Thats an excellent point she brings up. I'm well aware of the arguement that the MLS is made by and paid for by realtors with the intent it is for realtors to use, and it hinges on the offer of a co-broke and so on. The trouble is, hiding, or holding back, any of the information on the MLS from the public is making us hated.
We've simply changed as a society, and people expect to be able to search anything on the internet and find it. Knowing that it exists as a computerized feed somewhere and that part of it is cut off just drives people nuts.
Well. It drives me nuts anyway. 
It's particularly interesting to me because I made a decision a long time ago to put addresses on my
listings everywhere on the web. So much of what our industry does is motivated by fear. Maybe the potential buyer will go straight to the house and attempt to buy it without us. Perhaps they'll (perish forbid) take the listing information to another agent and buy it that way.
My approach was simplistic. As a buyer I would want to kmow where the home was and as a lister, I want the home sold.
I agree with both of your sentiments Athol and Geri.
The reason 'given' for not adding addresses is for saftey and security of the seller. I think I understand that, but I don't buy it.
I think it is still saftey and security of the Member/Broker/Association. Believe me that is hard for me to say since I've just spent the better part of two years serving the Members/Brokers/ and Associations as a leader.
Have I been outvoted?? Yes I have. Have I given up?? Nope. Not by a long shot. I received this email from a would be client and she is not happy. She like REALTOR.com, but I know she will find other sources for information (Trulia, Google, etc.). Problem is though is that REALTOR.com is the place where one will find the most listing information... as long as we are giving it to them. Alas we are not... and we ain't making more friends because of it. That is what those of us on the inside shouldn't put up with.
Interesting discussion. It is always fun to hear the ranters -- especially when it isn't directly at you.
I can understand the safety argument. But, is it really safer? I took a call last night on a property I have listed, and within 10 seconds on the phone had given the address and directions to the property -- highlighting how it was on a quiet country road, but only five minutes from the mall. And I'm sure -- especially in this market -- that any other agent would have done the same thing. We have a live-body calling on a listing and wanting to know more.
While, I understand that "in theory" it is safer to not have the address on the Web, but it would simply take a phone call and they've got the information they want.
So it is really any safer?
No Toby, it isn't any safer. It is a silly little argument that brokers and old school agents like to make so that they can get the live phone calls or office visits.
The only thing that is really trying to be protected is the double sided commission. I'm calling it like I see it.
The broker/agent business model is damaged in this current sales enviroment and we will all be lucky to survive.
It's all about listers wanting to sell the listings themselves and offices wanting an in-house deal. Where in all of that is our fiduciary responsibility to our seller. We're obligated to act in their best interest, not ours. What a novel concept!
Realtor.com has built it's model around making profit by any means necessary. It's all about the deal and the leads that can be brought in, no matter the user experience on their site.
This is why Realtor.com will ultimately be just another dinosaur that could not adapt to what consumers want and demand.
Thanks for the post, Todd.
Commenting by HaloScan
