Thanks for your insight.

I find it entirely amusing that you transferred the burden (and the cost) to the broker, while you reap the benefits of the lead-gen via a “web-centric” model.

So are you part of an agent team? If you are, how are your sub-agents compensated?

-rsh

We generate all of the business for our agents via Internet marketing and leave very little room for the broker to make money on our production.

I actually started our real estate company a few years ago and then sold it to the current broker so that we could focus on closing transactions vs being broke brokers.

@Mariana – Thank you again for the insight about your commission structure and lead / transaction model.

It was so great to meet you at REBW as well. I do believe “Rojo” will remain something of an inside joke for those of us who were there. But what happens in Vegas….

Your session was also one of the highlights, so it’s great to continue the conversation here. My questions/thoughts on this:

However, I do not think that the web is the be all end all for lead generation. Traditional methods are still valid, and will continue to be valid. Furthermore, there are agents who are predominantly powerful lead generators, and others who “may not be able to bring in business if their lives depended on it” but there will always be a draw to real estate by agents who “do it all” … A full transition to a web-centric brokerage could never accommodate those kinds of people, so I think there will always be room for the types of brokerages we have now – maybe just LESS of them.

I think the real question your model raises, frankly, is not on whether the “power lead generators” will not be necessary. Nor is it whether the “traditional brokerage” will cease to exist.

I think the real question is whether your model allows brokers to make more money.

In other words, the web forces a shift in the value relationship between brokers and agents. The effects of that, none of us knows — hence, “here there be monsters”.

On that, I think Kevin is probably right. What none of us knows, of course, is whether current agents who are making a very good living on these 90/10 splits and such will go along with the changes. If not, what will they do?

-rsh

Interesting comments and maybe the financials of some of the sites like ziprealty and realestate of IAC may provide the some insight into the models you are discussing.

If I remember in Q1 & 2 of both companies had continued increases in # of transactions & closing while the rest of the traditional RE bombed. They were not profitable due to expansion but it does show that they have the potential.

Rob – You bring up some very interesting points. I am certain that the web will continue changing all aspects of what we call the “business of real estate” and it will be interesting to see the effects on Broker-to-Agent-to-Broker relationships.

However, I do not think that the web is the be all end all for lead generation. Traditional methods are still valid, and will continue to be valid. Furthermore, there are agents who are predominantly powerful lead generators, and others who “may not be able to bring in business if their lives depended on it” but there will always be a draw to real estate by agents who “do it all” … A full transition to a web-centric brokerage could never accommodate those kinds of people, so I think there will always be room for the types of brokerages we have now – maybe just LESS of them.

BTW … It was awesome to meet you at REBW.

Your point about a “web-centric” phase is intriguing. Since the vast majority of this sort of innovation is coming from the agent/team level, and not the broker or franchise level, you have to wonder how this will play out.

Perhaps the Mariana Wagner teams of the world will venture out as their own broker-owners and hire agents simply to consummate the deals that they bring in from their effective web presence. Then, in an odd twist, the power will be back in the hands of the brokers — I mean, those brokers who do rain-making on behalf of their agents.