While this is an interesting article, it's worth noting that it's (a) from 2005 and (b) using data from the previous decade. So what, it's still relevant, right

While this is an interesting article, it's worth noting that it's (a) from 2005 and (b) using data from the previous decade. So what, it's still relevant, right? Welllll, this summary itself suggests maybe not: > In recent years, the Internet has made it easier for sellers to track house prices. In theory, this would decrease the value of the real-estate agent's specialized knowledge. Indeed, the authors find that when the public was beginning to use the Internet, from 1992 to 1995, the premium on agent-owned homes was 4.9 percent. By 1996 to 1999, as Internet usage was becoming widespread, the premium dropped to 3.2 percent. As the market became more informed, the advantage was going down -- and that was a half a decade before Trulia, Zillow, and Redfin came onto the picture. It's quite likely that if Mr. Freakonomics[1] ran this study now, the "premium" would be lower still. Zillow ain't gonna factor in "this home is owned by a Realtor" into its Zestimate (tm). [1]: Not being flippant here -- look at the first co-author!