If you’re not in real estate, you might not be familiar with the National Association of Realtors' (NAR) Clear Cooperation Policy (CCP). Enforced by many Multiple Listing Services (MLS), CCP ensures home listings are accessible to all buyers and agents, preventing properties from being secretly marketed within select groups. The goal? Maximum exposure for sellers, transparency for buyers, and a competitive marketplace that drives the best outcomes.
Historically, when real estate agents and brokerages have operated without oversight, unethical practices have thrived. Realtors played a central role in some of the worst housing discrimination in U.S. history—steering, blockbusting, and systemic exclusion—until regulations forced change. This is no different. Without policies like CCP, the financial incentive to prioritize self-interest over clients' best interests becomes impossible to ignore. If agents and brokerages can double their income by keeping deals off the MLS and selling them in-house, what do you think publicly traded companies—beholden to shareholders, not consumers—will do?
Compass CEO Robert Reffkin and reality TV star Mauricio Umansky, CEO of The Agency, are leading the charge to dismantle CCP under the misleading banner of "consumer choice." Reffkin has appeared on Bloomberg, CNBC, and other outlets recently, supposedly promoting a new app, but primarily pushing the narrative that CCP harms sellers. The data, however, tells a different story: homes listed on the MLS sell for 17% more than those that don’t.
One of their key arguments? Builders and developers—“the most sophisticated sellers”—sell 300,000+ homes annually without MLS rules. But this is highly misleading. Builders have internal sales teams, invest millions in marketing, leverage MLS by listing representative homes, not every single lot, to drive traffic, and offer agent bonuses when sales slow—proving broad exposure is key to selling homes. Unlike brokerages, builders sell their own inventory, not client-owned properties, so there is no conflict of interest.
They also argue that syndicating listings to Zillow, Redfin, and Realtor.com harms sellers by exposing unfavorable information like Walk Scores, price history, or days on market. Yet in reality, sellers and agents want listings on these platforms. More visibility means more competition—and competition drives better results for sellers.
At 2:50 in this interview, Reffkin lays out a new three-phase marketing plan for Compass sellers. The only real change? Phase 1 keeps listings exclusive to Compass agents before broader market exposure. This internal-first approach raises major concerns:
In the end, if Brokerages can control a certain percentage of the market share, we become gate keepers with incentives not aligned with our sellers or buyers best interest.
If off-MLS sales were truly in a seller’s best interest, builders wouldn’t pour millions into marketing or rely on MLS traffic to sell homes. The fact that they do exposes the hypocrisy of this argument.
Weakening CCP disproportionately benefits brokerages over consumers. Fewer buyers competing means lower prices for sellers and fewer options for buyers. Transparency matters, and consumers should be wary of any attempt to dismantle it under the guise of “choice.”
Be weary of any Brokerage who encourages an in house sales strategy that does not expose your home to the full marketplace.
Protecting Clear Cooperation isn’t about preserving rules—it’s about ensuring a fair, competitive, and transparent marketplace. Let’s not be misled into thinking otherwise.