pamona) dictate what our MLS should look like and behave. For example, it is hard enough to get a variance when needed now, imagine what that would look like on state wide level. I just don't see a benefit. No thanks!
  • I strongly believe that the Paragon MLS system has negatively impacted our daily way of doing business and that the proposed merger will serve to add another layer of unnecessary complications.  Additionally while information about market activity in other areas may be interesting I don't believe it is truly relevant to doing business - and - I strongly believe that agents/brokers doing business outside their realms of expertise, knowledge & experience does more harm to clients and cooperating agents/brokers than simply referring to local agents/brokers.  I have serious concern about playing into the aggregates hands rather than cooperating with such entities -primarily Zillow.  Further the suggestion of lower fees is a smokescreen that most likely will not occur. 
  • A bottom line negative impact on the overall funds that come into the association from selling MLS services. 
  • There could be loss of jobs at the MLS if there were to be a merger. 
  • While the merger "might" lower our associated costs, I see it as a potential problem for both governing and maintaining an acceptable high standard in terms of service and professionalism. As we open the door of information for out of area agents, we may also be opening the door for agents who follow the scent of money, rather than a sense of what is right for the client, as they attempt to do business in a market in which they can offer no true expertise. Will they refer the business or opt to "wing it" in an unfamiliar market? Will they consumer ultimately be short changed?
  • I think a merger with CRMLS as one big association (The associations would not change, instead of receiving MLS feeds from Sandicor, GSDAR, NSDCAR and PSAR would receive MLS feeds from CRMLS) might end up with no representation from our area. Do we want others deciding what is best for San Diego County? I for one am not in favor of this merger.
Comments and questions from undecided individuals
  • It will concern me to have other agents that do not know the Market at all trying to miss inform the clients.
  • I worry about any association giving up their data rights. Why do we need a statewide system? I am concerned that agents will try to sell RE outside their region which can be dangerous. That said, I'm not shuttling the door on the idea but I need to know the whole truth about the ramifications of such a move. (To clarify, currently the Association does not have rights to the data. Rights to the data belong to the Broker and to Sandicor. CRMLS would have the rights that Sandicor currently enjoys)
  • PSAR can not even tell me how much money was being spent by Sandicor to promote the public facing web site of Sandicor.   This to me is CRIMINAL.  I am disgusted by this action and the lack of honesty presented to the members about this.   It is about time that the REAL TRUTH be exposed.    Asking for this opinion when you have blocked the Board Members from knowing basic information should put the powers that be in front of Federal Grand Juries.  This is the same HALF TRUTHS that are coming from our political leaders that think, that doing Gov. business on private e mails is correct. It is getting time to pay the bill.
  • Realtor Patrick Hale put together his opinions on the difference of a merger or data share.  They can be previewed on his blog.
  • The ongoing-growing information super-highway is here to stay-on into the future. I am leaning heavily in favor of merging to assure our pro-active input & management in how we control the sharing of our county listing information with most of the state. The pros I've read and concluded myself so far, greatly outweigh the cons.
  • I have some hesitation about a merger. One benefit of a consolidated MLS would be that those occasional listings taken by out of county agents who choose not to list in the Sandicor MLS would not be hidden from buyers who only receive listings from Sandicor's MLS. But I'd rather see this controlled by a rule that would require out of area listing agents to have to join and post the listing in the local MLS system.
  • More than anything we desperately need to level the playing field with Zillow, Trulia, etc. I believe the way this will happen is if the MLS front facing websites and client notification systems (ClientConnect in Paragon) would be equal to the flash and appearance of the aggregating sites. ClientConnect is Paragon's biggest failing. As it stands, Paragon pales by comparison. We look like the a kid dressed in rags at a rich kids school. Will a merger in any way present that opportunity? At the moment it seems each MLS system is like a anorexic monkey trying to take on a 300 pound gorilla.
  • If a merger would allow for more resources to be focused on improving the MLS ClientConnect experience to rival Z and T, I'm all in. 
  • Would it be the same fees that currently are effective for the local MLS ?
  • In favor of one, state wide MLS if: Lower costs Greater benefits/tools Guaranteed Model MLS rules Guaranteed local grievance/other hearings Guaranteed local reps (like US senate) and by population (like US House).   Ability to opt out Full disclosure of all terms and conditions of merger (are motto is  disclosure!) 
  • Need full terms and conditions of merger. Disclosure, disclosure.