Real Estate in the Age of the Internet Volume 8

Critique of Traditional Real Estate Brokerageinternet and disaggregated real estate service
Compensation Modelproviders reveals a fundamental truth: for-sale
Given the apparent paradox between real worldproperty listings information in and of itself has little
endurance and academic/political criticism the currenteconomic value; access to information was used as
real estate brokerage compensation model, a reviewan inducement to enter into a formal agency
of recent literature on the topic provides a structurerelationship, during which value added services were
for parsing out the relative merits of the currentprovided. It follows from this, that use of traditional
percentage-based split commission model as wellbrokerage service would remain steady and no
insights as to how it may evolve in the future.reduction in broker compensation would be seen
In their 2007 paper, "Is the Compensation Model forwhen such information is made freely available. And in
Real Estate Brokers Obsolete?" authors Miceli, Pancakfact, this has been the case, as is demonstrated in
and Sirmans (2007) argue the traditionalthe reduction in the rate of FISBO's seen since 1987
percentage-based split commission model for brokersand persistence of brokerage commission rates over
has become obsolete, given contemporary legalthe same period. "Between 1998 and 2005, the real
agency relationships and technology-drivenmedian real estate broker commission per transaction
information availability. As a result, they concludegrew by 25.5%. However, commission rates remained
buyers and sellers experience substantial transactionalrelatively stable during that time irrespective of
inefficiencies during the two primary phases of themarket conditions, home prices, or effort to sell a
real estate transaction, matching and bargaining. Theyhome (US Government Accountability Office (GAO),
then proceeds to mathematically model the existing2006)."
compensation model and identify alterations, whichPerhaps the most instructive oversight in the Miceli et
would mitigate the inefficiencies he describes. Finally,al. (2007) argument is in their lack of treatment of
Miceli et al. (2007), proposes a list of policy actions,the true economic justification of the current
which if undertaken, could facilitate the emergence ofcompensation model, which is based on risk and
the compensation model they propose. This paperreward. Currently, in real estate brokerage, agents
reaches some useful conclusions in terms of policyand brokers assume 100% risk in the transaction
actions, however some of the assumptions uponpurchase sale and sale process. They incur tangible
which the supporting argument is made, may neglectand intangible expenses throughout the entire
certain functional roles of real estate brokerage. Inprocess without guarantee of payment. Buyers and
addition, the proposed the compensation model, whilesellers on the other hand assume no risk and only
elegant, does not address the fundamental basis formake payment upon successful consummation of a
why real estate brokerage services, have, up untiltransaction. In this respect, the real estate brokerage
this point in time, been delivered wholesale. Never themodel exhibits attributes of an insurance model, with
less, Miteceli at al. (2007) is an useful in formulating awholesale payment for services rendered upon
vision of how compensation in real estate brokeragesuccessful transactions required to compensate for
may evolve.expected losses on unsuccessful transactions. In
The main assumption Miceli et al. (2007) make uponorder to justify his compensation model, Miceli et al.
which their central argument is made, is in(2007) make the leap to a future point in time when
oversimplifying real estate brokerage services intothe provision of disaggregated brokerage services
two all encompassing functions: matching andare proven to be independently economically feasible
bargaining. While doing so allows Miceli et al. (2007) toand more importantly, to when the provision of such
formulate an economic model of brokerservices does not undermine the structural
compensation, it excludes many of the functions"insurance" dimension of real estate brokerage; the
brokers perform, which have economic value, butattribute which allows buyers and sellers to incur no
which have here to fore lacked independent pricingupfront expense in the purchase and sale of real
due to the existing bundled service model.estate.
As discussed previously, the agent provides a rangeThe traditional percentage-based, split commission
of services, not only subsequent to the matching andcompensation model in real estate brokerage is still
bargaining phases, but within these phases as well,prevalent today because it crudely, yet none the less
which are omitted by Miceli et al. (2007) in theeffectively, compensates brokers and agents for
interest of modeling broker compensation. Fortheir direct and indirect expenses. While there is
example, decisions regarding pre-listing activities suchevidence the industry has engaged in anticompetitive
as level of property fix-up (requiring monetarybehavior on an institutional level, these actions are a
investment) and home staging decisions are oftenrational given the potential unintended consequences
critical in the matching phase and can have substantialassociated with undermining the economic
impact on the final sales price. Alternatively, decisionsunderpinnings the industry. However, while anti-trust
involving choice of appraisal company can influenceproceedings continue to move forward, the very
property valuation, thereby influencing the probabilitysame trends the industry has sought to curtail, such
of a successful a bargaining phase. In the Miceli et al.as unfettered access to MLS listings by the public and
(2007) model, these types of services are essentiallythe emergence of limited service discount
considered to have zero economic value, as Miceli etbrokerages, have taken place none-the-less. And yet,
al. (2007) advocate for a collective listingswholesale real estate brokerage remains the
aggregations model in lieu of the process by whichdominant business model and the percentage-based,
brokers search for listings: "we will argue however,split commission compensation model continues to
that unlike an unimpeded search for buyers,endure. The main conclusion which can be drawn
competition for listings is unproductive in that it doesfrom these circumstances is that the primary value
not increase the likelihood of a sale..." Miceli et al.agents and brokers bring to the real estate value
(2007). It is precisely within this process that brokerschain is not associated with information control but
and agents market their skills (compete) in therather, with information management. In the long and
aforementioned examples and affect sale price. Thecomplex real estate transaction, agents and brokers
underlying supposition in the Miceli et al. (2007)collect, analyze, interpret, and transmit data. Given
analysis is that all seller brokerage services arethe relative infrequency of sales transactions, the
commodities.public at large does not attain the collective skills to
Another potential weakness in the Miceli et al. (2007)engage in these activities, wholly or partially. The risks
broker compensation model, is in their economicand costs associated with engaging in these activities
overvaluation of the role of the broker during themotivate the public to contract with traditional
matching phase as associated with property search.wholesale brokers and agents as opposed to
Miceli et al. (2007), argue the emergence ofexperimenting with alternative models.
information technologies has allowed buyers toHowever, the information intensive nature of real
search through property listings informationestate makes the industry particularly susceptible to
independently of the real estate agent, which theyadvances in information technology. The efficiencies
juxtapose to the era when agents controlled accessto be gained from technologically enabled agents and
to such information. Their argument posits that freebrokers will result in competitive advantages, which
and unfettered public access to listings informationwill magnify over time (to be discussed in Section 2).
should have resulted in a reduction in brokerUltimately, disaggregated service offerings will be
compensation, to reflect the reduced value add ofavailable to the public on a per fee basis, but the bulk
the broker: "The traditional compensation model forof these services will be offered by traditional
brokers has not evolved to reflect their diminishedwholesale service brokers and agents, who have
role in the matching stage" Miceli et al. (2007). Indeveloped economically-feasible
reality, the persistence (growth) of the traditionaltechnologically-enabled partial service models within
percentage-based split commission compensationthe context of their full service practices.
model in the face free listings information on the