Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Mike.. Part of belonging to our MLS is the agreement to share a fee advertised in the system. If someone is not a member, technically they would need to sign an agreement with a listing agent to pay a commission every time they made an offer.
If you are not part of our MLS, we have no obligation or agreement to pay you or share in the money earned. We can pay you because you're licensed but no agreement exists to do so.
Interesting! Being a part of an MLS in general I would think requires an obligation of cooperating compensation. I know it's a rule my MLS enforces. I remember a few years ago seeing an entry only listing that wasn't offering cooperating compensation and the listing was taken down after a few hours.
Anyway, my point is merely to point out an example where there is an obligation outside of MLS to pay a coop fee.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjrcm
There are MLS associations that do not require NAR membership.
The MLS in my area does not require NAR membership, but dues are lower if you are a Realtor. It's not enough to offset the obscene dues I pay the Realtor board, but it's a discount.
I am the broker for Non MLS Realty in California. We serve those agents who either cannot afford the MLS fees or have other jobs and cannot devote the time to be full time agent. They do not want to turn their license into the Real Estate Division. They now become referral agents so, they can earn referral commissions. There are over 400,000 real estate agents in California and only about 20 % make a living! So, a Non MLS company is ideal for those agents.
Yes, but only to other members of the MLS (at least in my MLS).
It's been a number of months since I made that post, but I believe those were the sentiments I was trying to convey.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Scrofani
I am the broker for Non MLS Realty in California. We serve those agents who either cannot afford the MLS fees or have other jobs and cannot devote the time to be full time agent. They do not want to turn their license into the Real Estate Division. They now become referral agents so, they can earn referral commissions. There are over 400,000 real estate agents in California and only about 20 % make a living! So, a Non MLS company is ideal for those agents.
I'm not trying to sound harsh here, but maybe these are people who should give up their license. It's unclear to me who they are helping (except themselves) by maintaining a license. Perhaps, the percentage of agents able to make a living at this would be a lot more than 20% if there weren't so many people skimming something off the commissions by maintaining a license solely for purposes of making referrals. Also, MLS fees are such a minimal part of the expense of being an agent. Anyone who can't afford to pay them probably shouldn't be an agent either.
It sounds to me like your brokerage was established to give agents who are on their way out the business a last stop before the off ramp so to speak. Just my opinion and I apologize if this came off as harsh in any way. I just feel that these situations contribute to the negative perception the public has of our profession.
Location: Mokelumne Hill, CA & El Pescadero, BCS MX.
6,957 posts, read 22,313,597 times
Reputation: 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Scrofani
I am the broker for Non MLS Realty in California. We serve those agents who either cannot afford the MLS fees or have other jobs and cannot devote the time to be full time agent. They do not want to turn their license into the Real Estate Division. They now become referral agents so, they can earn referral commissions. There are over 400,000 real estate agents in California and only about 20 % make a living! So, a Non MLS company is ideal for those agents.
I've always wondered how brokers exercise their obligation to provide supervision to their agents in a situation like yours. I looked up Ziprealty the other day and they have 578 agents in CA!
I'd hate to be in a position to try and get that cat herd into the corral. I also see you have exactly one salesperson under your supervision, so it's probably no big deal for you. I also like your mailing address! I'm working toward the day when I can run my shop from Los Cabos MX
The industry is in constant flux. There's so many properties deliberately not listed on the MLS at the moment, for various reasons. I am a real estate agent and even I can't find many of these so try these guys if that's what you're looking for: Privy Property.
MLS's were established as a means for offering compensation to cooperating member brokers that sell another broker's listing. If a broker is not a member of an MLS, then they must establish a compensation agreement directly with any broker where they may want to sell that broker's listing, or only focus on selling their own listings.
I don't understand your other comment about MLS's taking over the industry. They are established by brokers to facilitate sharing listings with a commission co-broke fee.
MLS's are NOT established by brokers, they are privately owned companies, usually the local realtor association manages to become part owner as well so that they can force anyone who wants to be a member of the MLS and be able to share listings they and every licensed person in their office MUST become members of not only NAR (National Association of Realtors) but also members of a state association AND a local association, they usually join at the local level and they bill the agent for the other two as the local enforcer.
Here is a pretty good and accurate article about the topic but they don't even get into how NARs rules for members are often more restrictive than local real estate laws which only go to hamper the way an agent conduct business and does not protect the agent from other unscrupulous agents, especially if they work with buyers.
Associations take over MLS's thus the Power of Brokerages
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverfall
The MLS is a pittance of my business costs per year. If I wasn't a member of the MLS it would hardly make a dent in my monthly expenses. It is $75 a month. Agents pay their own MLS fee.
MLS's haven't taken over the brokerages. They are a business tool. That's like saying cell phones took over the brokerages.
I can guarantee one thing, any MLS that requires an agent be a "Realtor" in "Good Standing", meaning you paid your dues and took the 4 year COE class online watching a slideshow, that the local association has ownership interest in the MLS. This is the way they can legally "REQUIRE" membership in the association.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Non MLS Brokers
