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”

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?

No related posts.

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

REALonomics continues to take a position that the natural market cycles should dictate the recovery and that government sponsored bail out attempts will create additional long term issues and actually stall a real recovery.

Although many in the industry favor federal intervention we are hard pressed to find anyone setting forth specific rationale for doing so. We hear a lot of emotion but not much sound economic reasoning based upon our industry’s historical commitment to traditional capitalism as the driving force behind real estate home ownership.

Wachovia was snatched up by CitiGroup just days ago. According to the FDIC’s website, there have been 40 bank failures since 2000 and NONE of them…yes, that’s right…none of them was bailed out by taxpayers. At iVoteAmerica.com there are predictions of more bank mergers over the next several business days.

Failing banks will continue to be absorbed just as ALL of them have been absorbed to date. After all, the best investment good banks can make today is to purchase assets of failing banks for pennies on the dollar and delivering huge internal rates of return to themselves. Therefore, patience is called for and we ought not to allow ourselves to be influenced by knee-jerk politicians from either party. Forget the election for a moment! Forget your favorite party preference for a moment!

Yesterday, September 29, 2008, the stock market lost more than $1 trillion in value. REALonomics predicts that investors will surface, shifting their investment strategies to more conservative, traditional positions.

NAR is Wrong on Rescue Package

Furthermore, REALonomics believes that the endorsement of the bailout by the National Association of Realtors (NAR) is a dead wrong endorsement and a clear indicator of NAR’s desperation with the housing market and its departure from the traditional approach to real property investment where true equity was a necessity to home ownership.

Our core value has always been home ownership as the primary investment for individuals and families. Behind this core value we have heretofore (prior to subprime lending) advised our clients to utilize conservative strategies when purchasing a home, including establishing and NEVER compromising their equity position. Have we decided as an industry that this is bad advice and adopted a dangerous borrow-to-the-hilt value system?

Some of you will remember the days when we encouraged homeowners to build “true” lasting equity that they could rely on when it came time to retire. The home was a person’s primary savings and investment account. I have a question for the RE industry; “Have we decided to depart from this core value position?”

Danger, Danger and More Danger to Owners

What about real estate company owners, our favorite topic? If the bailout occurs with a massive amount of taxpayer dollars used to rescue the so called “toxic mortgages” most real estate company owners will be effectively out of business within a short time as home values will likely plummet to pre 2001 levels. The toxic loans will be discounted to unprecedented levels, impacting literally every property value in metro markets.

If a rescue occurs, all property values in the United States will immediately decline. In fact, the financial institutions are already cutting HELOCs and credit card amounts in a desperate attempt to ratchet the market downward.

If the rescue occurs as currently outline by the Senate and voted down by the House, the ability for the average American buyer to access available real estate investment capital will diminish the market by perhaps another 50%. Although REALonomics is not attempting to inject hysteria into an already highly charged situation, we believe it is important that Realtors® have a clear understanding of the potential long term risks of a bailout by taxpayers.

Just Plain Old Bad Business and Bad Policy

The rescue of bad loans is simply bad real estate business and bad real estate business is bad for the real estate industry and bad for real estate company owners.

Let the market fix itself. The market will repair itself and the results will be less painful than allowing the bailout to prevail. The fact is…actually, the truth is, we are going to be harmed. The only question is how much pain are we going to allow to be inflicted upon the industry?

If we do not allow the market to heal itself and we adopt a taxpayer bailout mentality we will be adopting a fundamental shift in the historical values espoused by the real estate industry and to a large degree we will have socialized real estate, diminishing the value of all Realtors® and the industry itself. Such a shift in policy will create a huge potential for government oversight of the real estate industry and create transaction liabilities for broker/owners, franchisors and let’s not forget appraisers and mortgage lenders.

We encourage you to think deeply upon these things.

Related posts:

1. Government Interference has Harmed American Real Estate Wealth
2. The Federalization of our Financial System at your Expense
3. Home Price Declines Hit New Records: What Can the Industry Do?

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?

REALonomics Editorial

We now own what we cannot control. We are witnessing the Federalizaiton of the Financial Systems of America. Backed by a fickle Congress and flanked by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, President Bush and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, contrary to their former political beliefs that government should stay out of the private sectors of the economy, took measures today to endorse the Federalization of our money systems.

Q1 - What does this mean to the real estate industry?

Clearly we are entering spooky waters wherein we dared never enter before. REALonomics believes the move by the government will paralyze the industry making home buying and selling incredibly difficult, if not impossible, in some already paralyzed markets. Home and commercial property values will assuredly decline even more, reducing the networth of the industry and its investor and home owner base.

Q2 - What does this mean to the mortgage industry?

Expect huge consolidations greater than the Bank of America’s absorbtion of Countrywide and Merrill Lynch. With this consolidation of the financial titans, mega titans will be created and essentially be required to submit to a new set of tightly regulated lending rules. It will be harder and harder to borrow and lend. This will create a over-regulation of the market and further drag on mortgage recovery.

Q3 - What does this mean to Americans?

Each of the more than 300 million people in America, including those born yesterday, will end up with at least a $100,000 debt hanging over their heads. This is the representative figure that is the accumulation of the current escalation of the national deficit and the new estimated $2 trillion dollar bailout of the financial markets.

The government bailout of the private sector of the market means that each of us was just handed a tax bill or, we might call it a “cash call” because we are collectively the new owners of the private problems of borrows and lenders.

Ron Paul (R, TX) was correct when he told Ben Bernanke, in essence, “you are going to bankrupt the American people with your money policies.”

The average American family is essentially, on paper, wiped out by this move and the impact on the real estate and mortgage industries was just extended to perhap a decade or even more.

Q4 - What does this mean in terms of the election?

This is the easy question and the answer is more finger pointing, more investigations, excessive government snooping (there needs to be some), lots of drama on the political stump and a great deal of harm to John McCain, who is already having difficulty coming out from the shadow of Bush’s foreign and domestic policies.

But it also means trouble for Barack Obama. He can forget about his national health care program for all Americans, he can forget about taxing anyone, much less those earning incomes above $250k and he can kiss his “no-new-energy-if-it-means-drilling-coal fired plants-and-nuclear-power” policy good by.

In essence the damage done to both candidacies is substantial and the next 45 days are going to be like the wild-wild-west as we run up to election time. To vote in the Presidential poll, visit www.iVoteAmerica.com.

The most remarkable thing about today’s move to “take-over” is that it represents a profoundly fundamental shift in our capital market value system and establishes a whole new mechanism for creating a way to further tax the American people. Make no mistake about it, you just got taxed and to pay the tax bill you were forced to financed the payments over time. There was paperwork, no disclosure and no recource for any of us. All of this is taking place right before our eyes without much of a whimper or a voice of protest.

Related posts:

1. Paulson Pushes Bush Plan to Revamp the U.S. Financial Regulatory System
2. Biting the Hand that Wants to Feed Us
3. Bush: Federalizing the Economy?

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

Because we wanted our faithful readers, authors and commentators to know first, REALonomics is pleased to announce that it has cooperated in spearheading the launch of the iVoteAmerica Network (iVA). iVA is a national polling and blogging network that includes political polling and blogging (Plogging) for all fifty States. The iVA network creates an online political blogging forum for each State allowing people to post to the left, the middle or the right of any issue.

As we have discovered in the last 12-24 months our industry is confronted with many challenge that have us wound up with politics and politicians. With the recent takeover of FANNIE MAE and FREDDY MAC by the Fed, we need to reconsider our ability to influence outcomes by creating voices. The iVA Network is one way we can do that.

The iVA Network incorporates polling as a means of measuring participant opinions on a variety of political and social issues. At its heart iVA is a political blog or, what we call a “PLOG.”

We simply are not vocal enough…we are informed, we vote, we care, but we are not vocal enough in the competitive political arenas. My vision for the iVoteAmerica Network is to simply deliver a political platform for people who vote. Who votes? People who own real estate vote, people who care about the influence politics has over us, our families, our industry and our lives. – Donald Teel, Founder

The iVoteAmerica State Networks

Each State in the iVA Network is its own plog and we are licensing the iVote State Plogs to individuals or groups who want to engage in political blogging, the creation of polls and a balanced approach to allowing consumers to voice opinions.

“We hope that real estate industry professionals will see the connection between politics, the power of our industry and our imperative to influence outcomes. Too often, we are letting others to create voices and control the content and we are then placed in a position of reacting to the babble.” said Donald Teel, Founder of iVoteAmerica.

Each iVote State Network operates under its own domain name (URL), such as iVoteCalifornia.com, iVoteNewYork.com, iVoteKansas.com, iVoteOregon.com, iVoteTexas.com, etc. The iVoteAmerica.com site is the national site that generates some of the polling content and advertising, while allowing State iVote Affiliates to operate their own State Networks independently.

Getting Started with your iVoteAmerica State Network

REALonomics hopes that real estate industry professionals who also have an interest in the political outcomes that shape our industry will consider involvement in the iVote State Networks. Each iVote State Network will be delivered to a qualifying party or entity that would like to build content, opinion and influence over issues at the city, county, state and even national level.

Want to find out more? Call iVoteAmerica toll free at 1-877-380-1000 for details or, if you prefer you may submit an online request for information through email or summit through the iVoteAmerica Contact Form.

Related posts:

1. Voting Influences Outcomes
2. Deal or No Deal – Play America’s Game of Chance
3. Local -vs- National MLS: May ‘07 POLL