Almost a decade ago, in 2017, I was involved in a very public fight over StreetEasy. Many of the NYC brokerages individually decided they were going to stop feeding their listings because of mounting fees charged to the agents.
At the time, Corcoran was among the brokerages pushing back against StreetEasy. But by September of that year, Corcoran reached an agreement to continue feeding its listings to the platform.
Fast forward to today, and the position has completely reversed.
Corcoran, now owned by Compass, is encouraging agents to remove listings from StreetEasy, with additional marketing support being offered for listings that aren’t posted there.
The circumstances have changed. StreetEasy has grown. The ownership of Corcoran is different. But one thing hasn’t changed: the seller’s interest should come first.
That is the point of my latest Inman opinion piece.
I have plenty of criticisms of StreetEasy. I don’t believe agents should be forced into business arrangements that don’t serve them, and I don’t believe a large portal should dictate how the real estate industry operates.
But this isn’t really about whether StreetEasy is good or bad.
It is about whether a brokerage’s corporate strategy should determine where a seller’s home is marketed.
Consumers use StreetEasy. They search for homes there. Sellers want their properties in front of serious buyers. If a brokerage is asking an agent to remove a listing from a platform where consumers are actively looking, the first question should be: Is this what is best for the client?
There is nothing wrong with competing with StreetEasy or challenging its business practices. There is also nothing wrong with a seller making an informed decision about where to market a home.
But sellers should not become collateral damage in a fight between large brokerages and large listings platforms.
At Brown Harris Stevens, our position is simple. We work for our clients, not a corporate platform strategy.
Nearly 10 years ago, Corcoran made a decision to keep its listings on StreetEasy. Today, it is taking the opposite approach. A decade ago, they said it was all for the good of their clients and agents. Who is it for now?
Leave a Reply