Franchisors are powerless without Broker-Owners and the old line franchise arrangements are no longer applicable in the The New Real Estate Economy.

Reality is always a very tough pill to swallow. It goes down, it seems, with the greatest degree of difficulty. Acceptance of reality is the great precursor to popping the pill.

Let me break it to you gently…the way we did business will no longer produce the ROI and sustained profitability required by Broker-Owners for the risks they take.

Tests have been run. X-rays have been taken. MRIs and CAT scans have been completed. The economic blood work has returned from the lab. The diagnosis is in…the party is over…without radical changes in lifestyle and barring miraculous intervenion, we are most likely terminal.

The Way We Were

The primary fuel for traditional brokerage profitability used to be control of property information coupled with free-flowing access to mortgage money. The relationship between brokerage profit and the control of information and lending is being redefined and will become more complex and demanding, creating fewer Brokerage successes but better leveraged and approriately balanced lending portfolios for banks.

Unfortunately, the banks have little interest in the survival of Broker-Owners or the real estate industry as we have known it. Add to this the new reality Owners are facing…the rapid accelleration of change and the inability manage forced transformation.

According to John Krainer, a Senior Economist on banking, “Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae now own or guarantee an overwhelming share of originations…at the same time, non-agency mortgage securitization and loans retained in lender portfolios have largely dried up.”

What is the current financial stability of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the guarantor of the overwhelming share of originations? They are on the brink of collapse, still running seemingly insurmountable losses.

We are entering an era that will be characterized by cautious and tempered lending. This translates into fewer transactions per Broker-Owner across the board. There will be less to live on and it will be more difficult than ever to compete for what little is there. Behind this, our NAR membership continues to remain ridiculously bloated.

The Way We Ought to Be

A solution being formulated and floated by REALonomics could be called “The Property Metrics and Monetization Model” or simply put we shift our economic model to developing and marketing property metrics and away from sole dependency on closed transactions. We are now being forced to monitize our greatest asset in ways never before realized.

The monitization of our greatest asset, property and local information, are both pieces of the new economic opportunity we face. The bitter pill we must swallow (many are still in denial) is that we will never again return to what we have known and called “normal.” Deny as we may, we are never, ever returning to a business climate in any way resembling 2000-2006.

Broker-Owners should be in the business of developing metrics and monetizing property information for profitability. Tall order and tough sledding. We have given away so much that regaining a foothold may be the greatest challenge of all.

Our New Economic Mother Board

The New platform will not be predicated on Social Networking models, although these are key distribution portals that need to be tapped by Broker-Owners.

The new economic reality we face demands that we create an entirely new platform that will provide us an economic mother board for plug-n-play brokerage in the new economic environment.

The mother board contains the processor for property and local information models accessible and marketable to consumers through multiple portals. Buying a house is the secondary economic component of our new model math, rather than the primary.

• Improved property and local information access
• Improved property and local information packaging
• Improved property and local information deployment
• Improved property and local information monetization

In the new global economic environment the game consumers want to play is played on a whatever, wherever and whenever game board with access to all things real estate. Real estate is being democratized.

Speed and precision are going to become operatives, coupled with unrestrained access for the consumer.

Problem at hand: While NAR spends money lobbying for the salvation of an already dead model, the globalization of information will overtake it and us. There are really only three options for the industry.

Option One. NAR could become the leader in real estate information management on a global scale and re-empower Broker-Owners with marketable solutions that leverage consumer relationships.

Option Two. Owners could take back the property databases they own by creating their own transparent and exportable solution forming a new business model focused primarily on using property information as the commodity for profitability.

Option Three. Non-Brokers (entities outside the industry) could implement property information systems that sideline traditional practitioners. This is already underway.

Our industry is in a self-induced form of deterioration. Yes, I know that once again statements like this will bring about more labeling of me as counter-productive and produce quiet whispers of “he’s not a team player…”

My only answer is “Take two and call me in 2012.”

Related posts:

1. The First Economic Wave

Syndicated from e-Partner

For centuries the notion of turning lead into gold has captured the imagination of countless Alchemists, all of whom were doomed to failure.

The real estate industry’s economic model has been for decades akin to conjuring concoctions that claim to convert the weight of our tarnished enterprise models into shining bars of profitability.

We have not always understood the true alchemy of our industry and the relationship between the decline of profitability with the introduction and application of new technologies to our industry.

Each of the two great historical shifts (economic eras) in our industry have occurred with the rise of new technology, the independence of agents and the empowerment of the consumer. Consider the following diagram and then listen to the accompanying presentation.

The shift from the Broker-Centric era to the Agent-Centric era was created largely as a result of the introduction of a technology known as the Personal Computer (PC) to the daily work habits of agents, empowering them to globalize their reach. From that point on, Broker-Owners were not able to fully contain the spillage of property information into the streets of their marketplace.

Download a FREE copy or the First Economic Wave, the Second Economic Wave and the Third Economic Wave.

The loss of the MLS Book coupled with PC access to MLS data created a decline in the control of property information (always a key contributor to loss of profit) and the empowerment of the consumer who no longer had to enter a real estate office in order to see the Holy Grail.

Nor have we fully appreciated how technology has always defined each of the three economic eras of our history and most importantly how each increase in technology within the industry reduces profitability.

In 1994, along came the Information Super Highway and property data began to find its way to the Internet, where a hungry consumer was waiting. The Internet created a bridge from MLS sources to consumers who were also empowered with PCs. This was the beginning of a shift from the agent-centric model to the current new real estate economy where the consumer is now the central character.

“Pb” (lead) can become “Au” (gold). The alchemetrics (not sure that is a word but I’ll run with it) are simply undeniable. Technology creates the shift and transition from one real estate economic era to the next. With each transition three things always occur:

1. Technology always defines the shift, the model and the wealth in our economic models
2. Owner profitability declines as control over property information control diminishes
3. Information control is distributed over time to an increasing number of people thus, democratizing real estate

What does all of this mean? Simply, and yet rather profoundly, this means that ours is a history made up of transitions created primarily by the introduction of new technologies and a fundamental shift in economic control from us to consumers. It also means that the principle of alchemy is real.

Our lead-based model (forget lead-based paint for a moment!) is in the process of being turned into gold. However, in the alchemic (not sure that is a word either but I’ll run with it as well) process, we will not necessarily become the benefactors of the creation of new wealth being created by the introduction of new consumer-centric technologies. We could be but we are not, it appears, equipped to transition with the consumer into The New Real Estate Economy.

Watch the presentation and please, comment.

Related posts:

1. The New Real Estate Economy
2. Government Interference has Harmed American Real Estate Wealth
3. New Improved Real Estate Model Math

This Post Syndicated from e-Partner

Ours is an industry with legacy. The brokerage business has seen many booms and endured many busts.

Many have come and most have gone.

Road kill has always been a part of the mix; the strong eat the weak and the weak find refuge in other endeavors.

The real estate industry has always been a town occupied by heralded gun slingers whose reputations have become the stuff of legends. Sometimes these are brands, other times they are movements, fads or personalities that come and go with the wind.

We have always been a tad reckless; that’s why we are a business model willing to predicate its economic viability on the unpredictable and unenforceable productivity of independent contractors. Let’s admit it, the business cultures we have created have typically been less than IBMish.

Nonetheless, we have moved from era-to-era, cycle-to-cycle and shifted from mode-to-mode, surviving the financial droughts of summer and living through the long, frigid economic nights of our many winters. We are an industry that could legitimately lay claim to squeezing blood from turnips.

We have historically endured and outlasted our most caustic critics who have mocked us at every turn and likened us to dishonest snake-oil salesmen.

Yes, we’ve been brought back from the dead a number of times. We are a cat with nine lives and most of them have been used up.
Are we now reaching the termination point? Are we, Tenus Terminatio Cuspis?

An Industry on Life Support

e-Partner believes we are an industry on life support. Our traditional business models are being depleted of their potency because they only work effectively within controlled economic environments backed by cycles where predictability is a guarantee.

Broker/Owners are reaching a desperation point as they face the decision to remain on life support or, turn off the apparatus that sustains them. In essence, they are losing the will to sustain the battle.

We have built our business models on the sands of predictable turnarounds that always came if we just waited long enough. Our economic foundation was never “rock solid” (a phrase once used by my former franchisor) but rather, a roll-of-the-dice at a table where we knew the odds would eventually turn against us.

The money is running out and the sand in the hour glass is reaching its last few grains. The water line that once flowed with abundance has slowed from its gush of 2002-2006 to droplets we must now try to ration.

Our rank and file is wearied and worried about sustainability. We are nervous and fearful about what might be waiting for us around the next corner. With few exceptions, there doesn’t seem to be a coherent national call-to-arms to address our crisis.

This is no way to run a business or an industry.

While We have Faint Pulse

During a recent two-hour protracted conversation with a Broker/Owner, I realized the deep hunger that exists within our industry for one-on-one support. In fact, I was told in no uncertain terms that the personal conversation itself had more meaning than the business concepts being exchanged. I’m feeling more like a therapist than a business consultant.

This and many other conversations like it indicate that we have a faint pulse but that we may be losing some patients very soon if we do not shore up the ranks by means of a national support network for Broker/Owners.

Our productivity numbers indicate that we are on the cusp, facing what could become a pandemic situation. Many Broker/Owners are reaching the termination point.

The 64,000 dollar question begging to be asked is, “Is our industry as a whole reaching a collective termination point?” How much more trauma can we endure?

e-Partner has not seen nor have we heard of any national industry initiative dedicated to addressing the survivability of ourselves.

While we may have a pulse today, tomorrow is coming. While many are hunkered down waiting hoping for some sort of market rebound, the demands and characteristics of a new real estate economy are passing us by.

I am ready to predict that there will be no return to what we once knew and that new operating and economic rules are being devised and implemented that will forever change our relationship with the consumer and thus, our viability.

There will always be time as long as we have a pulse. Like any weakened or wounded entity, the longer we wait to implement decisive corrective action the more difficult becomes the chance of survival. And if we squander our resources on internal battles that do not equip us for the next generation of our industry we will surely succumb.

We can survive but not without a herculean effort to save ourselves. Then, after survival comes the art of rehabilitation and full sustainability. The industry as we know it today is in need not of a stint but of a radical transplant in order to produce the type of organization that is in possession and control of the requisite tools and willful capacity to perform in a new global real estate economy with new rules and new regimens.

There is a set of irreducible minimums that e-Partner sees as industry priorities and this set of principled changes must be considered before we can arrive at protracted sustainability.

• Redirect key NAR Resources to industry redevelopment and Broker/Owner support.
• Redefine the meaning of real estate “market” in contemporary terms.
• Redistribute property information via transparent MLS economic packages.
• Retool local Realtor Association models and services for tomorrow’s reality.

These four principled changes serve as the nucleus for rehabilitation and sustainability of our industry. Let’s address each of these briefly.

Redirection of Key NAR Resources. NAR holds sway over much of the industry. Our money flows from the grassroots members upward to NAR and is used to promote the priorities of our industry.

Promotion is an integral component of the function of NAR. But more must be done to create the conversations that will lead to transformation of the industry. This requires a consideration of the redistribution of our capital assets. The motivations behind how NAR prioritizes the allocation of our resources is just as important as where these economic resources are directed.

NAR does a great job defending and promoting the industry. But it does a less than stellar job tending to the needs of Broker/Owners and the demands placed upon them by the massive economic and technology changes taking place within the rank and file. We are not collectively managing the economic and operating changes at a pace commensurate with the consumer nor the profit margins required for survival.

In order to insure survival and sustainability, the industry needs to take a serious and candid look at the economic priorities implemented by NAR and ask the question, “Is this what we should be doing with our money?”

Redirecting key economic resources toward targeted initiatives designed to re-define the economic model, our relationship with the consumer and how we transact business for profitability should be emergency priorities.

Redefining our Market. Second on the list of priority principles is the notion of market definition. All businesses must be predicated upon an accurate definition of their market in order to produce sustained economic success.

I believe that our previous definition of market as a zip code, city name or a set of buildings positioned therein, is now defunct because the customer has changed the definition for us.

Until we understand what the real estate market is we cannot expect to move to a new platform where profitability exists and where the industry can flourish.

Although transactions take place in a fixed geographic location, I do not believe location is the market and furthermore, I believe the market is much more distant, unpredictable and illusive than in previous economic eras.

The market is Jell-O, not dirt. It is water, without concrete. Yet our institutional structures and operating models are still captive to bricks, mortar and steel.

The chemical and behavioral composition of the “new real estate market” is a highly refined set of consumer characteristics finding their origin in the freedom and power granted by technology and the Internet to self-access information and it is therefore in a constant state of uncontrollable flux. Indeed, the new real estate market never gels. Our industry must then be as liquid as possible in order to play effectively.

Learning the components of market definition will lead us to new models. Until we reach an understanding of what constitutes our market and how we fit into this new paradigm, profit will continue to erode and sustainability will continue to place us in peril.

What is a real estate market? Is it my city? Is it my customers in my database? Is it my hot list of prospects? Is it consumers pledging loyalty to my brand?

No, it is none of these anymore. It is a complex set of consumer bents, biases and behaviors that are shifting the center of control away from lead generation, massive corporate models and universal branding to stealth and fluid exchanges that result in trust and conclude with transaction. The Trust = Transaction formula, although not new, is, however, comprised of new dynamics that create it and it is precisely these dynamics that we need to capture and shape into models that create what I have been referring to as “new real estate model math.”

Brand loyalty, process control, property information containment, website contact forms, registration requirements and the host of Web 1.0 schemes are dead or dying, being replaced by freedom platforms that move the consumer to the center position and us into orbit around a unique set of moving and ever changing requirements.

This is the new market.

Redistribution of Packaged Property Information. Once the new real estate market has been defined we can then create new property information models that can become economic products and marketable services to the consumer.

It’s not the house, it’s the information. It’s not the brand anymore, it’s the information. It’s not the broker, agent or NAR, it’s the information. Any semblance of control techniques, tactics and models will be loathed.

Grouped informational products designed by the consumer, then defined and deployed by us can provide the new profit stream for the industry.

As a whole, we as an industry have spent inordinate time, money and effort sweating over the loss of our precious MLS data while, at the same time, failing to understand the economic power that exists in packaging this information as a product for consumer distribution.

It is not just property information the consumer wants packaged up, made accessible and delivered via the portals of cyberspace. In the real estate and relocation process, there exist a myriad of ancillary information data sets that are marketable, including health care, community lifestyles and much more.

Old MLS control models are largely defunct, too expensive and more importantly, they are inoperable as economic tools. They are increasingly failing to perform for Broker/Owners.

Retooling Realtor Association Models. This leads me to my final dribble.

Heretofore, our local Associations (formerly “Boards”) served a valuable function in supporting local real estate businesses in a non-technical, disconnected world where real estate transactions were virtually all initiated on site and in a building owned and/or operated by a Broker/Owner. (See the post “The Four Bs” at Realonomics.net).

The localized value proposition for Associations has changed. The importance of the traditional functions of Associations is diminished from its pre-Internet apex in the early 1990s where Associations were controlled by local Brokers, printed MLS books and hosted MLS meetings where agents shared wants and needs. A total control model.

Yet, despite the transition away from the centralized control wielded by the Brokers, Boards, Books and Buildings (the “The Four Bs”) geographic model, we have been largely unwilling to break our addiction the now false and unsustainable notion of property information control through Associations.

Can and do Associations have value? Yes, no and maybe. Yes they can and many do, if they are functioning and providing the types of services necessary to the new real estate economy.

No, Associations are not valuable if they are simply self-serving paternalistic job banks at the expense of Broker/Owners and local agents.

Maybe Associations can bring new value to the industry if they equip themselves to provide the types of cutting-edge business services related to the creation and sustainability of Broker/Owner profit.

Translation: If an Association can justify its existence (and they should be required to do so at regular intervals) and its functional costs to Members when measured against productivity standards and market conditions, then maybe they can deliver value.

Retooling Realtor Association models is a tall order because of historic entrenchment and a perception of need that is probably misplaced.

Almost all functions currently executed by Associations could be centralized and even made more effective through consolidation of services, marketing and training. Small is good, agility it the first of the Ten Commandments of the New Real Estate Economy. Generally, the refinement and redirection of general and administrative costs is good for business and profit.

In my own geographic area in northern Arizona there are Associations in Flagstaff, Sedona and Prescott, just to name one small geographic area. Remarkably, the distance between these locations is less than an hour.

Each of these Associations has its own Executive Officer, staff, facilities, operating costs and Board of Directors. What are we protecting?

The reality of the situation is that agents in central and northern Arizona are now servicing all three markets because that is what the consumer wants them to do AND that is what they must do in the prevailing market to produce income.

However, despite the needs and wants of the consumer and the dictates of market realities these Associations are an impediment to change and Broker/Owner profit because their membership structures are prohibitive rather than inclusive. Some legal minds even view these structural impediments as economic and therefore potentially subject to anti-trust law.

Associations were largely constructed upon the old definition of the real estate market being purely a localized function driven by sign calls, newspaper ads and up-desk lead generation.

Why have we not adapted our administrative model so that it matches consumer reality and Broker/Owner needs in a market defined by bits and bytes? The layers of bureaucracy inherent in the Association structures and their relationship to NAR would make a career bureaucrat blush.

Simply said, our administrative models are labor intensive, bloated and we are spending too much money on infrastructure and organizational maintenance at the expense of profitability.

We are spending approximately the same amount of money per transaction per Association as we were in 2002-07, money that could be used to redevelop the industry. Why?

In conclusion I can only ask, “Tenus terminatio cuspis?”

Related posts:

1. NAR’s Tail Wagging the Dog National Control Model
2. The Four “Bs”

Syndicated from e-Partner

Owners are engaged in the delicate balancing act; walking on the razor’s edge, barefoot.

Slicing into Profit

The razor upon which owners must balance themselves is now slicing so deeply into revenues that profitability is now proving more and more illusive. Today’s Broker/Owners are confronted with an economy that is not rebounding fast enough to enable them to survive.

e-Partner has long held that Broker/Owners are the financial backbone of the real estate industry and that their survival should be one of the top priorities of our industry through 2010.

Our Bleeding Feet

The razor’s edge takes no prisoners and yields no concessions to owners who are struggling to meet their ever increasing general operating expenses. Trapped by the same economic factors faced by other businesses, owners are looking for ways to decrease fixed and personally guaranteed obligations.

e-Partner talks to owners from every brand and those who are independent and the story is generally the same. There are simply too few closing and too much bricks-and-mortar operating expenses. “There is just not enough transaction commission to meet the monthly demands we have,” one broker/owner told us.

Mandatory Agility

Agility, created and sustained, is the first of the Ten Commandments of the New Real Estate Economy.

Although we are not quick on our feet, the razor’s edge is sensitizing us to perils of standing still for too long in one place. Our bloated organization body weight presses down on the sharp stainless steel edge and this slices away large chunks of capital required to sustain retail models.

New principle: the razor’s edge is now an owner’s continuing reality and he/she/all of us will learn to walk on this edge nimbly and quickly or, we will be cut to pieces.

Dancing to a New Beat

Dance or be cut! The stakes have never been higher. But can owners find revenue, create revenue, jettison unnecessary expenses and learn the new beat fast enough to escape the razor’s edge?

Short answer is yes. The long answer is that we can only only escape the razor’s edge if there is the will to accept the truth that some of the old operating fundamentals are no longer adequate and may never be.

Many brokers are holding on, digging in, hunkering down, waiting for the much discussed and heralded market turn-around.

Standing still on a razor’s edge is not recommended. What we do recommend are these immediate actions:

1. Redirecting bricks-and-mortar costs to new market penetration models that can reposition your brand, create recruiting opportunities and new transaction revenue. Shift from facility management and uni-market branding to horizontal branding and multi-market management. ASK US HOW.

2. Include fee-based cash flow models as a part of your total market revenue model. This includes remodeling for up to 65% of you agent team being fee-based agents…AND…including pay for placement models where local supporting services such as insurance companies, new homes contractors and property management companies become total market revenue partners with your firm via flat fee online ad positions. ASK US HOW.

3. Acquire and merge with smaller companies that can open markets to your brand in minor and intermediate markets and create these acquisitions with a “work from home” model, such as e-Partner advocates. This M&A approach allows an owner to expand his/her company without the corresponding capital demands associated with traditional business models. ASK US HOW.

4. Develop and implement consumer-centric social networking models and make them a part of the core personality of your company. Pursuing transparent Internet models that bring the consumer into a partnership with your online presence. There are reasons for the success of Twitter, Facebook, MySpace and YouTube. Consumers want to be empowered to express themselves and create online presence through dialogue. ASK US HOW.

Should the current economic trend continue for 2-3 years it is predictable that many organizations will be forced to close their doors. However, Broker/Owners are still in a position to re-define their business models by cutting and redirecting expenses into affordable growth models.

Our websites will not save us. Our brands will not save us and technology alone is not the solution.

However, understanding the economic eras of the real estate industry and how technology dictates and defines Broker/Owner profitability can help Broker/Owners see the relationship between their models and current trends. Please watch this presentation and post your comments.

Related posts:

1. By Owners, for Owners
2. Dear Owners, the Border Patrol is out in Force
3. Mug Shot: A New Front Face & Profile

Brokers, Boards, Books and Buildings remain the economic blocks that continue to drive our brokerage profit models. Three of the four are still alive and kicking. What are the Four Bs, how do they function and what, if anything, do they mean to us now? More importantly, how do they meet contemporary consumer expectations?

Broker/Owners are literally the financial backbone of the real estate industry. e-Partner and this blog, REALonomics, support the importance of sustaining the roll Broker/Owners play in perpetuating real estate transactions and indeed propping up the industry at large. It is Broker/Owners who literally guarantee the financial stability of the industry. They are real estate’s preeminent risk-takers.

They are almost always the sole guarantors of market presence and it is they who take most of the personal financial risk for the real estate organizations operating within thousands of communities.

Fact: Broker/Owners are losing their ability to produce and sustain profit for their local brokerage firms. The risks now out weigh the rewards, as many are discovering. TWe are facing the financial collapse of many Broker/Owners.

Broker/Owners have increasing lost their grip on the consumer due largely to (1) the widespread availability of property information to agents and consumers; (2) the industry’s empowerment of the vast numbers of agents with cutting-edge tools that tie them directly to consumers and (3) the irrelevance of their control over local Associations, formerly called “Boards of Realtors” and the centralization of power over consumer access to property by NAR.

Broker’s once maintain an iron grip on local property information through NAR’s establishment of Boards of Realtors owned by Broker/Owners. Broker/Owners still have stated authority over local Associations but their is little or nothing for them to control and their role is primarily administrative and therefore without economic benefit.

WATCH THIS PRESENTATION

Each local Board of Realtors (BOR) (now called “Association of Realtors”) once commanded total control over local property information on behalf of the paying members. It was the Broker/Owners that owned and controlled the local property information data, how it was received, formatted and distributed.

Through the BOR, Owners owned (no pun intended) and controlled ALL property information and ALL access to the information, whether by agents or the consumer. Therefore, they were assured of income and barring reckless squandering of funds they were also assured of a perpetuation of their profit and existence.

Through such property information control, Broker/Owners were able to set individual brokerage listing fees, control agent commissions and literally decide who could play and who could not play.

The union of Brokers and Boards coupled with geographic market definitions and control of property information meant that ALL consumers were required to work through one channel of expertise for any real estate investment, that being Broker/Owners.

Local BORs were compelled to comply with local Broker/Owners who were the ligitimate owners of property information within a specified regional area. All of this engineered and mandated by NAR.

WATCH THIS PRESENTATION

It might surprise many of our readers when we tell you that the primary technology used during the era of Broker and Board control was ink and paper.

The Board of Realtors’ MLS Book was the officially designated and exclusive repository for local property information. It was, in fact, the technology used by Brokers and Boards to distribute property information to consumers through the Broker’s agents.

To distribute new property information for use by agents, who were the monitors and purveyors of current property data to consumers, a new MLS book was printed at regular intervals. At the moment of printing, the data was defective, as some properties were sold and other listed for sale prior to print.

Data updates were facilitated through thousands and thousands of local MLS meetings held each week across the nation. At these ritual gatherings agents arrived, books and marking pens in hand, for the local property information “update” wherein properties were declared “sold” by agents and then robotically lined through in the MLS book.

Price adjustments were written into the margins of the MLS book along with other information verbally supplied by agents.

These meetings were quite the scene. Nonetheless, they represented the manner in which property information was collected, distributed, managed and updated for the ultimate end user, the consumer.

Let’s also remind ourselves of the operative phrase of that generation of Broker/Owners, Caveat Emptor, Latin for “Let the buyer beware.” In those days, the buyer was an unsuspecting consumer who was not at all represented in a real estate transaction but instead was told by us, “we only represent sellers but promise to treat all parties to the transaction fairly and honestly.”

WATCH THIS PRESENTATION

This brings us to the fourth “B” and the central pillar of the real estate business model used by Broker/Owners…Buildings.

The Brokers who owned the Boards published the Books that were placed in the hands of agents who were warehoused in Buildings in just about every market in the U.S.

The Buildings were the primary real estate market expression used by Broker/Owners. Bricks and mortar was the economic junction where consumers were provided with the most important and manditory requirement for acquiring relevant property information. Such information was only provides by agents in buildings owned or leased by brokers with books in hand that were printed by the boards.

In those days the components necessary for a real estate transaction to occur came together in a Broker/Owner’s office; these being buyer, seller, broker and property information. in those days we were the true “gate keepers” of the transaction.

Yard signs, newspaper ads, open houses and updesk calls were the path to consumer contact and ultimately a commission. These ingredients were the spider web designed to capture consumer buying leads in the local market.

Consumers had very little control over the process of buying real estate, a process completely controlled by Broker/Owners and their local marketing machines.

Circa 1970. Something began to happen in the late 60s and early 70s. National real estate franchising came into play and began to redefine a Broker/Owner’s market from local to regional and even national.

Franchising brought with it the first real attempt to provide Broker/Owners with a horizontal component to their business model, increasing their potential for referrals and relocation by means of national branding and networking with member of like kind.

During this same time frame, local Boards began to digitize property data and to generate computerized MLS systems that could deliver property data to a Broker’s office electronically. This would later prove to be the beginning of the end of one of the four Bs, the Book.

About 25 years after the first digitized MLS endeavors began . Computerized MLS, personal computers, modems and ultimately the Internet came into play and provided the empowerment of agents and consumers with ubiquitous real estate information.

In 1994, MLS property information became available on the World Wide Web (WWW), known then as the “Information Super Highway.”

Today, the MLS books are gone. Buyer beware is gone.

What still remains, hanging by an economic thread are the remaining three Bs; Brokers, Buildings and Boards (renamed Associations).

The total control of local property information by local Associations is being challenged and seems to be eroding.

Each of the remaining three Bs is now under scrutiny by an increasingly powerful consumer. It looks like the next “B” to fall is the notion of “Buildings” as an ultimate but now unaffordable retail expression of a Broker/Owner’s real estate market presence.

REALonomics, as a student, analyst, crytic and developer of concepts related to the real estate industry’s business models, can’t help but wonder which of the remain two “Bs” is most in jeopardy:

Will it be Broker/Owner or our local Associations of Realtors (Boards) that will be transformed or eliminated?

Your thoughts?

WATCH THIS PRESENTATION

Related posts:

1. The First Economic Wave
2. The Second Economic Wave
3. Home Price Declines Hit New Records: What Can the Industry Do?

Unlocking Franchise Economics: Pt 3

This is the third installment of a three part post entitled Unlocking Franchise Economics (see Part 1, see Part 2)

Have we ever wondered how the consumer views our real estate industry franchises? If we are going to unlock franchise economics and truly understand the value propositions inherent in franchising we must also see them (franchises) as the consumer sees them and we must ONLY value them as does the consumer.

If you were to create a list of distinctions…real ones…dynamic ones…that separate one franchise brand from another in the eyes of the only true client, the consumer, what would those distinctions be and how are they manifest in the process of transacting business?

Enjoy the PhotoBlog below. Read it carefully and ask yourself what might happen if the consumer could place all franchises into one blender and extract the best. What would the “best” be? What are the clear distinctions between franchise A, B and C?

If franchises have any value, and REALonomics believes they do, what is the empirical value to the consumer? Is franchise value a black-and-white proposition or, will we see living color coming out of the recession in 2009 and beyond? What changes do franchisors need to make to create distinction in local markets? Can distinction even be created and sustained? Do we need to blend the franchises? Do we need fewer franchises? Will franchises be blended out of economic necessity and through mergers and acquisitions?

If a Broker/Owner adopts a franchise model what is the set of “measureable” distinctions derrived from the relationship that will impact the consumer? Specifically, how do franchise distinctions create revenue for Broker/Owners in the crowded marketplace?

Related posts:

1. Unlocking Franchise Economics: Pt 2
2. Unlocking Franchise Economics: Pt 1
3. Three Stooges: ‘09 Acid Test #2

The Obama news conference was followed this morning, Saturday, November 8, 2008 by a radio address with similar content. These two initial events give us hints about the Obama economic model that will shape America and of course, the real estate industry for perhaps decades.

Attacking the Economy Means Controlling the Outcome

The Obama team is going to attack the economy in laser-like fashion. New rules are going to be written that will impact the private sector and retool the way in which those transactions dependent upon credit and lending work.

REALonomics has believed for some time (years, actually) that the real estate industry needed to redefine itself through sweeping consumer-centric changes driven mostly by standards based brokerage and maximum transparency.

What we never knew and could never predict are the bleak economic factors that now give rise to the transformation of our business models and have fueled a meltdown of home values in such universal proportions. Principle: Economic problems left unsolved by the private sector typically invite government mandated intrusions in order to harness the favor of the electorate.

Can the RE Industry Still Write its Own Rules

It is beginning to look a lot like the real estate industry will be shaped not by factors we control but by the policies and rules created by others. We, under the mantle of the National Association of Realtors (NAR), have, for the most part, missed most of our opportunity to define and shape the debate and participate in the rules that will create a “New Real Estate Industry.” NAR’s mistaken endorsement of the $700 billion bailout program has hurt us and created a dependency relationship with the federal government. In essence, we have been placed in the unenviable position of a reactive industry rather than a proactive force.

Do we still have the clout and the courage to write our own rules? Do we have the will power, discipline, leadership and the creative inspiration to recognize that we are on the cusp of a “New Real Estate Economy” wherein we can control the rules that dictate how the industry operates within a consumer-centric era? Have we become an industry, like so many before us, that will eventually become reliant upon the solutions created by a bloated federal bureaucracy that is more interested in centralizing power than in actually empowering people?

The Key Principle behind Rule-Writing

It’s not so much the rules per se, that govern business matter as it is the economic and social viewpoints of those who pen the rules. It’s always belief that precedes policy. What we believe about our industry is different that what Washington believes. There are principles behind rule-writing, always!

The key principle behind rule-writing is simply “BE THE RULE WRITER.”

Here are but some of what REALonomics believes will be the “new rules” evolving from the financial policies that will be put in place during what will be increasingly defined by the new Administration as a “crisis.” A history lesson…bureaucracies flourish best when set in motion during “crisis.”

NEW RULE 1: There will be a heavy emphasis on creating a bevy of legislation designed to control each aspect of the mortgage lending process. This sounds good until we understand the difference between our and Washington’s definition of transparency and disclosure. The new set of rules will further slow the markets while everyone waits to see and then create a whole new layer of regulations and regulators operating in the basement of every mortgage lender.

NEW RULE 2: Crack down will be the new operative language for not only Wall Street and so-called “overpaid CEO’s” but also those within the real estate industry who are not fully compliant with Rule #1. REALonomics thinks that real estate brokers will become targets for industry crack down and the eventual police force for compliance with new lending and transaction rules. In his website Barack Obama has already pledge to crack down on brokers and lenders.

NEW RULE 3: NAR will become more and more dependent upon government approval for the implementation of our industry policies and procedures that have sustained us for decades. NAR, already reeling from the DOJ debacle, will have a mandated hotline to Washington and will need to use it to check-in, seek approval and help implement the new rules that will be written. In essence, NAR could become an extension and purveyor of brokerage and home ownership policies written by the Obama administration, Pelosi’s House and Reid’s Senate.

Although the housing industry is suffering and the real estate industry is under siege, REALonomics would like to encourage the industry to step up to the plate and position itself under a new set of operating principles that can be sent to Washington as a demonstration of our commitment to operating and policing our own industry. We are still strong enough to influence the outcomes if we are proactive rather than reactive.

Let’s continue to remind ourselves that the key principle behind rule-writing is simply “BE THE RULE WRITER.”

Get the full transcript of the Barack Obama news conference and read between the lines.

Related posts:

1. Obama, McCain and Real Estate
2. Obama: Bailout, Banks & Bowling
3. The Federalization of our Financial System at your Expense

According to a recent Standard&Poors/Case-Shiller home price index of the top twenty metropolitan area home values, we are seeing record declines. Get a copy of the report.

Here’s the breakdown synopsis (source: Standard&Poors/Case-Shiller) (arrow highlights by REALonomics):

In these and hundreds of other markets, home value declines are taking a toll on individuals and families whose financial security is predicated almost entirely on home ownership.

There are at least three things local real estate companies in partnership with mortgage and title service providers could do for struggling homeowners.

1. Set up financial support workshops led by experienced brokers/agents designed to coach homeowners with respect to their property values, the current trends, their specific mortgage situation and how to take positive steps to stay in their homes unless they absolutely must sell at this time. Such workshops should utilize skilled mortgage service counselors (not loan officers) who can give them answers;
2. Real estate agents in troubled markets should be literally returning to the old practice of knocking on doors, not to get listings but to meet homeowners as “Property Consultants” to discuss specific home values within their neighborhoods and offer advice. In addition, brokerage firms should deliver resource information to homeowners that will advise them about market conditions, refinancing and other information they need;
3. Brokerage firms should turn a portion of their print media budget and Internet costs toward creating blogs that are specifically administered by trained “Property Consultants” who can interact with property owners and deliver solid advice in real time.

During the next 24-36 months brokerage firms who want to build and retain consumer loyalty and predisposition should take a serious look at engaging in the creation of a group of “Property Consultants” who engage homeowners who are facing uncomfortable times.

Such an emphasis sends a powerful signal to consumers that we are serious, skilled, well trained, competent and knowledgeable professionals who can and will assist them with any property question they have, including financial counseling.

Related posts:

1. Obama & a New Real Estate Industry
2. Biting the Hand that Wants to Feed Us
3. Home Real Estate – Model Perfect

There seem to be two camps developing within the real estate industry. The first camp believes the media and negative language is the culprit that is creating a lot of the market decline and lack of buyer confidence. The other camp is the group saying, “We need to look within the industry and raise our standards making them more consumer-centric and us less susceptible to repeating the errors of the past.” REALonomics falls into the later group.

As a result of feedback here is the comment from the Inman article posted here for our readership:

The notion that positive thinking and misplaced hype can move us away from a faulty and failing economic model is more dangerous than the crisis itself because it demonstrates the lack of depth in our thinking. This crisis cannot be repaired by “making people believe the worst is over…” This is the logical result and outcome of poor economic modeling in the mortgage industry that loaned billions to buyers who didn’t qualify and the real estate industry’s fickle pretense that it exercises ultimate fiduciary in its dealings with clients.

Rather than whining, what we should be doing as an industry is recreating ourselves in terms of standards-based brokerage practices, revamping our national and state networks into consumer-centric, transparent operations and utilizing the power of NAR to send a positive signal to consumers that we “get it” and that they are going to see a new side to the professional real estate industry they deserve and one that will refuse to close a transaction where the buyer does not qualify.

A standards-based model should include heavy fines for brokerage firms that (1) hire under qualified agents who lack the academic training and counseling skills we need for consumer protection; (2) refuse to fulfill maximum (not minimum) financial training in economics and real estate investments and fiduciary training courses and finally, (3) much higher costs to enter the industry and stay in it.

A standards-based industry would include national performance reviews and ratings of brokerage firms with financial and recognition incentives for creating and maintain standards of excellence that protect consumers and their investments in real estate.

In addition, we need to look at the role of NAR and how NAR services the industry and consider refocusing its mission and resources on a newly profiled industry that really understands and accepts responsibility for its actions when counseling consumers to invest in real estate.

One thing we believe with certainty, we are never returning to what we once knew. Having said that, what is it we would like to become as an industry after the dust settles?

While the Feds scramble to resolve issues, we should be scrambling as an industry to reinvent ourselves. Such a reinvention involves painful analysis and truth-telling about where we have been and how we have operated. Only then can we begin the process of rebuilding a tattered industry that is increasingly viewed with skepticism by most consumers.

REALonomics.net”

———- END OF COMMENT ———-

Related posts:

1. Home Price Declines Hit New Records: What Can the Industry Do?
2. The Four “Bs”
3. REALONOPOLY – Does Anyone Still Wanna Play this Old Game?

In this series of posts REALonomics has one primary objective it would like to accomplish on behalf of owners and that is as follows:

…to help owners unlock the door to franchise economics so that gain an understanding of the substantive value propositions that exist and how a franchise name and associated promises can be quantifed in real dollars that are converted to a profit equation that is greater than it would be if the brokerage firm operated without the franchise.

Franchising is an Add-On Toolkit, with Limitations

At its most fundamental economic level a real estate franchise is a brokerage toolkit. Yes, there are all sorts of issues such as marketing, relocation, referrals, training, conventions, etc. But for now, we are setting those aside. A real estate franchise is an economic toolkit, at least it should be. Franchisors spend a great deal of time butter-balling brands, numbers of offices, growth, name recognition, relocation, referrals, etc., and that is how most franchise sales people will present their proposition to an owner. It’s the owner’s responsibility to translate the presentation into real economic reality and performance and to insist that the franchisor do the same.

As a toolkit, there are some things a franchise can do, there are many things it cannot do and there are more things it does not want to do for a brokerage firm because to do them will harm the franchisor’s bottom line. Let me be clear on this last point. At some point in the franchise relationship, an owner may find the franchisor a competitor for market territory, referrals, relocation and even local business.

As owners, it is important to enter your franchise considerations with both feet firmly planted on the ground and your eyes wide open when you begin to consider both the limitations and the benefits of the franchise toolkit. Converting the tool kit into a quantifiable economic model is entirely another thing and in the end will prove to be the true test of the value to your brokerage.

When an owner considers franchising his/her brokerage firm, one of the highest considerations is the impact on agents and operating overhead. Make no mistake about it; a franchise decision will change the economic structure of the real estate company before it ever delivers a single penny of economic value. Overhead is going to increase immediately and not all agents and employees will perceive and measure value as an owner might. – Donald Teel, Realonomics

Bottom line: the tools provided by a franchisor should fill voids in the brokerage firm with real solutons that can be measured. The brokerage firm must know with certainty how the tools produce NEW ROI (more on this later) and finally, how the implementation of the franchise enlarges the company’s market position and growth opportunities. It is entirely possible that becoming a franchise may in fact diminish a firm’s market potential.

Understanding Owner & Franchisor’s Motivational Schemas

As with any business arrangement, understanding the motivations of the parties is critical so that each can build a workable blueprint. Franchisor are in it for the money. Since franchisors are in it for the money, so should the owner be! Business is conducted with a profit motive, although some brokerage firms are not necessarily profit driven.

If you franchise, you will spend a lot of time (perhaps years) in continued negotiations with the franchisor over myriad operating issues (we will get to this later, as well). Therefore, coming out of the chute, the owner needs to have a pristine understanding of what drives the franchisor’s model.

The Owner’s Schema. I never met an owner that didn’t love transactions. Typically, when an owner considers incorporating a franchise brand into his/her market model, transaction are a key motivator. The Franchisor knows this and the presentation is designed to convey a perception that once franchised, transaction counts will increase.

In addition, broker/owners want more market opportunities in terms of their ability to provide agents with services that will enhance recruiting. However, recruiting is a somewhat dying art and most metro markets are saturated with brokerage firms and agent, reducing the recruiting message to a simple message, “We pay you more.”

Some owners want and desperately need networking opportunities with other owners where they can exchange information, create idea forums and discover new ideas to improve the efficiency of their company. Franchisors can meet this need and most do a good job at creating opportunities for Broker/Owner exchanges.

Today technology and the Internet play an ever increasing roll in real estate brokerage business operations. This was not so true just 14 scant years ago when the first property listings found their way to the Internet and pagers found their way into the hands of agents.

Many brokerage firms are looking for technology solutions and the implementation and maintenance of these solutions can be incredibly expensive. Franchisors are finally beginning to see how technology can provide them with a lock on brokers. When considering a franchise Broker/Owners should have a complete understanding of what a particular technology solutions will create in terms of not only opportunities, but operating costs, maintanance, training and obsolescence. After all, it won’t be included in most franchises.

The Internet is separate from technology, in our opinion, and there will be a whole set of operating and branding requirements for the owner and his/her agents when it comes to utilizing the Internet. Do not assume that your website will automatically comply with the franchisors requirements…read that fine print. Franchisors are doing a much better job today with their technology and Internet delivery than were even five years ago. Most owners want more Internet traffic. Find out how the franchisor delivers Internet presence AND traffic.

The market is paramount to an owner. Almost every owner I have known in nearly 25 years shared the desire to see their company grow in size and market share. What owners may not realize is that “market” is a very important word to the franchisor and it is here where the greatest potential for conflict between owner and franchisor might arise.

Owners want to capture and control more market area horizontally whereas, many times, the franchise will contained highly defined and rigid definitions of “market area” that the owner may find restrictive. Will entering into the franchise agreement expand or contract the owner’s market opportunities? This is an all important question needing to be answered.

Owners are increasingly discovering that market definition in the franchise relationship can make or break them. Any and all attempts to block an owner’s legitimate rights to horizontal growth should be negotiated out of the franchise agreement. Retrictions and control of horizontal market expansion is a key to the franchisor’s economic model. Franchisors typically exercise control over expansion by denying use of marks, brands and branch offices unless they approve. – Donald Teel, REALonomics

Finally, profit is the end game for owners. Although the franchisor will state its strong support of owner profitability, what will happen to the relationship when losses mount for the owner. What specific economic support does the franchisor provide to failing brokerage firms in terms of fee reductions or set asides?

Franchisors should be required to specifically demonstrate with empirical data how the franchise will pay for itself and how long it will take before the relationship brings profit to the Owner when measured against all related expenses. In the opinion of REALonomics, this should be a warranted performance item, with franchisee recource. If they can’t or won’t do it, show the franchisor the door. After all, profit is the end game of business.

The Franchisor’s Schema. Real estate franchisors measure things with a different stick than do most broker/owners.

The king pin in the franchise economic model will always be the brokerage gross commission income (GCI). It is the primary calculator for the franchise payment stream. Franchisors are interested in GROSS as the number against which their multiplier is applied, whether it be 3, 6 or 8 percent. This is their great motivator. Forget the franchise fee of $15k, $25k, $30k or $50k because this number will pale over the long haul of 5-10 years (typical initial franchise term).

How an owner thinks about and treats the franchise effective fee rate in the accounting process is paramount to quantifying the franchise value. If you think of franchise fees as a cost of sale, that’s one thing. If you treat is as an expense item, that’s another. But if you view it and treat it as a business development and capital expansion cost, that’s entirely another matter.

Definitions do count and calling a franchise cost a “selling cost” may be a giant investment error. After all, what did the franchise have to do with the selling cost of your transactions and if it did contribute, how did it contribute? Can you specifically account for it as a selling cost? An expense? Franchising is a market and development cost. Think of it in terms of research and development.

Franchisors are also motivated by the durability of the brokerage firm when they award a franchise to and owner. This has to do with the history and good will of the company in the local market(s). From this a franchisor can deduce predictability and replication of fee payment.

Referrals and relocation leads are a huge part of any franchisors presentation. But, be careful, because most of the major franchisor are running the relocation and referral businesses under not so evident agreements and as separate profit centers. This is a political and economic playing field that is continually tilted by franchisors. It is not uncommon for one franchisor’s relocation lead to be given to a direct competitor operating in the same market as its franchisee.

Watch out when you weigh relocation and referrals as a part of your decision-making. Our advice, based upon your market location, is to consider whether these should be taken off the table as considerations in the value proposition. You’ll only be able to do that if you ask for and receive the referral and relocation statistics with detail. Do not predicate your decision to franchise your firm on empty promises relocation and referral leads.

An owner should explore franchise training programs, business planning and the host of other fringe benefits as well. These are a part of the toolkit…but will they be used and are they, in fact, cutting edge or shop worn?

Stay tuned for “Unlocking Franchise Economics: Part 3.”

Related posts:

1. Unlocking Franchise Economics: Pt 1
2. NEW Franchise Blender-Extractor Available for 2009 Holidays!
3. REALonomical: an Economic Mentality