4 ms·
I don't think 'MLS' is a single entity - instead different areas have their own MLS, and these are interconnected based on contracts. Thus, there isn't a monopo
by ejstronge 3y ago
I don't think 'MLS' is a single entity - instead different areas have their own MLS, and these are interconnected based on contracts. Thus, there isn't a monopoly to disrupt in the first place.
- cyral 3y agoCorrect, and some of the MLSs won't even sell you data (for all those trying to disrupt real-estate). They have exclusive agreements to only appear on Zillow or Realtor.com or something like that when I looked into it before.
- asynchronous 3y agoActually Zillow I think just scrapes sites, I don’t think they even have legal/API access. I hope someone puts a bullet in the Realtor industry.
- joshuaheard 3y agoThey pay a fee for MLS access.
- aabajian 3y ago"Most MLSs are owned by the REALTOR® association that formed them." See: https://www.reso.org/blog/mls-faq/ https://www.reso.org/blog/mls-faq/ Read the Redfin post. The rules the REALTOR association imposes to get access to MLS data is monopolistic.
- ejstronge 3y agoI did read the post. There is no monopoly because there is no single 'MLS'
- YokoZar 3y agoIt's perfectly possible for there to be many of them and for them to also be monopolies over their respective regional markets. Compare with cable companies carving up territory and agreeing not to intrude on eachother's turf.
- rcstank 3y agoThere’s another word for that: cartel
- codecutter 3y agoCartel is the correct word. As an individual consumer, I wanted access to MLS data and was willing to pay a monthly access fee. But they wouldn't provide such access and want you to use the cartel member, real estate agent.