I have been in the real estate industry since 1979. I was a real estate agent at 21 and started my business at 26. Today, one in seven residential real estate contracts in America includes our name. I have never practiced any other profession, and I never will. I will go to my grave as a real estate agent. I love this industry and the people who work there. In fact, I love what we do for a living. We help people buy and sell houses. From their first to their last, it is an honor to help individuals and families with one of the most important financial and lifestyle decisions of their lives.
Always has been and always will be.
In my nearly five decades in the industry, I’ve seen just about everything. From really rising markets to really falling markets. From interest rates as high as 18% to as low as 2.7%. I’ve seen a steady parade of new ideas and models that promise to reinvent the industry. I even wrote my share. Most come and go. A pair of sticks. But one debate I never expected is whether it is better for a home seller to market their property privately or publicly.
To understand why this is important, it helps to explain how residential real estate has traditionally worked in the United States.
The MLS ensures maximum exposure
The backbone of the housing market for decades has been the Multiple Listing Service, or MLS. The MLS is not a business. It is a shared marketplace created by the brokers in that market. When a home is listed on the MLS, that property information is immediately available to virtually every agent in the market who is a member of the MLS, and by extension, to any serious buyer who works with an agent who has access to the MLS. By extension, literally all buyers and sellers of online real estate portals enjoy getting their data from them.
Simply put, the MLS creates maximum exposure, maximum competition, and the greatest chance of a seller discovering what the market is really willing to pay.
A private listing, often called an “off-market” or “coming soon” listing, works very differently. Instead of being placed on the open market, the house is marketed to a limited audience. This often happens within one real estate agency, a private network or a composite group of buyers. By design, fewer people ever know about the house. It is said that even though it is not on the open market, the “right” agents and all “potential” buyers are aware of it.
Actually, there is no way to know or prove this.
Let me be clear. Sellers should have the right to choose how their home is marketed.
It is their property, their information, their wealth and their financial future. After all, there are some reasons why a seller might choose to use a private listing for a while. More privacy, fewer displayed requests, and more time for pre-market preparations are all possible outcomes. Agents and their companies must respect the seller’s right and support every choice their clients make. But rights and informed decisions are not the same. And what concerns me today is not the idea of privately marketing a home, but the potential lack of full, balanced disclosure surrounding it.
Some companies in our industry have started promoting private listings as a superior path for sellers. They have gone so far as to advertise “exclusive access” as a benefit rather than a limitation. And that may well be true. That’s not my problem. My problem is full disclosure. Full disclosure where the seller is fully aware of their options and their potential benefits and pitfalls. My concern is when sales pitches masquerade as revelations. Where potential benefits are trumpeted and potential harms are whispered or ignored.
That is not transparency. That’s marketing dressed up as advice.
Here’s the truth: The MLS remains the most powerful, open marketplace for real estate buyers and sellers ever created. It exposes a seller’s home to any potential buyer, through any affiliated agent, across the entire market. Immediately. Nothing else offers that kind of reach, competition or fairness.
Private listings, on the other hand, by definition limit visibility.
They limit exposure to a small group of buyers. That could benefit a seller who really values absolute privacy. But that can also reduce competition, undermine bargaining power and ultimately cost the seller money. To claim otherwise is disingenuous.
And there is irony in all of this.
A seller who chooses privacy today will become a buyer tomorrow. If they purchased a system that withholds inventory in the name of exclusivity, they will face the same restrictions on the other side of the transaction. They won’t see everything that is available. They only see what someone wants them to see. No open market. Not a complete picture. No way to be aware of all possible choices. An opaque market works both ways.
It’s time to raise the standard
That’s why I believe it’s time for our industry to raise the bar.
I advocate full openness. True disclosure for both sellers and buyers. No pitch. No story. A clear presentation of the pros and cons of the ways in which a property can be marketed and the ways in which a property can be found. This way people can decide what is really best for them.
We must respect their rights by giving them the opportunity to decide, and not by manipulating their consent.
States are starting to understand this. Wisconsin even passed a law on public marketing and transparency that will go into effect on January 1, 2027.
The future of our industry must be about transparency and disclosure. Strong markets are built on trust, and trust is based on truth. Let’s give consumers the whole truth and let them choose for themselves.
Let’s give homeowners clarity and let them choose with confidence.
Furthermore…
Gary Keller, Executive Chairman and Co-Founder, Keller Williams Realty, LLC
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial staff and its owners.
To contact the editor responsible for this piece: [email protected]
Related
Related
#Exposure #MLS #Private #Listings #Full #Disclosure #Important