Mert's MLSNI post

[MattL]

This is in response to Mert's recent blog post at that other useless forum:
http://www.realestatewebmasters.com/...mert/341/show/

First, let me say that compared to MANY MLSes in America, MLSNI has some of the most progressive (and pro-consumer) policies around.

To contend some of Mert's points:

1. The IDX feed for MLSNI contains 87.5% of the full MLS (by today's numbers).
2. Of those properties excluded from the IDX feed, 20% of them belong to Coldwell-Banker Residential and Baird & Warner -- the original defectors to MAPMLS because of MLSNI's VOW policy. Another 20% belong to RE/MAX offices that are pushing IllinoisProperty.com. And, personally, I would say that at least half of the remaining listings are blocked unintentionally, because the listing agent doesn't understand the implications.
3. The "forced login" policy is very, very good for Realtors and beneficial to consumers. Most significantly, it prevent the wholesale exploitation of your site by other Realtors (which DOES happen). For consumers, it allows far more functionality and, potentially, improves the solution's intelligence through personalization. You wouldn't sit with an on-site client for an hour searching properties without getting any contact information, so your "virtual office" shouldn't be any different. MLSNI has pledged to uphold this policy even if NAR adopts a modified ILD policy, so get used to it.
4. MLSNI's policy allows cooperative advertising, which is an easy way for an internet startup to defray costs. This is specific to MLSNI, as NAR's default VOW policy does not permit advertising on listing pages.

What Mert SHOULD be complaining about:

1. The handful of megalithic brokerages that "blanket opt-out" their own listings from the IDX feed while merrily displaying competitors' listings on their site. This is one provision of the ILD policy with which I whole-heartedly agree -- if you opt-out, you may NOT display other Realtors' listings on your own website. Then it's more of a cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face policy, and there would be some disincentive to opting-out.
2. The lack of industry standardization in IDX, VOW, and RETS data feeds. Having been a software developer for 10+ years, I can't believe how poorly implemented the "standards" are in this market, or how disparate are the three sources. Having true standards would allow far more code reuse, and afford a lot more cooperation (even conversation) between developers from different firms. As it stands, each company that creates a solution (myself included) actually benefits from withholding the "secrets" of making it work, usability improvements, and so on.
3. NAR's national anti-competitive practices that relate to the Internet (i.e., most of the DoJ's anti-trust allegations). In my eyes, they are all fairly valid in some way.

-Matt