I apologize if this is going to be part of tomorrow's article. I'm not sure if it was prompted by greed, loyalty to NAR, or just bad business advice, but IMHO any MLS who signs an exclusive licensing agreement for placement of their customers' listings is doing a disservice to those very same customers. Why would you isolate those listings from the millions of web surfers who do not use the exclusive site? How can an MLS decide where its customers listings will be advertised and profit from the decision? But, again IMHO, I feel that it is even more shameful for a broker or franchise to sign an exclusive deal. Isn't the broker's fiduciary duty to sell the seller's property in a timely fashion, advertise it widely, and make the deal. If you peruse the Insider List that you referenced in today's article, you will also see some names of large brokerages from across the country who are also trying to cash in on the stock warrants they were issued for their exclusive arrangements with HOMS. One of the names even maintains, or maintained a web site about the fiduciary responsibilites of real estate professionals. How does one of their agents present this to the consumer? "Dear consumer, we will advertise your property on the interent, but only on one site. My broker stands a chance to make a profit on stock warrants only if we agree not to advertise your property - for no charge - at the other major sites who receive millions of visitors every month." Exclusivity was bad 3 years ago - and it is still bad. Russ Bergeron SoCalMLS