Compass scoops up Douglas Elliman agent Patty LaRocco

by Jim Dalrymple II | Apr 16, 2025 | Industry, News Feed

This post was originally published on this site

Sue Yannaccone reveals launch of new title venture ‘Upward Title’

by Jim Dalrymple II | Apr 16, 2025 | Industry, News Feed

Bigger. Better. Bolder. Inman Connect is heading to San Diego. Join thousands of real estate pros, connect with the Inman Community and gain insights from hundreds of leading minds shaping the industry. If you’re ready to grow your business and invest in yourself, this is where you need to be. Go BIG in San Diego!

Lately, real estate has looked like a clash of Titans. There’s Compass versus Zillow, Rocket buying up Redfin and the National Association of Realtors playing defense on multiple fronts.

Anywhere, one of the biggest titans of them all, has waded less proactively into industry drama than some firms. But that doesn’t mean the company is resting on its laurels. Case in point: Anywhere this week revealed to Inman that it has quietly been working on a title venture, dubbed Upward Title, for almost two years.

Upward grew its revenue by 10 times year over year in 2024, according to numbers Anywhere provided to Inman, and it is currently available in 30 markets across the country. More broadly, Upward is part of a larger trend in which big companies are getting bigger and finding new ways to capture more of the homebuying and selling transaction.

This week, Inman sat down with Sue Yannaccone, president and CEO of Anywhere Brands and Anywhere Advisors. The conversation began with a rundown on Upward and what it means for the company, then meandered to some of today’s most-debated news stories.

And the takeaway from this conversation was that Yannaccone sees trends, including consolidation and transaction integration, dominating the real estate industry. Recent, high-profile deals — notably Rocket’s recent buying spree — exemplify this trend, but Yannaccone argued that in such an environment, the type of scale Anywhere possesses represents an advantage.

What follows is a version of Inman’s conversation with Yannaccone that has been edited for length and clarity.

Inman: You guys reached out about a venture called Upward Title, which is part of an effort to build an integrated buying experience. Tell me what Upward is and why it matters. 

Sue Yannaccone: As an enterprise, obviously, we have benefited from the scale of having a fully integrated business, right? And we saw the opportunity to really leverage that national scale and expertise in our title business to benefit our franchisees. Obviously, title is a scale game. It’s a unit driver.

So we thought, how cool would it be to bring to market a solution as part of Anywhere, leveraging the benefits of our experience and scale, in owning this national title business.

What we did is we launched a multi-franchise title joint venture business. We first piloted it in 2023, and we’ve had some success. And now we’re looking to expand it significantly. It’s branded Upward Title.

Who can use this right now, and what is the long-term goal?

Currently we have franchisees from all of our brands participating. We have been really excited with the growth that we’ve seen thus far. We are in 30 major markets. And really there’s no ceiling on the opportunity there. It’s just volume of business. I want it to be encompassing as many of our affiliates as we can.

We’re in everywhere from California to more rural markets in Minnesota. We’re in Pennsylvania, NorCal. The need is universal, and so our opportunity is universal.

What’s been really unique for us is, as we’re talking to independent companies who are considering affiliating with one of our brands, this has been something they can then launch within their marketplace. It’s a full service opportunity that they bring to bear when partnering with Anywhere.

What’s also interesting is that upwards of 50 percent of the revenue in Upward comes from outside business as well.

Thinking about opportunities to further integrate, what are you hearing from franchisees and brokers? What are they saying they want?

Upward was absolutely an answer to a question that they had.

I think now they’re constantly looking for the ability to grow their business. Whether it be doing mergers and acquisitions, where we’re very involved in conversations with our affiliates to help them grow that way. There’s also delivering on the tried and true value proposition things as well. Really strong learning and development, agent coaching. And of course, helping them market to the consumer in a way that is relevant and modern.

You mentioned mergers and acquisitions. Where do you see that going? Will we see more local companies combining to create local juggernauts? Will we see more of the Compasses of the world buying up Latter & Blum? All of the above? What’s on your bingo card for M&A?

We expect to see industry consolidation continue. We at Anywhere are always involved in the M&A conversations and evaluating what those opportunities are to enhance our portfolio and our business as well. We’re looking to focus on helping our affiliates grow, diversifying their business through things like Upward, while also leveraging the scale that we realize that we have.

This conversation is taking place against the backdrop of Rocket buying Mr. Cooper and Redfin. What do you make of those deals?

I think it’s really a sign of what’s happening. I think there’s that inevitable consolidation. I think those opportunities are interesting and focused really on that home transaction process. That is a piece of the ecosystem. I think it is about this integrated home transaction. I’ll be interested to see what they do with that business and where they take it.

But again, that’s why I think it’s so important that we lean into what we already have, which is that mass scale. through the transaction, through title, through mortgage and the entirety of the process.

With that deal, I’m curious about how it complicates what Rocket even is. In the past I might’ve said Rocket and Anywhere are two great companies without a ton of overlap. They’re not necessarily rivals. But now Rocket has a brokerage through Redfin. And a portal. And a mortgage servicer. So, does Anywhere see Rocket, or other companies that are traditionally outside your space, increasingly becoming rivals or competitors?

I spend much more time focused on what our business strategy is and our growth lens. And I think with our scale and our opportunity, I don’t look at them in the same wheelhouse as ours. I think we continue to watch what they’re doing and who they’re serving and where they’re serving them in the transaction.

We’re talking about building out this integrated system for the transaction. Have you guys, for example, considered acquiring a portal? Or building a portal or something like that?

We’re always looking at opportunities and considering what strategic fits may be in play for us. And so, one thing we’ve said is we’ll explore a lot of different opportunities and are constantly= having those conversations and thinking about those opportunities.

I think we are always going to — and [Anywhere CEO Ryan Schneider] is on record saying this, and I am as well — that we evaluate deals as they make sense for our business. They have to be strategic. They have to make strong financial sense. We take a lot of calls, and we take every one of them. We have those conversations.

We are talking about portals, and last week the big news was Zillow’s decision to exclude privately marketed listings. What do you make of that move?

I think we’re going to have to watch and see what happens, how that comes to market. We believe transparency for the consumer is the best way to go. And we won’t leave our affiliates or our agents in any position to be disadvantaged. But we do believe in a world where we were pushing for reform, not repeal of [the National Association of Realtors’ Clear Cooperation Policy].

I think it’ll be interesting to see where this all comes out. But we’re focused on delivering to our customers what they need, no matter where the marketplace goes.

Where does it go? NAR made their change, but then we still have Compass and Zillow pushing different sides. Any thoughts on where the new status quo lands?

I wrote an op-ed on this. I think that ultimately, we continue to fail to discuss what the consumer wants and needs in this process. Ultimately, I believe that the consumer should have the option as to how they market their home. And that is who will likely end up driving where this all lands from a mass execution standpoint.

We believe in full transparency for the consumer and the most eyeballs on a home is the best way to sell it. But we also understand there’s a desire for some privacy and security in some instances. And so I think we’re going to continue to watch this, but we can’t lose sight of the consumer’s desire because it is in fact their asset (25:21) that they need to sell in the way that works for them.

In our last couple of minutes, talk to me about advice for brokers and agents who want to thrive in the world we’ve been discussing. 

As we look at certain things and think about what I’ll consider the evolution of the real estate model and what’s next, I encourage everyone — whether they’re an agent, affiliate, broker-owner, anybody in the space — to just focus on what is the right thing by the consumer in the process. Understand the evolving landscape and be super transparent with your customer.

Lean into differentiating how you do business. Because I do believe that in a consolidating environment, that both the agents and the brokers that are future forward, that are evolving with the marketplace, are going to be the ones that outperform.

Email Jim Dalrymple II

This post was originally published on this site

Agents attracted to techie brokerages, capped fees: Report

by Jim Dalrymple II | Apr 14, 2025 | Industry, News Feed

This post was originally published on this site

Windermere exec: Private listings herald ‘demise’ of real estate

by Jim Dalrymple II | Apr 10, 2025 | Industry, News Feed

Bigger. Better. Bolder. Inman Connect is heading to San Diego. Join thousands of real estate pros, connect with the Inman Community and gain insights from hundreds of leading minds shaping the industry. If you’re ready to grow your business and invest in yourself, this is where you need to be. Go BIG in San Diego!

The battle over private listing networks intensified last month when Compass and Windermere began duking it out on Instagram.

The conflict started with critical comments from Compass CEO Robert Reffkin about Washington state-based Northwest MLS and Windermere, with Windermere soon firing back with its own Instagram post. Reffkin has since continued posting about the issue on the social network, including this week with a quote supporting his position from a law firm. Meanwhile, Windermere Co-President OB Jacobi fired back in an opinion piece.

At issue is a disagreement over how and where real estate listings reach the public. In other words, while this is a feud between two specific companies and centers on policies in one state, it’s also part of a broader and ongoing philosophical debate in real estate. Inman has endeavored to cover both sides of this debate and, in the past, has published opinion pieces from Reffkin and invited him to the Inman Connect stage to discuss related issues.

This week, however, Inman spoke with Jacobi to get his take on the issue. Jacobi was unsparing in his comments, criticizing Reffkin and Compass by name, and arguing that private listings benefit brokerages but not consumers. In addition, he said that opening the private listing floodgates could ultimately set the real estate industry back by decades.

What follows is a version of Inman’s conversation with Jacobi that has been edited for length and clarity.

Inman: I think some people already know where you stand, but give me your take on private listings, Clear Cooperation and this debate that’s happening right now.

OB Jacobi: My dad started the company in 1972. I got my license in ’89. I haven’t seen the really bad markets, but I’ve seen some other stuff where lack of transparency creates bad actors in our space. And we’ve seen it in recent times, such as the lawsuit last year. That was a lack of transparency.

And so, for me, what’s happening today is that Compass has decided to create their private exclusive listing network. And to me, that just takes away transparency, and lack of transparency creates issues for everybody.

We’ve worked really hard over many decades to create a more transparent marketplace. And now, Compass threatens to take us back decades.

We’re in about 50 MLSs in 10 states that have varying rules. The only difference is that the Northwest MLS — which happens to be where Windermere’s headquarters are — is a broker-owned MLS and doesn’t have to follow NAR rules. And that’s a little bit of a crimp in Robert Reffkin’s plans to move his private listing network into Washington state.

[Robert Reffkin] has made the case that Northwest MLS is uniquely restrictive. How do you respond to that?

Historically, Northwest MLS has been viewed as a leader in the industry. And it’s been a leader in the industry because it’s owned by the brokerage community of more than 30,000 members. They have been able to set their own rules. And they seem to be one of the only MLSs that was not sued in the national case. And they were not sued because they made transparency changes.

So, saying they’re restrictive is actually not really the right thing to say. I’d venture to say that they’re the best MLS out there in regards to consumers in the real estate industry. And he’s finding fault with them because they’re not bending to his rules of a private marketplace.

I think I understand the argument that you’re making, but the other side of this issue is that it’s about seller choice. So, shouldn’t I be able to do whatever I want with my house? Sell it however I want to sell it?

In almost every MLS, sellers, if they want to have a private listing, that option is available to them. They can exclude their name. They can exclude their address. They can exclude showing time. They can exclude local or public dissemination of their information. They cannot exclude — or they should not be able to exclude — having the MLSs of the world, the agents of the world, see their property.

Why would you want to limit the amount of people that could see your property? What Robert’s saying is it’s seller choice. Really? Is it a seller choice? Number one, is it fully disclosed to all of the sellers that only a very limited number of people in the world can see their homes on Compass or on their private network? Does the seller make marketing choices typically? Or is it the agent and brokers that make the marketing choices? I suggest the broker makes the marketing choices. And so I think seller choice is really a fallacy.

I think Robert’s response to that would be, “Well, days on market start counting right away.” Great, Robert. Why didn’t you work with the MLSs across the country to change that, specifically? Because private listing networks only benefit the brokerage that does it.

Why does all of this matter right now? Back in, say, 2015, there was no Clear Cooperation, for example. Was discrimination widespread? Was redlining a problem 10 years ago? Why would these problems return in response to the changes that people are pushing for?

I think the industry has always faced challenges with bad actors.  You look at the study that was done on Long Island about steering. The industry has always faced those kinds of things. And so when you have transparency, you get accountability. The more transparency you can have, the more accountability is created.

When you create private listing networks, who are you accountable to? If somebody says, “I want to sell my house to the neatest family in the world,” well, now you’re discriminating against single people. Is that fair? Could it be a situation of have and have not? In this instance, it’s saying, “we’re not going to play by the fair housing rules anymore.”

You’ve said previously that the push for a private listing network is a business move by Compass, that this is about money. But they’ve made a similar argument, saying the rules exist to prop up trade organizations or smaller brokerages. What’s your response?

I would say this: Is competition good? I love competition. Competition makes me better.

Let’s get to the real bottom of this question. Who is it good for? Study after study shows that it’s not really good for the seller. So, Bright MLS, NAR, Zillow, they all came out with studies that say it’s not good for the seller. So, is it good for the buyer that has to call your company and say things like, “Hey, how many days on market is that? How do I make an informed choice on what I should offer?”

What happens if private listings become the norm? What does that future look like? 

We have 30 percent market share in the Pacific Northwest, so we are the company that has the most to gain out of something like this. But I want to make it really clear: This is bad for competition.

A small player in the market, I can’t see how they survive something like this. And so companies become monopolistic. In companies’ perfect world, they get rid of all the other companies and the MLSs. If they do that, do they control the pricing? Do they control the commission structure?

I think the future of real estate, if this is allowed to happen, is it’s really bad for buyers who don’t have information at their fingertips. They need to make informed decisions. I mean, appraisers probably go away. Where do they get their information from? Does Compass start their own appraisal company? Probably. Is it good for sellers? Well, we already established they don’t make more money. They have less choices.

There are other executives in the industry who have said, “Hey, we believe private listings are bad. But if that’s where this goes, we’re going to have to do it ourselves.” I’m curious where you stand on that. If private listings become common, do you guys start doing them also? 

It’s a really good question. It’s one that we’ve internally talked about. The current answer is no, we’re not going to participate in that. And that’s my answer. You know what? It’s bad for consumers, period, end of story.

I think we can compete in that market. We have really strong professional development. We coach on talking about your value and the value of the system that’s in place.

I’m a firm believer in DEI in our space. I’m a firm believer that what has transpired in the past is we have acted as a bad industry for marginalized people. And so creating a system and being part of a system that allows that kind of behavior is not something we’re interested in.

I hope companies don’t let the dominoes fall and say, “We’re going to do this for the short-term gain.” Because that’s all it would be. It would be a short-term gain for your company, and you are participating in the demise of the real estate industry. I think that is an absolute, total shame if people do those kinds of things.

We think we can win and we are ready for the fight. I hope other companies are, too. [NextHome CEO] James Dwiggins, he’s out there having this fight as well. You can see people who are following the side of the consumer and that, in my opinion, always wins.

You say you guys are ready for the fight. Is this a fight in the court of public opinion? A legal fight?

It wouldn’t shock me. Robert has been a little bit of a bully when it comes to this movement, if you will. He’s trying to make everybody bend to his will. And so if it’s a fight in a court, we’re happy to have it there. If it’s a fight in the court of public opinion, we’re also happy to have it there. We know that we’re on the right side of this fight. A free marketplace is the best system.

I know you’re a part of Northwest MLS, which is not affiliated with NAR and thus not bound by Clear Cooperation specifically. But the concept of Clear Cooperation is part of this conversation, so I’m curious what you make of the changes NAR made to the rule.

Yeah, it’s terrible.

Listen, it’s pretty simple, right? If an office takes a listing and never inputs it in an MLS and just shares it amongst its agents, who’s it good for? There’s no answer other than the company and the agent. There literally is no answer.

You know, everything about the changes, I can’t stand. I believe in taking a listing, putting it in the fair marketplace that we’ve established over decades, and then having it marketed to agents and the public.

Email Jim Dalrymple II

This post was originally published on this site

Windermere exec: Private listings herald ‘demise’ of real estate

by Jim Dalrymple II | Apr 10, 2025 | Industry, News Feed

Bigger. Better. Bolder. Inman Connect is heading to San Diego. Join thousands of real estate pros, connect with the Inman Community and gain insights from hundreds of leading minds shaping the industry. If you’re ready to grow your business and invest in yourself, this is where you need to be. Go BIG in San Diego!

The battle over private listing networks intensified last month when Compass and Windermere began duking it out on Instagram.

The conflict started with critical comments from Compass CEO Robert Reffkin about Washington state-based Northwest MLS and Windermere, with Windermere soon firing back with its own Instagram post. Reffkin has since continued posting about the issue on the social network, including this week with a quote supporting his position from a law firm. Meanwhile, Windermere Co-President OB Jacobi fired back in an opinion piece.

At issue is a disagreement over how and where real estate listings reach the public. In other words, while this is a feud between two specific companies and centers on policies in one state, it’s also part of a broader and ongoing philosophical debate in real estate. Inman has endeavored to cover both sides of this debate and, in the past, has published opinion pieces from Reffkin and invited him to the Inman Connect stage to discuss related issues.

This week, however, Inman spoke with Jacobi to get his take on the issue. Jacobi was unsparing in his comments, criticizing Reffkin and Compass by name, and arguing that private listings benefit brokerages but not consumers. In addition, he said that opening the private listing floodgates could ultimately set the real estate industry back by decades.

What follows is a version of Inman’s conversation with Jacobi that has been edited for length and clarity.

Inman: I think some people already know where you stand, but give me your take on private listings, Clear Cooperation and this debate that’s happening right now.

OB Jacobi: My dad started the company in 1972. I got my license in ’89. I haven’t seen the really bad markets, but I’ve seen some other stuff where lack of transparency creates bad actors in our space. And we’ve seen it in recent times, such as the lawsuit last year. That was a lack of transparency.

And so, for me, what’s happening today is that Compass has decided to create their private exclusive listing network. And to me, that just takes away transparency, and lack of transparency creates issues for everybody.

We’ve worked really hard over many decades to create a more transparent marketplace. And now, Compass threatens to take us back decades.

We’re in about 50 MLSs in 10 states that have varying rules. The only difference is that the Northwest MLS — which happens to be where Windermere’s headquarters are — is a broker-owned MLS and doesn’t have to follow NAR rules. And that’s a little bit of a crimp in Robert Reffkin’s plans to move his private listing network into Washington state.

[Robert Reffkin] has made the case that Northwest MLS is uniquely restrictive. How do you respond to that?

Historically, Northwest MLS has been viewed as a leader in the industry. And it’s been a leader in the industry because it’s owned by the brokerage community of more than 30,000 members. They have been able to set their own rules. And they seem to be one of the only MLSs that was not sued in the national case. And they were not sued because they made transparency changes.

So, saying they’re restrictive is actually not really the right thing to say. I’d venture to say that they’re the best MLS out there in regards to consumers in the real estate industry. And he’s finding fault with them because they’re not bending to his rules of a private marketplace.

I think I understand the argument that you’re making, but the other side of this issue is that it’s about seller choice. So, shouldn’t I be able to do whatever I want with my house? Sell it however I want to sell it?

In almost every MLS, sellers, if they want to have a private listing, that option is available to them. They can exclude their name. They can exclude their address. They can exclude showing time. They can exclude local or public dissemination of their information. They cannot exclude — or they should not be able to exclude — having the MLSs of the world, the agents of the world, see their property.

Why would you want to limit the amount of people that could see your property? What Robert’s saying is it’s seller choice. Really? Is it a seller choice? Number one, is it fully disclosed to all of the sellers that only a very limited number of people in the world can see their homes on Compass or on their private network? Does the seller make marketing choices typically? Or is it the agent and brokers that make the marketing choices? I suggest the broker makes the marketing choices. And so I think seller choice is really a fallacy.

I think Robert’s response to that would be, “Well, days on market start counting right away.” Great, Robert. Why didn’t you work with the MLSs across the country to change that, specifically? Because private listing networks only benefit the brokerage that does it.

Why does all of this matter right now? Back in, say, 2015, there was no Clear Cooperation, for example. Was discrimination widespread? Was redlining a problem 10 years ago? Why would these problems return in response to the changes that people are pushing for?

I think the industry has always faced challenges with bad actors.  You look at the study that was done on Long Island about steering. The industry has always faced those kinds of things. And so when you have transparency, you get accountability. The more transparency you can have, the more accountability is created.

When you create private listing networks, who are you accountable to? If somebody says, “I want to sell my house to the neatest family in the world,” well, now you’re discriminating against single people. Is that fair? Could it be a situation of have and have not? In this instance, it’s saying, “we’re not going to play by the fair housing rules anymore.”

You’ve said previously that the push for a private listing network is a business move by Compass, that this is about money. But they’ve made a similar argument, saying the rules exist to prop up trade organizations or smaller brokerages. What’s your response?

I would say this: Is competition good? I love competition. Competition makes me better.

Let’s get to the real bottom of this question. Who is it good for? Study after study shows that it’s not really good for the seller. So, Bright MLS, NAR, Zillow, they all came out with studies that say it’s not good for the seller. So, is it good for the buyer that has to call your company and say things like, “Hey, how many days on market is that? How do I make an informed choice on what I should offer?”

What happens if private listings become the norm? What does that future look like? 

We have 30 percent market share in the Pacific Northwest, so we are the company that has the most to gain out of something like this. But I want to make it really clear: This is bad for competition.

A small player in the market, I can’t see how they survive something like this. And so companies become monopolistic. In companies’ perfect world, they get rid of all the other companies and the MLSs. If they do that, do they control the pricing? Do they control the commission structure?

I think the future of real estate, if this is allowed to happen, is it’s really bad for buyers who don’t have information at their fingertips. They need to make informed decisions. I mean, appraisers probably go away. Where do they get their information from? Does Compass start their own appraisal company? Probably. Is it good for sellers? Well, we already established they don’t make more money. They have less choices.

There are other executives in the industry who have said, “Hey, we believe private listings are bad. But if that’s where this goes, we’re going to have to do it ourselves.” I’m curious where you stand on that. If private listings become common, do you guys start doing them also? 

It’s a really good question. It’s one that we’ve internally talked about. The current answer is no, we’re not going to participate in that. And that’s my answer. You know what? It’s bad for consumers, period, end of story.

I think we can compete in that market. We have really strong professional development. We coach on talking about your value and the value of the system that’s in place.

I’m a firm believer in DEI in our space. I’m a firm believer that what has transpired in the past is we have acted as a bad industry for marginalized people. And so creating a system and being part of a system that allows that kind of behavior is not something we’re interested in.

I hope companies don’t let the dominoes fall and say, “We’re going to do this for the short-term gain.” Because that’s all it would be. It would be a short-term gain for your company, and you are participating in the demise of the real estate industry. I think that is an absolute, total shame if people do those kinds of things.

We think we can win and we are ready for the fight. I hope other companies are, too. [NextHome CEO] James Dwiggins, he’s out there having this fight as well. You can see people who are following the side of the consumer and that, in my opinion, always wins.

You say you guys are ready for the fight. Is this a fight in the court of public opinion? A legal fight?

It wouldn’t shock me. Robert has been a little bit of a bully when it comes to this movement, if you will. He’s trying to make everybody bend to his will. And so if it’s a fight in a court, we’re happy to have it there. If it’s a fight in the court of public opinion, we’re also happy to have it there. We know that we’re on the right side of this fight. A free marketplace is the best system.

I know you’re a part of Northwest MLS, which is not affiliated with NAR and thus not bound by Clear Cooperation specifically. But the concept of Clear Cooperation is part of this conversation, so I’m curious what you make of the changes NAR made to the rule.

Yeah, it’s terrible.

Listen, it’s pretty simple, right? If an office takes a listing and never inputs it in an MLS and just shares it amongst its agents, who’s it good for? There’s no answer other than the company and the agent. There literally is no answer.

You know, everything about the changes, I can’t stand. I believe in taking a listing, putting it in the fair marketplace that we’ve established over decades, and then having it marketed to agents and the public.

Email Jim Dalrymple II

This post was originally published on this site