Real Estate Politics

The Great Debates: Who "Owns" Leap Day?

Okay, not actually a Great Debate, and not exactly a widespread phenomenon, but still, thought this was interesting enough to share today...

The Buddy System?

A filmmaker in Canada has begun work on a new project called "House for Sale," which will highlight the proper precautions necessary for real estate agents to take to avoid and even escape the inherent dangers of the profession.

Robin Webb is well-known for his films about social safety, and he has made feature-length films and documentary miniseries alike. "House for Sale" will be a made-for-TV movie and will present what many agents have already called a controversial idea: "Don't show a house alone."

Webb formerly helped develop a safety program for the Fraser Valley Real Estate Board in the 1980s, so his interest in protecting real estate agents is long-running and genuine, so I personally wonder why real estate agents are not heeding his advice. According to this article from the Times Colonist, Webb said real estate agents were "sincere and genuine" as he presented this particular idea, but they ultimately said they wouldn't practice it.

I'm not a real estate agent; I don't have a license and I know more about online media and journalism than I do the ins and outs of real estate. I have been working with Brian Wilson since October 2007 and continue to learn much about the industry and its intricacies and nuances, but I don't think I need to be a real estate professional to understand the benefit of a buddy system when showing houses.

Why | risk | it?

You're alone. With someone you likely don't know very well. You're giving them the benefit of the doubt. But still.

Why would real estate agents object to this idea? Is it an issue of time (can't realistically have someone meet up with you for every appointment)? Money (can't afford to pay someone for their time - Webb even suggests using a taxi and having the driver wait outside)? Impracticality?

So I am asking you, the professionals: would you use a buddy system? Why or why not? Maybe you do already, or you know someone who does? Do they regret it?

Why is this idea controversial?

-Christopher Zabka

And the winner is...

Voting for "The Great Debates: Realtor.com: Friend or Foe?" is now closed. Our readers have determined that Russell Shaw of No Hassle Listing (69.6%) won this debate over Brian Wilson of Zolve (30.4%). Thank you to all who participated.

Stay tuned for information on our next Great Debate and more insight from Real Estate Politics.

- Christopher Zabka

Controversial blogging and Yossarian...sort of

We choose not to avoid any given issue because of its potential for controversy, agitation or even lack thereof; instead, we choose to establish Real Estate Politics for the civil, level-headed discussion of such issues for the sake of education and betterment for all.  - from The Real Estate Politics Manifesto

The above excerpt strictly pertains to our mission here on Real Estate Politics. We have created a platform via which discussing controversial topics is encouraged and, for that matter, welcomed.

But outside the context of this blog and a handful of others, controversial real estate blogging isn't necessarily widespread because most real estate blogging is meant to build business and help sell a product or service, ultimately. This can be a difficult thing because we all have our opinions, yes? And one of the things we hear pretty frequently is to be yourself on your blog; if people don't like who you are and what you have to say, you're no worse off because your audience is basically filtering itself out until you have the people most likely to do business with you and appreciate what you have to say.

And in that sense, controversial blogging might be the way to go, might be the thing that sets you apart from other real estate bloggers: If you aren't afraid to touch the hot-button issues, sooner or later someone somewhere will begin to respect that and have an interest in associating with you.

But.

That is generally too small a chance to risk alienating a much larger reader base, the "hey I'm interested in your local market and you know a lot about it" readers that could easily turn and become your "but something you said really left a bad taste in my mouth so I'll go with someone else" readers.

Even though.

Controversy can create buzz. Buzz can create interest. Interest can create traffic. And traffic can create customers.

I had this whole idea of incorporating ideas from Heller's novel Catch-22 into this post because it fits, the idea of dealing with circular arguments and the tyranny of trying to escape them, and I think this discussion on controversial blogging is essentially a Catch-22, how once we begin writing controversial blogs, the minute we enlist, basically, we become Yossarian, we become the guy stuck in the cyclical bind of some inane trap we would never be able to escape unless we somehow have the dumb luck of Orr or the eventual wherewithal of Yossarian to make it to neutral Sweden. That was the gist of it, but there were a couple hitches in my mind that I couldn't work my way around to present a more fluid analogy, and it floundered.

If you have no idea what any of that means anyway, the basic point is this: controversial blogging could create business from a certain type of reader, but you are also likely to lose many other readers in the process.

In the vast expanse of the blogosphere, writing something controversial can seem insignificant because there is so much going on out there that it's hard to be noticed in the first place. But when you are noticed for creating controversy, especially as a local real estate blogger, you might decide you actually don't want to be noticed for it after all because it is affecting your image and, therefore, your ability to market. But you'll never be able to do enough damage control to fully erase the print of what you wrote to begin with, and as long as you're in this business there will always be the chance for Google to become the Great Loyalty Oath Crusade, for you to become Yossarian, for your controversial post to actually become your undoing, your own personal controversy, your own lingering Catch-22.

- Christopher Zabka

Shame on you, Citimortgage

It is a low-down, dirty, shame Citimortgage...

Janet Latta is a nice woman.  5 years ago, she and her husband bought a reasonably-priced with his Veterans Association loan and they chose you as their lender.  You accepted the 1% origination fee plus things like a $75 "express delivery fee" for a $12 delivery without pause and then starting the next month, they started paying you a reasonable interest rate.

2 years ago, they finally answered one of your solicitations for a "free home equity loan" because you enticed them with the prospect of "consolidating debt," "taking a well-earned vacation," & "home improvements."   You did not even send out an appraiser & instead relied on an automated computer valuation to offer a line of credit up to 100% of that computer's valuation of the home.

8 months ago, the line of credit is now just a line of debt.  The vacation & debt consolidation were managable but his layoff burned through that "equity" rather quickly.  Related or unrelated, also came the separation & divorce proceedings. 

6 months ago, I Janet calls me and asks me to sell the house because the mortgage payment is 65% of her now single income that she shares with her two daughters.  She owes Citimortgage $181,000 on the VA loan and she owes Citimortgage $44,000 on that "great deal, variable interest, tax deductible" line of credit.  The market says her home is worth $195,000.

2 months ago, I recieve an offer for $188,000.  I counsel Janet to take it.  She asks why.  I tell her that now that we have an offer, the Citimortgage "loss mitigation department" will finally start returning our calls, probably.

1 month ago & 16 phone calls later, Citimortgage finally sends an appraiser to the home (as required by the VA) and the VA appraiser values the home at $200,000.  The number 88.3 runs through my head because that is the percentage that the VA will multiply to the appraised value to establish the number that they will accept as a loss rather than taking the property as a "government-owned home." 

Citimortgage says it will take the $176,000 payoff for the $195,000 that it is owed on the VA loan.  Of course they will... the government will compensate them for the difference. However, Citimortgage is silent on the 2nd loan.  After sales costs and paying off the first, Janet will still have to bring $1,600 to the closing table to save herself from being a statistic.  This means the 2nd loan will get nothing.  I ask Citimortgage to take $0 on the 2nd loan so that Janet can make good on the Citimortgage government-backed 1st loan. 

Silence

Silence

Silence

7 days ago, the buyer's agent calls and warns me that his buyer is probably going to move on after two months. I tell him that I understand and that Citimortgage has yet to answer.

1 day ago, we finally get through to someone at Citimortgage regarding the 2nd loan after 4 weeks of calling & message.  John tells me his computer has been down.  He'll get back to us when he hears from higher and to not leave any more messages because it will slow down his response.

Tomorrow, Janet will experience another day in financial limbo and emotional distress while she also manages her divorce proceedings and being a newly-appointed single mom.  A firm "no" 8 weeks ago would have been much less cruel. 

Shame on you, Citimortgage.

Editor's note: we notified Citimortgage of this post and invited them to respond.

- Brian Wilson

The Great Debates: "Realtor.com: Friend or Foe?"

The Great Debates: "Realtor.com: Friend or Foe?"
Realtor.com is possibly the most valuable asset controlled by the National Association of Realtors®. However, some NAR members believe it is being poorly utilized or even used to undermine its membership.
PRO Brian Wilson Zolve Brian is the founder of Zolve.com, the premier network for real estate professionals on the web, connecting them directly to one another and creating an international network that will help them grow their spheres of influence exponentially.	CON Russell Shaw No Hassle Listing Russell is a mega-producing Realtor® from Phoenix, AZ. He began his real estate career in 1978 with John Hall & Associates and is a GRI, CRS, and Lifetime Member of the President's Roundtable. He has twice been named a top-30 national seller.
“Levels the Playing Field” The National Association of Realtors® is a trade organization.  It is the largest & potentially one of the most influential trade organizations in the United States.  What NAR has done with its trademark “Realtor” to leverage it into the leading real estate information destination on the internet is very impressive and brings great value to its members. I understand that the general feeling amongst most Realtors® is that Realtor.com is simply an expense rather than a resource, but this is because Realtor.com has just done a poor job defining its value proposition to its membership. If I may be so pretentious, allow me to define Realtor.com’s value proposition for them: 1. Realtor.com is the #1 real estate search destination. 89% of those who search real estate online start here. By virtue of that position, every member of it's organization has access to a the world wide visitor. By maintaining the lead in the online real estate domain, Realtor.com maintains the “Realtor” brand and tightly marries together with the with “real estate information.” 2. Local market and home information is highly sought after content by the visitor and one of the most important assets that Realtors® leverage into the real estate conversation. Realtor.com is the manifestation of this valuable local information about home listings on an aggregated & national level. For those searching that content, Realtor.com has the effect of reinforcing the Realtor® brand as a natural part of the home transaction. Consider this: According to comScore ranking of total unique visitors to real estate sites for December 2007 as seen below, if you took Realtor.com out of the equation, the bulk of real estate customers would find themselves landing in sites 2-10, sites that have interloped in between the Realtor and their customer. Valuable real estate information would then be associated with Silicon Valley rather than local real estate professionals.    Rank        Site     1)            Realtor.com     2)            MSN Real Estate     3)            Yahoo! Real Estate     4)            Rent.com     5)            Apartments.com     6)            Homegain.com     7)            Trulia.com     8)            Servicemagic.com     9)             HPCInter@active     10)         Zillow.com 3. Realtor.com levels the playing field for all Realtors® who choose to work at small or local brokerages rather than dominant local companies or franchises.  Imagine again a scenario where Realtor.com did not establish the frontrunner standard that promotional access should be open to all Realtors® from all companies rather than preferentially to those Realtors® associated with specifically larger companies. The little guy, the local superstar agent would be buried.  The Prudential/Yahoo deal exemplifies that paradigm by virtue of a non existent sense of accountability to all Realtor's but instead, one small group. Realtor.com has never shown preference to franchises vs. private brokerages or larger vs. smaller.  All men are created equal here. Consider the potential monopoly large organizations would have of Remax.com or Century21.com taking the leading online real estate information position.  It would be great for their agents but what about the independents and the little guy. They would be at a distinct business disadvantage. 4. Realtor.com saves Realtors® $!  I know many will disagree with this claim but let's examine the facts by first taking a look how listings are promoted in Europe. Without the presence of an MLS or a continent wide portal such at Realtor.com, agents and brokers are forced to promote their listing on paid for listing sites. According to Simon Baker, from REA Group at his recent appearance at Inman Connects, they posses 1 million + listings from the ten countries they operate in where each listing cost the agent approximately $40 to post. If Realtor.com did not exist and maintain the standard for free posting, I think it is reasonable to assume that the real estate listing portals with significant market share would have a much easier time requiring and receiving a fee for the exposure they provide.  I think this is particularly feasible in light of the success of REA. 5. Realtor.com is good for the real estate customer. Realtor.com offers the most comprehensive & inclusive collection of listings per market and more markets than any site on the internet... for free. The competing portals can only display 50% - 80% of a particular market’s available listings because they are limited to the listings of their opt-in brokerages. This can be a disservice to the customer, especially if they do not know that the portal they are viewing is not inclusive of all of the available homes listed online. This can result a buyer making an important buying decision based on an incomplete picture. When a Realtor® doesn’t provide all of the available listings to a buyer that meet his/her buying criteria, it is considered incompetence or misrepresentation.  What is it when a listing portal does the same thing without full disclosure?  Realtor.com does not put buyers in this quandary. 6. Finally, Realtor.com has been outsourced to a publicly traded company accountable to its shareholders for profitability.  This is a smart move because American capitalism and the profit motive will continue to drive improvements in Realtor.com. If NAR attempted to manage this site in-house, privately, outside of the public domain, I doubt it would still be such a clear market share leader.  The operating agreement with Move.com has obviously kept Realtor.com competitive while still retaining membership control.
“Stop. It. Now.” Is Realtor.com a friend or an enemy of the working Realtor?  Or is Realtor.com neither a friend or foe?  I think of a foe as someone who should be completely stopped and rendered completely ineffective.  Is Realtor.com (the website managed by MOVE for the National Association of Realtors) "against Realtors".  I don't think so.  Do I believe they sit around trying to figure out how to put real estate brokers and agents out of business (like some people and companies attempt).  No, in fact they want to keep brokers and agents in business, so we can keep paying them their continually increasing high prices.  As part of my full disclosure to you: have I just again renewed with them (at the old price) while they attempt to work out a "fair price" for everyone else?  Yes. Do I believe Realtor.com is factually attempting to help working Realtors and brokers?  No.  There is precisely no evidence of any kind to support such an idea.  Lots of meaningless statements but no factual evidence. Here is a post I wrote for BloodhoundBlog on the subject. (along with the original graphic of the Realtor.com Pencil Sharpener) Here is another but the graphic isn't nearly as "graphic".  The real problem is the flawed business model the mindless, unable to look at all into the future, people on the NAR board of directors set up in the first place.  The board that was sitting at the time got stock in Homestore (both as a corporate entity and as individual board members).  The fancy building NAR has in Washington, D.C. was paid for with money raised by selling that Homestore stock.  That sitting board GAVE OUR NAME AWAY (Realtor.com) to a for profit company.  Just gave it away.  That isn't how the minutes of that meeting read but that is pretty much what happened.  They allowed Homestore (the original name of the company - since changed to Move due to loads of scandals and bad press) to charge working Realtors for something that should be included FREE with our dues.  We each "get" a "free listing" on Realtor.com with one photo.  But if you want to add additional photos or a virtual tour, pay extra.  Pay extra for anything and everything you can possibly think of - just pile it on.  If you take the time to read the pencil sharpener post (I won't bother to repeat that content here) you can get the basic idea.  This is in sharp contrast to the Canadian MLS.  Canadian agents can add multiple photos, etc. (an "enhanced listing") free.  The entire site and all of the search features are all "free".  Free, in the sense that they are all simply included in the agent's dues to the Canadian Real Estate Association.  Take a few minutes and look over www.mls.ca.  Compare it to Realtor.com.  See anything different?  How about something missing?  Yes, people searching mls.ca have to suffer through page after page with missing ads.  Stop.  It.  Now.  Who wouldn't like to see cluttered page after cluttered page with ads across the top, along the sides and maybe at the bottom too?  Your listing comes up in a search and they can see an ad for some other agent or company too.  Just like lots of other sites, these people are trying to make money off of our listings - Yahoo, MSN, Zillow, Trulia, Google - and there are hundreds of others.  The difference is those other companies - who also fib (lie?) and say they are all "trying to help us" are simply and only for profit companies.  Anyone who thinks otherwise is too retarded to grasp anything that will matter.  Realtor.com isn't just "some real estate site".  It is OUR site.  My association.  Your association.  Who do you think "owns" NAR? What is the purpose of NAR?  Who does it represent?  Who is it supposed to represent?  Who is NAR supposed to be helping?  Read this again and then look at Realtor.com.  Does it really seem to align? Have I met people at MOVE or Realtor.com who weren't very nice?  Someone I didn't like?  No, none.  Everyone I've met and spoken to there has been polite, cheerful and when possible, helpful.  Am I sort of "mad at them".  Not one bit. Do I think it is wrong for them to want to make a profit?  Again, no. Do I think it is wrong that they have my name (our name), Realtor.com and use it to charge the highest possible price?  Yes.  I think it is a business model that is flawed so badly that it can never really be a true friend to the working Realtor.
Rebuttal I disagree with the position that Realtor.com® is not actively working to help Realtors®.  I think the operating agreement between Move & the NAR has succeeded in increasing the value of the association’s most valuable asset… an asset arguably worth more as an asset than that skyscraper with corner office views of the U.S. Capital Building that Russell mentioned.    Do I think it makes sense that it is a good policy that a standard listing on Realtor.com will only show 1 picture when they could show more at basically no cost to the site?  No, I don’t’… especially since you can find an article on Realtor.org only a couple clicks away encouraging Realtors® to use more pictures online since that is what customers want.  OK, granted. However,  let’s look closely at Russell’s comparison with The Canadian Association of Realtors® site: www.mls.ca.  Canada’s site is free and shows multiple pictures of homes by standard.  It also allows agents to add their own pictures next to their listings if they want, and both of these things are apparently free of charge.  Russell also noted an  absence of advertisements.  This is all one side of the equation, now let’s look at the other. Please see this screenshot when I searched the search phrase “Real Estate” on Google; Realtor.com comes up prominently in first position.  I also searched to hometown real estate markets: “Denver Real Estate” & “Colorado Springs Real Estate” and in both scenario’s Realtor.com came up in the 1st page results for both of these local real estate markets.  That is very powerful in terms of traffic generation for Realtor® listings and for branding. I then searched “Canada Real Estate” and www.mls.ca came up in the 4th position… behind: 1.        www.remax.ca - it must be nice to be in Remax in Canada 2.       www.propertysold.ca - which lists itself as the leading FSBO listing service, and 3.       www.coldwellbanker.ca - ditto to #1. PS - I know most people think that page rank is inconsequential but www.mls.ca shows a Google page rank of 1 out of 10… that’s lower than the website for my wife’s local scrapbooking club. Unless you are part of the 2nd mortgage brokerage or wear a gold jacket, this is not a good thing.  I also searched several provinces and Canadian cities and I did not find www.mls.ca on the first page for any of these. I think this proves the point that you get what you pay for.  If we as a Realtor® association want to keep our brand associated with the #1 destination for real estate information on the internet and want to personally benefit from that exposure, then we should not balk at paying for it. Or, we can make Realtor.com a not-for-profit resource and after sites like www.zillow.com, www.trulia.com, www.remax.com, etc. overtake the prime search engine “real estate,” we can pay them for the same type of exposure instead.
Rebuttal Brian has written his rebuttal to my original post.  Brian is not only a really nice guy, he is a really sharp guy.  But like Jay Thompson pointed out, it is going to take more than sharp to debate the pro position for Realtor.com.  And he doesn't.  He writes at length but does not address any of the points I raised.  This isn't to fault Brian, in fact, I welcome anyone, anywhere to address those points and show how Realtor.com is helping Realtors.  The roar of silence on this will be deafening.  No positive statement about Realtor.com really takes up the issue of what could be.  What could Realtor.com be?  If it were designed to create the maximum bang for the working Realtor's buck, how could it best help Realtors? Has anyone at NAR who was on any of the work groups that approved or oversees Realtor.com ever even asked a working Realtor what they might like?  You know that there are no actual working Realtors on those committees.  The very traits that would allow one to be a successful working Realtor practically preclude them from working their way through the existing morass to eventually wind up on such a committee.  So .... we have well intentioned and usually fairly bright people who wind up on the committees.  But the day to day "monitoring" is left to assigned permanent staff.  The very people who are good friends with the staff over at MOVE.  So the various price increases all seem totally alright. But aren't Trulia, Zillow, Homegain, Homes.com, Yahoo, Google and about a hundred other sites also just endlessly attempting (in one way or another) to raise their prices to whatever the traffic will bear?  Yes, absolutely.  And I've found it just ludicrous when any of them have tried to position themselves as "here to help Realtors".  They are all - each and every one of them - here to use Realtors in any way they can, to make as much profit as they possibly can.  Is any of that wrong?  No, not at all (just so long as they skip the BS "reasons" for their actions.  Wal-Mart doesn't have the "goal" of providing low prices to consumers.  Providing low prices to consumers is how they achieve their goal. So why do I have a completely different standard for Realtor.com?  Why is it totally alright with me for Homes.com to charge whatever price they think they can charge and still get an optimum number of agents to pay it?  Why don't I protest?  They have people on staff (just as they do over at MOVE) who can calculate the approximate number of agents who will not resign at certain price points.  They all know how to optimize their pricing structure so that they collect the maximum amount of money from the agent population. Same thing for me when buying radio or TV spots.  You might think that those prices are based on "ratings".  Only partly true.  For example, in a presidential election year the demand will soar.  So does the availability and the prices.  Some media companies don't even care what the ratings or number of spots available are - they are just hell bent on charging more every year, no matter what.  Either buy more from them or pay a higher price for the same thing.  So why don't I protest a giant ripoff like that?  I do - I just don't buy those spots.  I just don't buy from those stations.  That is the extent of my "protest".  They have every right to charge any price for their services and products that they see fit.  If MOVE wants to raise the price for the latest version of Top Producer it won't matter how high they raise it, you won't hear a peep out of me. Realtor.com is an extension of The National Association of Realtors.  The NAR has a very specific purpose - a "reason for existing".  The core purpose of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® is to help its members become more profitable and successful.  Read that again.  The purpose is to help Realtors be more successful.  How does setting up some outside company to take advantage of us even begin to align with that purpose? I want a system for all Realtors that is simply included with our annual dues.  One where all Realtors can "enhance their listings" with extra photos and virtual tours.  No ads.  None.  No zip codes for sale.  No special treatment for any company or agent.  It is our association.  Realtor.com is our name.  The name alone accounts for a huge amount of the traffic.  If the dues need to be raised to accomplish this - then raise the dues.  I want our site to be in real alignment with our purpose.  The core purpose of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® is to help its members become more profitable and successful.

The following poll is open from 02/11/08 to 02/18/08.

Opinion Polls & Market Research

What do Al Capone & your local Realtor® have in Common?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67P0zAzQw_4

They can both be taken down by the IRS.

Okay, sure, for different reasons, but it has escaped me why those who wish to re-engineer the real estate industry have not taken a page from the playbook of Eliot Ness.

Due only to the strength of the National Association of Realtors® trade association, “real estate agent” is the last exemption standing when it comes to payroll withholdings & payroll taxes. Your local Realtor® (like me) maintains the privilege that was lost by other powerful professional groups like attorneys & mortgage lenders to be paid by 1099 rather than be classified as an employee under tax law.

This is great for real estate agents for obvious reasons but the true benefit goes to the brokerages. If this final exemption to the payroll tax rules were to go away, imagine the consequences. The 125-man Keller Williams office on the corner would now have 125 W-2 employees and 125 paychecks with payroll taxes due every month… rain or shine.

Or would they?

Since half of those agents only close 0-1 transactions PER YEAR, it is much more likely that those agents who have not consistently closed at least one transaction per month would be “disinvited” from the brokerage in short order. This is how it works at mortgage brokerages that follow the payroll rules.

I also imagine that this would turn the brokerage economic model on its head. Most brokerages contract with Realtors® by taking a split of their commission, charging a monthly brokerage fee for support & services, or a combination of both. If brokerages had to budget for a “payday” each month, I think they would find it hard to manage the fixed expense of a payroll with the inconsistent revenue of real estate sales commissions… It is likely that brokerages would be forced to replicate commission models more similar to car dealerships and other salary + commission plans. This could easily translate into lower real estate commissions charged to the customer in exchange for a monthly marketing fee plus a bonus upon sale.

So for all of you who think that there are too many Realtors® who dilute the talent pool or think that Realtor® fees are too high, you may want to take your eggs out of the “divorcing commissions” basket or the “open access to the MLS” basket and instead pay a visit to your friendly local IRS agent.

- Brian Wilson

And in this corner...

The Great Debates, Vol. 1

The Real Estate Politics Manifesto

Real Estate Politics is a blog designed to host a balanced discussion of the real estate industry's most pressing issues led by many of real estate's most vocal thinkers and writers. Its lofty goal is to stir the pot of discussion in hopes of effecting change.

We choose not to avoid any given issue because of its potential for controversy, agitation or even lack thereof; instead, we choose to establish Real Estate Politics for the civil, level-headed discussion of such issues for the sake of education and betterment for all.

We declare courtesy and understanding as the foundation for meaningful discourse. Real Estate Politics is about issues, not people. A healthy respect for both is mandated.

The Great Debates:

The Great Debates exist to bring opposing viewpoints together to produce intelligent dialog on today's most controversial real estate industry issues. We have developed a simple yet effective pro/con format as follows:

• The topic is presented
• Two debaters are introduced
• They are provided ample room to present their arguments
• They are given an opportunity for rebuttal
• Each debate will end with a poll through which readers vote: "Who wins this debate?"

This format is intended to encourage discussion among readers. The polls are not meant to determine the ultimate authority on any given issue but rather to provide a means through which readers can join the discussion. Posts are also open for comment (see below).

Participants for The Great Debates are chosen by Real Estate Politics based on several criteria:

• Proven record of active participation in the blogosphere
• Proven record of thoughtful, courteous discussion within said blogosphere
• Proven record of having taken a meaningful stance on the given topic

If you would like to participate in The Great Debates and feel you are qualified based on the above criteria, and you are passionate about a topic you would like to see covered, please contact us at realestatepolitics@gmail.com.

Posts/Comments:

Posts not including The Great Debates are developed and written by members of Real Estate Politics. If you have an informed opinion and would like to contribute to Real Estate Politics, please contact us at realestatepolitics@gmail.com.

We reserve the right to moderate comments and posts for profanity and direct attacks on any person or group of people, neither of which will be tolerated. Transgressors will be contacted privately and warned; repeat transgressors will be banned from Real Estate Politics indefinitely. Anonymous comments are discouraged.

- Christopher Zabka