Reffkin takes ‘flood the zone’ approach in bid to sway industry execs 

Compass International Holdings (CIH) Chairman and CEO Robert Reffkin took the opportunity at the T3 Leadership Summit in Orlando, Florida, last week to tell executives directly why private listings and seller choice should be more widely embraced by an industry known for its resistance to change.

In a rapid-fire presentation, Reffkin whizzed through 39 slides to make his case. Drawing on what he characterized as "moral" and "legal" arguments, Reffkin said he was not — as some might think — trying to "destroy" the MLS, but rather, restore it to a former state.

Turning back the clock

Much of Reffkin's argument revolved around taking the MLS back to a time when portals were less dominant, with the CEO often citing evidence from a pre-Zillow era when the internet had only been used for a few years by the real estate industry to promote listings. 

For example, one slide included a statement made by former REMAX General Counsel and President Geoff Lewis after the DOJ sued the National Association of Realtors in 2005 over a policy allowing brokers to withhold listings from other brokers' websites.

In public comments meant to dissuade the federal government from intervening in the industry, Lewis said that "to open up the MLS for internet display listings by parties who do not actually engage in brokerage would risk causing genuine brokers to withdraw from the MLS," arguing that the MLS was designed "as a B2B vehicle" and not a public utility. "This could jeopardize the viability of the system that has and continues to serve consumers well."

In highlighting that quote, Reffkin seemed to suggest that home search portals should not be allowed to display listings derived from the MLS since they do not contribute listings of their own. The CEO also sought to use Lewis' argument to show that, as in 2005, MLSs today should be working harder to protect brokers' data from threats, which now include AI and other third parties that do not practice the business of brokerage.

Tying Zillow's 'subjective' rules to NAR's filtering policy

Another core argument in Reffkin's presentation was that Zillow's listing access standards (which he called the "Zillow ban") are "subjective" — and he implored MLSs to put a stop to them. 

When a listing violates Zillow's standards, Reffkin noted, the listing agent and their brokerage are punished based on what he sees as "subjective" criteria. The CEO pointed to Section 21 of NAR's Handbook on Multiple Listing Policy, which refers to the "non-filtering of listings," and said Zillow's access standards violate this policy.

The policy statement, however, only addresses compensation-based filtering. MLS participants and subscribers, according to the policy, must not "filter" or "restrict" MLS listings "that are communicated to consumers or clients based on the existence or level of compensation offered to the cooperating broker or the name of a brokerage or agent." 

When asked for clarification on the policy, a rep for NAR told Real Estate News that "MLS enforcement decisions are made at the local MLS level," and that the association doesn't comment on brokerage business models.

'Recycling' dismissed claims

Reffkin went on to suggest that in "protecting" Zillow, the leaders in the room were helping an industry villain of sorts. His evidence? Documents unearthed in discovery after Compass sued the portal last year. The internal Zillow memos — which have since been dismissed in court as brainstorming documents, not policy statements — have incendiary quotes like "we want to punish the agent for choosing to put their listings on alternate networks."

By sharing those memos, a Zillow spokesperson said, Reffkin was "recycling claims a federal judge already threw out" — and doing so well after Compass dropped its lawsuit against the portal.

"[Reffkin is] mischaracterizing Zillow's listing standards, which have one simple trigger: a listing being hidden from certain buyers. That's it. That's the whole rule. It's a straightforward consumer protection standard, not a subjective judgment call," the spokesperson said in an email.

"Reffkin pushes a business model built around restricting which buyers could see which homes — a model that serves Compass, not sellers or buyers," the spokesperson added. 

Calling out CRMLS

Another quasi-villain highlighted in Reffkin's presentation was the California Regional Multiple Listing Service (CRMLS).

The CEO seemed to target the MLS in particular because, he claimed, CRMLS does not currently allow subscribers to send coming-soons only to Redfin — the portal Compass partnered with on such listings in February.

Reffkin also took issue with CRMLS Vice President and General Counsel Ed Zorn, who had told Compass that if anyone outside the brokerage — agents or clients — viewed listings in its in-office exclusive listings book, that could violate CRMLS's policies. That's because CRMLS had not "modified or changed" its Clear Cooperation rules to allow one-to-one marketing of listings that aren't shared with other brokers. If the book contained only open listings, that would be acceptable, Zorn noted. 

Reffkin pointed to this as an example of CRMLS effectively telling brokers, "our business model requires you not to increase your margins."

The MLS's rebuttal

A handful of CRMLS executives were in the room during Reffkin's presentation and later shared their thoughts about some of his claims.

"CRMLS supports an open, cooperative marketplace," CEO Art Carter told Real Estate News, and welcomes "thoughtful dialogue" about its future — but, he added "it is important to separate rhetoric from how the system actually operates."

Carter also said that "contrary to claims" made by Reffkin, CRMLS allows coming-soon listings to be displayed through IDX, and the MLS began syndicating them at the end of March. Additionally, CRMLS will be exploring new listing input options in the near future with REcore's PropList, an add/edit listings platform, "to provide brokers with greater flexibility, while ensuring compliance with legal requirements and maintaining accurate, transparent data across the marketplace," Carter said. This would allow brokers to designate which portals their coming-soon listings are sent to.

Carter went on to emphasize that CRMLS does not support withholding "key information" from consumers, like days on market or price history — metrics Compass has referred to as "negative insights." 

"A broker's fiduciary duty includes ensuring clients fully understand how marketing decisions may impact exposure, timing, and outcomes," Carter said. And full transparency "includes clearly communicating the potential trade-offs associated with limited-exposure strategies."

Reffkin's perspective on fiduciary duty

The second half of Reffkin's lecture was divided into what he called "moral" and "legal" arguments.

The moral argument drew on the relatively straightforward notion of seller choice: "Sellers deserve the right to choose when, where and how to market their homes … in the constraint of the Law," Reffkin projected on a slide.

He noted that Compass had created addendums for its listing agreements disclosing that listing as a private exclusive or coming soon could impact the number of buyers who learn about a property, the number of showings, the number of offers or the final sale price.

Reffkin's legal argument centered around fiduciary duty and a 1983 report from the Federal Trade Commission on the residential real estate brokerage industry.

Reffkin asserted that an agent's fiduciary duty to their seller trumps MLS regulations, per federal law. Part of that duty, he noted, is to "follow all lawful instructions of the client" — meaning agents have a duty to market a property as a seller sees fit, regardless of MLS policies.

He likewise pulled quotes from the 1983 FTC report on mandatory MLS listing submission rules: "On its face, requiring that MLS members submit all of their listings of a designated type restricts the competitive freedom of the broker-members," the report stated. "Alternative methods of selling houses are effectively foreclosed."

Reffkin did not, however, mention that by the end of that section of the report, the author acknowledges that mandatory submission rules can benefit consumers. 

"A common problem for sellers and for the MLSs has been 'vest pocket' listings," the report states. "An ability to easily withhold under-priced listings may increase the incentives of some brokers to undervalue listings initially. Thus, one rationale for mandatory listing requirements traditionally has been that it helps in suppressing a practice which can do substantial injury to consumers."

NAR violating 'its own antitrust policy'?

Reffkin also saved some criticism for NAR, suggesting that the association wasn't abiding by its own rules.

The CEO noted that before the MLS Antitrust Compliance Policy was amended in November 2004, it included two points that are now excluded: the MLS shall not make any rule regulating the advertising or promotion of any listing; and the MLS shall not prohibit or discourage a member from accepting a listing from a seller who prefers an "office exclusive."

If still included in the policy, these points would certainly help Reffkin advance his 3-phased marketing strategy — and leave MLSs unable to fight it.

But Reffkin further suggested that NAR had violated "its own antitrust policy" by removing those two points, arguing that by revising its definition of "office exclusives" in 2025 to include language around public marketing, NAR severely curbed seller choice.

The new definition, which was rolled out when NAR launched its delayed marketing exempt listing option, states that "an office exclusive is an exempt listing where the seller has directed that their property not be disseminated through the MLS and not be publicly marketed. The office exclusive listing shall be filed with the MLS but not disseminated to other MLS Participants and Subscribers." Previously, the definition did not include the public marketing language.

An NAR spokesperson told Real Estate News that the association "continues to uphold and abide by" the policy, adding, "the Clear Cooperation Policy, adopted in 2019, continues to require that publicly marketed listings be submitted to MLSs for cooperation with other MLS participants."