Open Real Estate: Closing the Door on Consumers

Welcome to Rethink Open House TV.
I have some exciting news!
The Realtor organization and the MLS are having a baby!
Four major brokerage groups just made the announcement.
They’re calling it Open Real Estate. Due early next year.
And judging by the family resemblance, this baby is going to look a whole lot like its parents.
Same MLS rules. Same portals. Same brokerage-controlled system. And apparently, another way to monetize listing data.
New name. Same family business.
Congratulations!
[Bumper]
I can see why they chose the name Open. Open is a great name. It’s inviting. It says welcome. It’s popular. I like the name Rethink, too.
But what exactly is changing for the homeowner with Open Real Estate?
Nothing.
Today we’re going to talk about what OPEN really means, and why homeowners are still locked out of the industry’s national listing system.
What TRANSPARENCY means, and why seeing listing information is only part of the story.
The MONEY IN THE MIDDLE. Referral fees, lead selling, and the industry’s plans to monetize property data.
And CONSUMER CHOICE. Who gets to participate, who gets to provide services, and who gets to decide what those services are worth?
We’ll also talk about why good real estate agents shouldn’t be afraid to compete with homeowners selling independently.
And why Rethink Open House already has a fundamentally better model, available today.
If you’re a buyer, seller, agent, or broker, this is important.
Because the real question isn’t who controls the real estate industry.
It’s who the real estate industry is supposed to serve.
On October 26th, Byron Lazine hosted all four founding CEOs of Open Real Estate on BAM as they introduced this new initiative.
The following day, on Episode 425 of The Real Word, he gave us his own assessment of what this organization is trying to accomplish.
And something he said was particularly revealing.
Byron was asked whether Open Real Estate would fundamentally change how homes are bought and sold.
His answer?
No.
He went on to explain how this initiative would protect the existing American real estate system.
Well, Byron, that’s exactly what I think needs to change.
Is the real estate industry supposed to be a tool for homeowners to sell their houses, or have homeowners become tools to support the real estate industry?
I think we’re about to find out.
Let’s look at what they’ve actually announced, because I think the words they’re using are just as important as the system they’re building.
OPEN. TRANSPARENT. CONSUMER CHOICE.
Those are powerful words.
But what do they mean?
Let’s start with OPEN.
Imagine a large open marketplace. Picture a big arena where people can sell their houses.
Over here, you have a homeowner who’s selling without a listing agent. That owner hired a media professional to create photographs and a walkthrough video, and now the house is available for buyers to see.
Right next to that owner, you have a real estate agent representing another homeowner.
That agent has a professional listing presentation, photographs, video, property details, and direct contact information.
There are other agents, other homeowners, and other properties throughout this marketplace.
A buyer comes in and looks around.
They see a property being sold directly by its owner. They see another property represented by a real estate agent.
The buyer can choose whom to contact. The seller can choose how to market the property.
And the real estate professionals can compete by demonstrating the value of their services.
Nobody has to hire a listing agent just to participate in this marketplace.
Now that’s what I call an open marketplace.
And that’s the model Rethink Open House offers today.
But imagine a different open marketplace.
Instead of an open arena, there’s an open door.
The real estate industry is standing at that door, telling everybody how open and transparent it is.
But if you’re a homeowner who wants to put your property directly into its national listing system, you can’t simply walk through that door.
You need a participating brokerage.
That’s Open Real Estate’s framework. Licensed residential brokerages and their agents are eligible to participate.
Individual property owners cannot independently enter their listings into that system.
Now, buyers will still be able to see publicly distributed listings through websites and portals.
I’m not suggesting that somebody has to hire an agent just to look at houses.
But that’s precisely the distinction.
Open Real Estate is opening the distribution of listing information within the existing real estate industry.
It’s not opening its listing system to homeowners who want to participate independently.
Rethink Open House does it differently.
An owner can work with a media professional and have a property marketed on ROH without hiring a listing agent.
Or that homeowner can hire an agent to handle the listing.
Both can participate in the same property marketplace.
That’s open.
Now let’s talk about TRANSPARENCY.
The executives behind Open Real Estate repeatedly talk about transparency.
Byron talks about transparency.
Everybody says they’re protecting consumers by making property information available.
But is that really transparency?
Having accurate property information available to everyone is important.
I agree with that.
But that’s transparency about the inventory.
What about transparency concerning the actual transaction?
Who represents the seller? Who represents the buyer?
Who gets paid? Who is paying whom?
Is there a referral fee involved?
What services are included, and what services can the consumer choose not to purchase?
And here’s a question every buyer should be asking.
When you click a button on a real estate website that says CONTACT AGENT, who exactly are you contacting?
Is it the person representing that property?
Or are you being connected with somebody participating in a lead-generation or referral program?
Those can be two very different things.
And a consumer may not understand the financial relationships behind that introduction.
I believe transparency means knowing who you’re dealing with and understanding what services you’re purchasing.
That’s why Rethink Open House identifies the professionals involved with a listing and provides direct contact information.
The listing agent controls their presentation, their branding, and their relationship with consumers.
And if that agent wants to introduce a preferred buyer agent on the listing page, they can do that, too.
The buyer can see who these professionals are and decide whom to contact.
That’s transparency.
But there’s another kind of transparency I think is equally important.
The property itself.
We’ve all seen real estate photographs where every room looks enormous, every window has a perfectly exposed view, and everything looks almost too good to be true.
Then a buyer gets in their car, drives across town, walks through the front door, and within twenty seconds realizes this isn’t the house they thought they were coming to see.
Why are we wasting everybody’s time?
Zillow’s own 2026 research found that fifty-two percent of buyers reported wasting time viewing properties they would have skipped if they’d understood the floor plan before visiting.
Think about that.
At Rethink Open House, the First Showing Online is central to the property presentation.
A real walkthrough video. Honest photography. Useful property information.
Let buyers experience the house before they schedule an appointment.
That can mean fewer unnecessary showings, less disruption for the homeowner, and more productive visits for real estate professionals.
More money in your pocket. Less people in your house.
Now, Open Real Estate is talking about improving the distribution of property data.
That’s useful.
But Rethink Open House already provides a better way to present the property and connect consumers with the people involved.
Those are very different objectives.
Now let’s talk about MONETIZATION.
And this is where I think the industry has some serious explaining to do.
What exactly does it mean when Open Real Estate announces that it intends to share the value of listing data with participating brokerages?
Where is that money coming from?
Who’s paying?
Are the portals going to purchase the data? Are other businesses going to license it?
How much money are we talking about?
What percentage goes to the brokerages? How much reaches the agents?
And what does the homeowner get?
Those are important questions.
Because this new organization is being promoted as something that will benefit consumers, yet the financial arrangements have not been fully explained.
Now let’s look at what consumers and agents are already dealing with.
Some real estate referral companies charge thirty to forty percent of an agent’s commission simply for providing a customer.
Forty percent!
That’s forty percent of the agent’s commission.
And that’s before other expenses and applicable brokerage splits.
A February 2026 report from the Consumer Policy Center examined these referral arrangements and raised concerns about high fees, commission competition, and inadequate consumer disclosure.
This agent referral fee doesn’t appear as a separate charge on the buyer’s closing statement.
But if an agent is giving away forty percent of their commission, how much flexibility does that agent have to negotiate a lower rate with the consumer?
And does that consumer even know the referral fee exists?
That’s a legitimate question about transparency.
So where is Open Real Estate’s proposal to address those fees?
Where’s the proposal to eliminate unnecessary paid lead routing?
Where’s the proposal to make it easier for a buyer to contact the actual listing professional without going through a referral business?
Those changes haven’t been announced.
Instead, we’re hearing about another opportunity to monetize property information.
Now, to be clear, Open Real Estate hasn’t announced that it will operate a referral-fee business.
And its proposed data revenue isn’t necessarily the same thing as an agent paying a portal for a referral.
But that doesn’t answer the bigger question.
How does adding another commercial arrangement around listing data reduce the money already flowing through the middle of a real estate transaction?
Imagine an agent paying a substantial referral fee to acquire a customer, while their brokerage receives some as-yet-undetermined share of revenue generated by property data.
Would that really make the system more efficient?
We don’t know how those numbers would work, because they haven’t told us.
And that’s the problem.
They’re making broad promises about protecting consumers while leaving important financial questions unanswered.
Look at premium property marketing programs, such as Zillow Showcase.
Agents and brokerages can pay for enhanced presentation and exposure.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with charging for a legitimate marketing service.
But look at how many businesses now depend on controlling, distributing, advertising, or monetizing information about houses other people own.
The listing attracts attention. The attention becomes valuable.
And then more businesses find ways to charge for access, exposure, or introductions.
Where does it end?
Rethink Open House has a fundamentally different business model.
We charge for defined platform and listing services.
We don’t take the buyer’s inquiry and sell it to somebody else.
We don’t collect a platform referral fee simply because a buyer connects with a professional.
And we don’t need to take a percentage of the real estate transaction to operate our marketplace.
That’s a major distinction.
And it brings us to something that seems to get overlooked every time the industry starts arguing about who owns the data.
Who created the inventory in the first place?
I’ve watched these discussions about Open Real Estate, including Jared James’s commentary.
And the same questions keep coming up.
Does the MLS own the data? Do the brokers own it? Who gets to distribute it? Who gets to make money from it?
But where is the homeowner in this discussion?
Before a house becomes MLS data, before Zillow can advertise it, before a brokerage can market it, before an agent can earn a commission, there’s a property owner who decides to sell a house.
That homeowner created the opportunity.
Without that decision, there’s no listing from that property. No buyer inquiry generated by the listing. No referral to collect. No transaction to close.
Yes, agents and media professionals create valuable marketing materials and provide valuable services.
But the economic opportunity begins with the owner.
And I found something interesting in Byron’s latest discussion.
He read a statement from Compass CEO Robert Reffkin acknowledging the homeowner and trusted agent as the creators of the listing.
I’m glad somebody brought the homeowner into the conversation.
But I would take that argument one step further.
The homeowner is the starting point whether they choose to hire a listing agent or not.
And a truly open marketplace should recognize that.
Rethink Open House already does.
Now here’s another question from The Real Word that deserves attention.
Who holds Open Real Estate accountable?
Byron was asked why agents and consumers should trust major brokerage companies to control a national listing-data initiative.
His explanation was that the participating brokerages would hold one another accountable.
Think about that.
The same businesses contributing the data, participating in its governance, and potentially sharing the revenue will hold each other accountable.
But where does the homeowner fit into that arrangement?
Who represents the interests of someone who wants to sell a house without hiring a listing brokerage?
Where is that person’s voice?
And who’s asking whether the system could operate with fewer layers and lower costs?
I’m not questioning whether the executives behind Open Real Estate sincerely believe they’re doing something beneficial.
I’m looking at the business model.
And what I see is another national system organized around participating brokerages, preserving existing MLS governance and distribution relationships, and finding new economic value in property data.
They’re calling it open and transparent.
I believe we can do better.
Now let’s talk about CONSUMER CHOICE.
Because this is where an open marketplace becomes more than a slogan.
Imagine a homeowner who wants to sell without a listing agent.
They hire a media professional to create a professional listing for Rethink Open House.
They have photographs, a walkthrough video, and their property is available for buyers to see.
They receive an offer.
Everything seems to be going fine.
But now they’re getting overwhelmed.
There are contract questions. Inspection issues. Negotiations. Maybe financing complications.
Suddenly, the homeowner realizes they need some professional assistance.
What happens now?
Should that homeowner have to start over?
Should they have to purchase an entire package of services they didn’t need when they first listed the house?
Why?
On Rethink Open House, that homeowner can go to Find a Pro.
They can look for a real estate professional willing and qualified to assist with the services they need at that stage.
Maybe it’s negotiating the contract.
Maybe it’s assistance getting the transaction to closing.
Maybe the owner decides they want full representation after all.
The professional and the homeowner can discuss the services and negotiate compensation, consistent with the laws and brokerage requirements in their state.
The homeowner gets help when they need it.
And the real estate professional gets an opportunity to earn money providing a valuable service.
That’s consumer choice.
And that’s why I believe an open marketplace should remain open throughout the transaction.
Now let me ask the agents watching this something.
Why should a good real estate professional be afraid to compete with somebody who’s selling their house independently?
If you’re a good agent, you have knowledge, experience, negotiating skills, and professional services that people may need.
You should be able to demonstrate that value and let the consumer decide whether to hire you.
Your value shouldn’t depend on controlling whether the homeowner can participate in the marketplace.
And the same principle applies to buyers.
Some buyers want their own agent to represent them throughout the entire process.
Others may decide they want particular services, where those arrangements are permitted.
The important thing is giving people meaningful choices and allowing professionals to compete for their business.
Rethink Open House isn’t trying to eliminate real estate professionals.
Quite the opposite.
It gives them a marketplace where they can demonstrate their value, control their branding, build direct relationships, and compete for business.
And now I want to speak directly to the agents and brokers watching this video.
Because there’s something important in the Open Real Estate announcement that you should consider.
They’re talking about a new listing input system that operates alongside the MLS.
An agent may be able to enter a listing through Open Real Estate or through their existing MLS, with the information synchronized between the systems.
In other words, Open Real Estate isn’t asking you to abandon the MLS.
Well, if you’re willing to consider another platform alongside the MLS, why not make that platform Rethink Open House?
Why spend your time supporting another version of the existing business model when a better model is already available today?
One that’s better for you, your clients, and your business.
Rethink Open House.
You control your branding, your videos, your property presentation, and your relationship with consumers.
Your seller gets a more complete property experience.
And we don’t sell your leads or take a cut of your commission just because somebody contacts you.
Now, I know what some of you are thinking.
Rethink Open House doesn’t have the inventory of the MLS.
You’re absolutely right.
But that’s not a problem with the model.
That’s a question of participation.
And you don’t need a million listings on a website to give your seller a better presentation of one house.
You don’t have to abandon the MLS to list on Rethink Open House.
You can continue using the MLS for its existing exposure while creating an ROH listing that gives you more control over your marketing.
Today, that means creating a separate listing on ROH, not relying on the automated distribution Open Real Estate is proposing.
But consider what you’re getting for that effort.
A branded presentation, direct contact with interested consumers, professional video, and participation in a marketplace that doesn’t depend on selling your leads.
And something even more important.
A chance to help establish a better model for the entire industry.
Before you spend your time supporting another version of the same system, take a serious look at Rethink Open House.
Look at what it offers your clients.
Look at what it offers your business.
And ask yourself which model you would rather see become the future of real estate.
The MLS has the inventory.
Rethink Open House has the better model.
It’s time to give Rethink Open House the inventory.
And here’s another reason I believe the industry is going to have to change.
Artificial intelligence.
Buyers and sellers are already using AI to educate themselves about real estate.
Zillow’s 2026 research found that among buyers who used AI during their purchase, seventy-four percent used it to learn about the buying process.
Among sellers who used AI during their sale, seventy-two percent used it to learn about selling.
Think about what that means.
Consumers are asking questions about commissions, referral fees, contracts, professional representation, and what services they actually need.
AI can make mistakes, and important legal and financial information must still be verified.
But consumers have increasing access to information that can help them make informed decisions.
And I believe that will put more pressure on real estate professionals to demonstrate the value of their services.
That’s an opportunity for good agents.
A good professional shouldn’t need an inefficient system to justify their compensation.
Their value should come from what they actually do for the buyer or seller.
And that’s a principle Rethink Open House already embraces.
Now, Byron believes Open Real Estate helps protect the existing American real estate system.
I believe the industry needs a fundamentally better system.
This isn’t about whether property listings should be collected in one place.
Of course they should.
That’s one of the most useful things about the existing MLS.
But concentrating inventory doesn’t mean we have to preserve every business practice built around controlling it.
And it certainly doesn’t mean the existing industry should determine the only acceptable way to buy or sell a house.
The property owner creates the inventory.
The buyer creates the demand.
Real estate professionals provide valuable services.
The marketplace should help those people find one another and conduct their business.
Not control their relationships.
Not force everyone into the same service arrangement.
And not collect another piece of the transaction simply because two people were brought together.
If four enormous brokerage groups want to establish another national organization that preserves the existing system, they’re free to try.
But don’t tell me that automatically makes it the best model for consumers simply because you’ve named it Open Real Estate.
A truly open marketplace gives people meaningful access.
A truly transparent marketplace helps them understand the property, the professionals involved, and the financial arrangements that affect them.
And a consumer-centered marketplace gives buyers and sellers choices throughout the process.
Rethink Open House already offers that different model.
Today.
The real estate industry should be a tool for homeowners to sell their houses.
Homeowners should not be tools for supporting the real estate industry.
The MLS has the inventory.
Rethink Open House has the better model.

© Rethink Open House. Transcript provided for accessibility, reference, and educational use. Unauthorized republication is prohibited.