The new laws and policies reflect a growing recognition that true fairness comes from not forcing all sellers down the same narrow path, writes Ginger Wilcox, president of Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate.
Last week, Connecticut passed a law that protects home sellers who choose to sell their homes through Zillow, Realtor.com, and the MLS. The law, which goes into effect later this year, is the latest development in a growing awareness of sellers’ rights to choose how their homes are marketed to potential buyers.
Connecticut joins a growing list of MLSs that codify seller control rights, joining a group that already includes states such as New York and Wisconsin. This is an important development in a debate that has been raging for years, and one that I have been lucky enough to experience from all sides.
The path until a home reaches a buyer
A few years ago, I worked at Trulia, where my job was to help publish listings to the open web. I’m not against widespread consumer access. In fact, I played a hands-on role in supporting its expansion. But open access is not the same as forcing all sellers a single, unified path to marketing and selling homes.
Much of the current discussion assumes that if homes don’t sell quickly and everywhere, buyers will be shut out. That’s rarely true.
Homes reach buyers in a variety of ways, from yard signs and agent networks to social media and the MLS. These approaches are not mutually exclusive. In practice, limited early exposure is often the first step in a broader plan.
In some cases, the regulations themselves can keep homes off the market. Sellers know that once a property is listed, the clock starts ticking. Days on the market add up, price tags show up, and a home can look stale even if timing is the issue rather than a lack of demand.
When sellers are penalized for listing too early, many end up waiting. Removing that artificial pressure will not reduce the number of homes coming onto the market.
Therefore, marketing strategies have traditionally been determined by sellers with the advice of their agents. Creating one necessary path will not make the market more open. Accept the homeowner’s choice and place it elsewhere.
The “essential” role of MLS
MLS plays a different, but still important, role. Collaboration between professionals gives agents the information they need to properly serve their clients. But telling sellers when and how to market their home crosses a line.
That was never the purpose of the MLS, but the rules now vary widely from market to market, with some extreme cases resulting in penalties for yard signs and social posts even when no buyer is trying to withhold a listing.
How these rules define “public” has broader implications. The more “public” is treated as universal and unrestricted distribution, the more a few dominant platforms will benefit.
Once you’re guaranteed that your listings will flow through a particular channel, that channel no longer has to compete for your business. Over time, costs rise and brokers, agents, and consumers have fewer choices.
Recently enacted laws and policies are not strikes against the open market. Rather, it reflects a growing recognition that true fairness comes from giving sellers the freedom to chart their own course to closing, rather than forcing all sellers down the same narrow path.
That choice is worth defending.
Ginger Wilcox is the president of Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate.
