Realtor.com is beta-testing AgentMatch in Las Vegas and Boulder, and just announced that they have selected 16 realtors to form a advisory board “to work in tandem with us on this important project”.
From the article:
AgentMatch ranks agents by city, ZIP code and neighborhood based in part on their transaction histories, with data sourced from the local multiple listings services. Other information, including certifications and recommendations, is also factored in.
The agents’ reaction to AgentMatch has largely been negative, with many expressing apprehension toward the accuracy of rankings that rely on statistics, and the inherent ambiguity in determining what makes one agent rank higher than another.
Redfin, Google, and others have rolled out their versions, and if it weren’t for the vehement objections by realtors, there would be several agent-rating websites in business by now.
There needs to be a solid, dependable agent resource center – the data is available, and third-parties are going to publish it, if we don’t.
It makes sense that realtor.com would be the natural portal. They have the direct connection to every MLS, and should be able to verify its accuracy. Agents should trust realtor.com more than the rest, and if realtor.com would have been dedicated to lead the industry, then we probably wouldn’t be talking about this. It would have already happened two years ago, before Redfin tried their agent-ranking version for a week.
Here’s what I wrote about it then:
https://www.bubbleinfo.com/2011/10/03/redfin-scouting-reports-guidance/
I’m not on their advisory panel, but I’ll offer my thoughts anyway:
1. Delete the ‘ranking’ of agents, and just make it an agent-resource center loaded with facts – and education. Give instructions on what the data means, and on how to properly interpret it.
2. Include an agent-profile box where realtors can manually input their own introduction and make a pitch why they deserve your business. Provide a link directly off the website to the agent. If an agent wants to dispute their sales counts publically, do it here.
3. Make the data readily consumable – easy to read with helpful tips along the way. For starters:
-
Total sales closed in the last 12 months:
-
Number of agents in group who reported sales under this agent:
-
How many off-market deals did you close:
-
Short-sales listing closed: Short-sale buyers closed:
-
REO listings closed: REOs sold to buyers:
-
Total sales closed in the last 36 months:
- (comparing 12-month totals vs 36-month shows professional growth)
- And more.
4. Allow clients and other agents to give feedback, just like Ebay. The realtor would be allowed to give rebuttals, and we’d have to deal with fake feedback. To make everybody happy, we’d probably have to allow agents to delete negative comments up to a point.
Realtors have enjoyed relative anonymity, and our commitment to educate the consumer is dreadful. A powerful agent-resource center that was properly positioned would help focus the attention on facts, and give the industry some much needed direction. It is in everyone’s best interest to work together to create a package that works.
Transparency would be greatly enhanced. Agents who focus on truthfully marketing themselves would benefit – the stats would back them up. The agents who depend on a fluffy image would still get by, because consumers attracted to that, probably wouldn’t be scouring the internet for data.
Some of the biggest objections will come from those whose shady dealings will now be exposed – it would help keep agents honest!
Most of all, it would give clients a resource from which to learn about the agents who are assisting them with one of the biggest decisions in their life. It’s the least we could do to help.
Articles:
http://agbeat.com/editorials/agentmatch-launches-objections-appear-anti-consumer/
http://www.inman.com/2013/11/22/zillow-adds-transaction-histories-to-agent-profiles/
http://www.homelight.com/agents/jim-klinge-ca-00873197
http://www.inman.com/2013/01/17/agent-matching-site-homelight-rolls-out-client-reviews/
Good thoughts as always Jim. Homelight is interesting but I ran a few queries and it’s pretty basic stuff so far.
There’s a sea-change in this space that will trend toward reputation ranking, curation of services and recommendation processes with much more competence than what the typical homebuyer gets now.
This process will take about 7-10 years but it will fundamentally change the industry for the better. The tech is there, the resources and even the business model is there (Amazon vs independent book stores)
new agents need to eat too, dont they?
new agents need to eat too, dont they?
It’s why they should ditch the idea of ranking agents.
Why insist on putting a score on everybody?
Just lay out the facts and let the consumer decide!
Having a display box that could be manually edited gives a new agent a chance to offer a compelling case on why they are worthy, and people would appreciate the effort.
You could mention the hot-buy-of-the-day, give mini-seminars, or just tell daily jokes and appeal to different consumers.
It would be better than what we have now, where every agent has their own website, which means that millions of individual websites are scattered across the country with no connection or central database.
What’s worse is what’s on those websites. Every agent promising the same thing; that they are in the Top 1% of realtors, and they will carefully listen to your needs.
BTW, It looks like I have wrapped up the award for #1 Agent at Klinge Realty for the tenth year in a row!!
This process will take about 7-10 years
For realtors’ sake, it better take 7-10 months.
This is realtor.com’s last stand against Zillow.
According to this August, 2013 summary, Zillow and Yahoo-Zillow is killing realtor.com (57 million vs 12 million):
http://www.realtor.org:8119/sites/default/files/reports/2013/nar-website-traffic-stats-august-2013-10.pdf
The Zillow CEO, who is in the headlines every week about something, said that they are now up to 65 million viewers per month.
65 vs 12 – it might already be over.
Realtor.com has the insider advantage, but has never capitalized on it. By becoming the agent resource center, they could at least put up a fight.
All of this doesn’t get around the real problem in real estate buying – information asymmetry. No matter how good or bad an agent is, there really is no consequence to lying in the business. [Let me just add this – of all the agents I have met over the years, you alone stand out as having unyielding honesty.]
I have two illustrations from friends who have run into problems caused by such asymmetry: (1) Listing agent told my buddy’s agent that they would have to make an offer 20% over asking to be in the running; a month later the house closed for 9% over asking. (2) Listing agent told the buyer’s agent that the buyer’s offer would have to be $100k more to be in the top 3; home closed for $200k less than the number the listing agent was talking about.
There is a chance that the listing agent was not stretching the truth, except that other than these two stories, I’ve heard about a dozen more similar ones. There are no consequences to stretching the truth (sometimes even very far). None. No amount of realtor reputation ranking will solve this problem (you scratch my back, I scratch your’s comes to mind; nothing a $1000 kickback to the client won’t solve; etc.).
Jim,
Is volume of transactions so important? I can see an index ranking; Low/Mid/High for the last 2 years, 3 & 10. There are sometimes advantages to low volume for many situations. Not every property is ready for a blitz and “git ‘er done” marketing.
I also see raw experience rankings to be a new barrier to entry.
Like you I am for more transparency but I don’t think volume is a revealing number.
I think this is a terrific idea.
It’s much like restaurant rankings – even with the much maligned Yelp. Sometimes, you’ll tolerate dated decor for great food. Sometimes, you’ll put up with a booked reservation list or a long wait for a great place. Sometimes, you just want to try someplace new. More information is better, it lets the consumer opt in to the experience they want.
When I bought my very first place, I was a pretty weak buyer, and I knew it. I ended up writing a bunch of low offers, 100% financed, because I had no money. I had a realtor that was willing to drive me around for months, because he wasn’t very good either, and was happy to have the business.
More information lets the customer find a good match.
Is volume of transactions so important?
It is the basic indicator of whether the agent can get people to the finish line.
Average and/or median sales price will probably make the cut, and help define the expertise.
If an agent had 4 sales in the last 12 months, and averaged over $2 million, it would qualify the recent experience.
If the last sale was in January of a condo in El Cajon, then that is telling too.
The agents with the phoney-baloney image campaigns or those who rely on their glamour shots to get clients won’t be able to hide their incompetence. They would have to develop their skills – hooray!
A new agent could fill their promo box with something like this:
“I work for a great company who provides a mentor with 20 years’ experience to closely supervise my work. I have taken extensive training and have been investing long hours preparing to help you. I look at a minumum of ten properties a day to build my expertise on home values, and I’m an expert in utilizing social media to market your home for sale. I enthusiastically want to go to work for you!”
Zillow is already on this – you see the number of sales in the last 12 months for each agent, and link to each property.
Great thoughts as usual Jim. It seems like lots of companies are against it. My friend got this email below:
Dear Associates-
You may be following recent press regarding AgentMatch, a new agent rating feature currently being BETA tested by realtor.com.
The tool allows consumers to search an address and the site will deliver the top 16 agents who have sold property in the area. According to Move, Inc., which operates realtor.com, AgentMatch’s algorithm identifies the agents “through MLS-provided SOLD data, including recent sales, list-to-sale-price ratio, average days on market of homes listed, recommendations and other information.”
While we agree that providing online access to feedback on agent performance and service level are necessary due to consumer demand, we believe that it should be in the form of reviews that are submitted by your customers.
We feel that using the data passed through from the MLS will result in rankings that are completely arbitrary and create lopsided opportunities for some.
Hypothetically, as an example, in Austin, Texas, if you search in the subdivision of Lost Creek (approximately 1,000 homes), only 2 of the top 25 producing agents in the Austin MLS may be displayed in the top 16 agents for the area. Essentially, only individual agents who may have less production, but who have sold in a specific area, will be shown, rather than the true market leaders!
In addition, any course of action by either Move or the MLSs to make an overarching decision about how your business is marketed – without you having a chance to weigh in – is completely misguided. Your business is just that – YOURS, and neither Move nor your MLS should make decisions for you without your input.
We commend realtor.com for deciding this week to put in place an agent advisory board for this product, and we are happy that KW has representation on that board. Know that as long as realtor.com moves forward with the current formulas and rating system for AgentMatch, we are firmly against it on the basis that it does not represent the best interests of agents or consumers.
When realtor.com first launched, the MLSs made a similar decision to share all the listing information without the agents’ input. This was the primary reason we built the Keller Williams Listing System – to ensure accuracy of our listing data and to give choice to our agents about where they wanted to market their listings online. We view this situation similarly, and we’re going to do everything we can to stop it.
We strongly urge you to petition your MLS NOT to participate in AgentMatch.
We’ll also be working directly with the executives at Move, Inc. to explain our position.
In the name of putting agents first.
“In the name of putting agents first.”
yup, no regard for the customer!