Comments on: A Lively Day on the Blog

By: Cindy Allen

Cindy Allen — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 06:51:29 +0000

Hi, Rico: I was given the same email, so I’m sure it will get to Gigi. I think it’s a great idea to let CLAW know your views. Thanks for your comment.

By: Rico Zim

Rico Zim — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 23:19:22 +0000

I think CLAW is making a mistake by assuming that it is either Redfin OR a traditional agent. Like almost everyone else who uses a traditional agent, I also use Redfin to do my own research on properties. With the amount of money at stake, wouldn’t anyone want to do the same? And I figure it makes my agent’s job easier and more efficient. The result for non-Redfin agents? The same commission with less work.

I called CLAW to explain this and was given the office manager’s e-mail address: gigi@themls.com.

Who knows if that’s the right e-mail, but I suggest that other folks with similar views write to this e-mail just in case.

By: clawmls

clawmls — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:16:14 +0000

We have read what’s been written here and I’ve posted what I hope is a detailed reply on the previous entry.

By: Cindy Allen

Cindy Allen — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:08:39 +0000

Andrew, thank you for posting. I really hope there is someone at CLAW who recognizes the need to change. The upsetting thing is that CLAW is holding its clients hostage. Its agents are earning some of the largest commissions in the ocuntry off of these sales, yet by omitting this information, they are committing a disservice to its buyers and sellers.

By: Cindy Allen

Cindy Allen — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:00:38 +0000

Ron, I appreciate your comments. Regarding the three Redfin agents who are members of CLAW affecting change within CLAW, I’m sure those agents would advocate the change, but there are three of them and hundreds of non-Redfin agents. Furthermore, as I’m sure you know, many traditional agents are mistrustful and even resentful of Redfin. So I think a groundswell of public opinion and perhaps pressure from other member agents — such as yourself, if you agree with what we’re saying — stand a much better chance of affecting change. If, as you say, CLAW is responsive to change, that gives me hope that they will read what’s been written here and make the necessary adjustments. There are more than 30 comments now on yesterday’s post; I hope CLAW’s seen it.

By: ron

ron — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:50:06 +0000

CLAW has a fiduciary duty to respond to its membership. Redfin is a member. Do they want to affect change or just complain about how unfair it is?

By: Corntrollio

Corntrollio — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:28:12 +0000

I doubt CLAW will be receptive to an online broker that doesn’t want its 3%. The calls from the Redfin brokers will go unreturned.

By: ron

ron — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:36:01 +0000

When Homegain, Realtor.com, etc. or a realtor who is a member of CLAW creates a IDX website (like REDFIN–yes, they are a CLAW member), CLAW info gets automatically accessed by anyone who searches through their site. Unfortunately, CLAW feels sqft is either proprietary or opens them to litigation. Therefore, not all guest websites that you find on the web typically have the full CLAW numbers. The consumer is out, imho.

Yet again, if Redfin wants to institute beneficial change to the policy like Cindy is provoking, then I can think of no better way of doing it than from within. The Redfin Seattle office is the broker office of record for CLAW. Also, Abe Chang, Erin Eckert and Erik Van Joosten are agents on CLAW roster who are listed as working from the Redfin office. In my experience as a CLAW member, I have found them responsive to suggestions and change.

By: Andrew Waite

Andrew Waite — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:32:20 +0000

My take on withholding information on any website is a legacy of a profession that still has holds itself above mere mortals aka, customers.

Realtors still have a strong contingent who cling to “Mommy knows best” philosophy as we are not capable of protecting ourselves or understanding the minutae of realty.

Welcome to the world of the web and the fact that there are already better sites covering the same content and more than CLAW covers.

This is simply an illustration of old guard management fighting a rear guard action to protect their buggy whip business. In my area we have this disfunctional MLS management committee who is still trying to justfy moving off a 1960′s platform and into the late 20th Century. No one wants to bite the financial bullet that change implies. Their data base covers less than 2/3s of the market and is falling and will be dead by 2010 unless they do something radical.

Andrew Waite – Publisher
Personal Real Estate Investor Magazine
Where to Live Books.