In covering the virtual office Website policy controversy, it has baffled me why the issue is so clearly one-sided to the popular press. Every reporter I have talked to across the country believes that all brokers should share all their listings with all other brokers regardless of the competitive risks in doing so. What they don't understand, and/or refuse to understand, is that the issue isn't as simple as that.

These reporters think only in terms of what is good for the consumer. If it is good for the consumer to have all the listings, they don't want to hear about the possible negative consequences to the industry.

A reporter who interviewed me once on the topic of the VOW policy said hello to me in the press room at the NAR convention last week. We briefly discussed the VOW issue again, and he said he couldn't see why "the brokers were holding onto the listings" and why didn't they simply let the online eBrokers have them? They already have access to the listings, but I let him go on. Then he said it's better for the homeowners to have their listings in more places because "it's free." He punctuated this conclusion with a shrug.

It was the shrug that drove home the point. It said to me that the listing broker doesn't matter. Only the consumer matters. Free.

I could see he had already been converted. Converts are interested in telling you their beliefs, but they don't really want to hear about yours. Knowing that any further discussion was a waste of time, I abruptly ended the conversation, clapped him on the shoulder, and went my merry way. I didn't have time to go into my view of how things should be, even if there were an opportunity to convert him.

But convert him to what, I wondered later? My view that the MLSs have done a lot of things right and that they are doing their best to cope with a rapidly changing medium called the Internet that allows certain actions that weren't possible in the days when MLSs published only books?

I could say that the listings may be free to the seller and to the consumer, but they aren't free to the listing broker, but somehow the listing broker's feelings don't matter in the reporter's summary of how things should be. In "how things should be," brokers should advertise their listings as many places as possible, even if it is competitive suicide for them to do so. Sellers don't expect brokers to advertise their homes until they are bankrupt. Why would they expect listing agents to advertise in places that might harm their business models?

If free to the consumer is all that matters, how about if I take this reporter's stories, put them on my Website, and tell consumers to cancel their subscriptions to his paper because I can provide the same stories for free? Hey, that works for consumers, doesn't it?

Isn't that what we are talking about? Free exposure? Or are we talking about using the inventory of the provider to cut him out of the consumer loop? I'll bet the reporter's copyright attorney wouldn't say, "Hey, we'll let this infringement go because it is good for consumers." I'll bet that he would fire off a nastygram so fast that it would smoke its way into my office. Do you think saying, "It's free," and shrugging my shoulders would keep me out of court? I don't think so.

Obviously, I know what would happen because newspapers have federally protected copyrights. Listing brokers don't, and that's why their industry is so vulnerable to this kind of reasoning by people who wouldn't put up with transgressions in their own industry for a New York second.

All listing brokers have to protect their rights to the listing is the MLS. Otherwise their only other choice is what caused the foundation of MLSs over a century ago -- pocket listings. If newspapers and the DOJ think the MLS is consumer-unfriendly for protecting listing brokers from anti-competitive assaults on their members' 'copyrights', then wait until pocket listings make a comeback.

And they will, thanks to some brokers who are thinking only of their business models and not the consequences to the industry. If other brokers no longer have a safe place to share their listings, the only other choice is not to share. If brokers who use the MLS and want to control where their listings are seen are being investigated by the Department of Justice as anti-competitive, then the only other choice is simply not to join the MLS -- a conclusion already reached by leaders in the largest franchise organizations in the country including Cendant brands, RE/MAX International and Realty Executives.

But I'll keep telling it until I'm blue in the face:

MLS listings aren't being kept from any broker. Access to listings is shared in a vehicle called the MLS. What the VOW policy issue is about is how the complete MLS listing database can be used by members. Some brokers who operate virtual offices in a Website believe they should be able to use the access they have to the MLS in their advertising, and to give consumers access to the entire MLS. But it is the advertising environment that is causing the problem. If a broker advertises that he discounts commissions -- alongside other brokers' listings -- should the other brokers be forced to give this broker their listings to use in that environment? To do so supports the discounting of commissions, which could be construed as anti-competitive, in that "have you stopped beating your wife" sort of way. In other words, brokers don't want to be party to discount sites because the same discount brokers who want their listings can also accuse them of price-fixing, and judging from their track record in filing lawsuits and tattling to the DOJ, they would file a price-fixing suit in a heartbeat.

To make some headway in this no-win situation and allow all brokers the opportunity to operate VOWs and showcase MLS listings, the NAR came up with a policy that allows members an opt-out provision. If they don't want their listings to be used in a VOW environment where they can't control what is being said around the listing, they can opt-out.

Because the MLS is a business-to-business environment, this solution seems progressive. It retains the atmosphere of trust that brokers have in the MLS while allowing any broker to operate a VOW. But there is no solution that will make everyone happy. There will always be some member of an organization that offers the dissenting view.

I can explain it to anyone who will listen, but I can't understand it for them if they won't try, especially if they are in the holy roller mode of giving the consumer anything they want, regardless of the costs to providers.

Published: November 11, 2003

Use of this article without permission is a violation of federal copyright laws.

Blanche Evans is the award-winning senior editor of Realty Times, the Internet's leading independent real estate news service. She is featured daily on the Realty Times Video Network in the "Realty Viewpoint" segment. Blanche has been named one of the "25 Most Influential People In Real Estate" by REALTOR Magazine, and has been twice recognized as a "notable." In 2005, she was named "Top Reporter Covering the NAR" by Delahaye-Bacon's. Blanche is a renowned author of five real estate books. Her newest, Bubbles, Booms and Busts: Make Money In Any Real Estate Market, McGraw-Hill, was rave-reviewed by The New York Times. She was also selected from hundreds of real estate experts to contribute to Donald Trump's book, Trump: The Best Real Estate Advice I Ever Received: 100 Top Experts Share Their Strategies, Rutledge Hill Press, and is featured on page 68. Order Now Review - Honors In 2006, Blanche was selected among scores of candidates to author two consumer real estate guidebooks for the National Association of Realtors: The NAR Guide to Home Buying, and The NAR Guide to Home Selling, Wiley & Sons. She is currently planning two new books for the NAR and its members.       Known for her keen insight into real estate industry issues and for her ability to make complex subjects easy to understand, Blanche is a sought-after keynote and continuing education speaker. Real estate organizations from MLSs, to brokerages, to franchisors, to associations hire her to provide up-to-the-minute analysis of real estate industry news and advice on how to improve revenues. Her passionate delivery, peppered with stinging wit, is a huge hit with audiences and fans. Don Klein, CEO Greater Nashville Association of Realtors, Blanche Evans, Richard Courtney, president 2007, GRAR "The GNAR membership meeting last week featured Blanche Evans as the keynote speaker. Her comments and insights resonated extremely well with those in attendance and we have had many requests for copies of her PowerPoint Presentation. She was a terrific part of the membership meeting and convention program!" - Don Klein, CEO Greater Nashville Association of Realtors Coverage from WSMV, Nashville - 8-14-2007 2007 AE Institute Session - To purchase 2006 AE Institute Session - Parts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 HouseValues Mastermind call - Parts 1 2 Blanche's fireside chat with Jeremy Conaway, HAR - Click here. To contact Blanche, email her at . For more articles by Blanche, click here.