Datashare Ends: How Did We Get Here?

UpdateDatashareIn light of REcolorado terminating the CCM Data Share Agreement as of March 2nd, 2017, after 14 years of successful collaboration, we wanted to take a moment to outline the events of the past few months.

11/15/16 – Joint meeting of IRES Managers and REcolorado Directors met at the REcolorado offices. Presentation made about REcolorado.  IRES voiced our opinion that data sharing should continue.

12/07/16 – An unsolicited offer from REcolorado to purchase IRES was presented to IRES Managers.  A meeting with the five IRES Board/Association owners was promptly scheduled for 12/19/16.  (The deadline to respond to the original offer was 12/30/16.)

12/19/16 – IRES Managers met with 2-3 representatives from each owner Board/Association to review the offer from REcolorado.  All agreed more time was needed, therefore, an extension was requested and granted until 1/31/17.

1/11/17 – IRES Managers reviewed the offer from REcolorado, including an in depth discussion exploring priorities, options, and alternatives. A follow up meeting with IRES owners was scheduled for 1/30/17.

1/30/17 – A meeting was held with the IRES owners (i.e. the Board of Directors for each IRES owner Board/Association) and IRES Managers.  The IRES Board of Managers recommendation was discussed. There was a unanimous approval from IRES owners to support the decision to decline the offer from REcolorado and continue dialogue with more MLSs in the state regarding the “Colorado Conversation”, including IRES funding of $50K to cover meeting and travel expenses for MLS administrators in Colorado.

1/30/17 – IRES provided our response to REcolorado regarding their purchase offer and suggested REcolorado participate in the proposed “Colorado Conversation” including financial support if they so desired. The IRES response also urged REcolorado to continue data sharing with the following statement:

“Finally, based on the broad input and support from garlicchive3IRES subscribers, we formally request REcolorado reconsider discontinuing data sharing for the foreseeable future and join us in collectively discussing the best path forward.”

2/1/17 – IRES received the notice of termination of data sharing from REcolorado, to be effective 3/2/17.

2/8/17 – A Broker Forum meeting was held in Denver, organized by Greg Zadel, Chris Mygatt and Alan Lovitt. IRES Managers and staff were invited to attend along with several large brokerages. Consultant Kevin McQueen made a presentation and brokers reinforced the need for uninterrupted access to information (e.g. data sharing).  The majority of IRES Managers attended as well as Lauren Hansen, IRES CEO.

2/14/17 – A letter to IRES, REcolorado and PPAR, signed by 20+ large brokers, is received and requests:

1.  Maintain or re-establish reliable data sharing between the three above mentioned MLS’s as quickly as possible and until such time that a single property database is available.

2.  Cause the creation of the single database no later than January 1, 2018 to enable us to do our jobs, serve our clients and remain relevant and valuable to the people who pay us.

3.  Present the three front range MLSs and their Shareholder Boards of Directors with their best recommendations and collaborative plan no later than June 1, 2017, to create a single common property database for our ongoing use.

2/22-17 – Special meeting of IRES Managers to formulate response to (2/14/17) letter from large brokers.

2/22/17IRES responds to organizers of the Broker Forum and letter from large brokers stating: IRES is in agreement with all three points noted and will support efforts to explore solutions. We look forward to the next steps.”

2/27/17 – IRES receives word that REcolorado Board of Directors stands by their decision to end data sharing as of 3/2/17.


16 thoughts on “Datashare Ends: How Did We Get Here?

  1. Oh well, you tried! I honestly don’t think it will hurt my business at all. In my 27 years I have sold only 2 Metrolist listings. These sales were about 15 years ago, long before the data sharing ever began. One was in Littleton and the other in Parker!

  2. Very unfortunate RE Colorado has taken this position. This will have a huge impact on those of us that cover the areas that overlap such as Frederick, Firestone, Erie, Broomfield, Thornton etc. Looks like I’ll have to join a 2nd MLS in order to have access to data.

    1. When IRES users entered listings into the above mentioned areas, primarily located in the Denver Metro area based on NAR’s boundaries; REColorado users were at an extreme disadvantage due to the incomplete data provided to REColorado users from IRES. NOW you are finally needing to join two. We’ve needed to join both for a very long time.

  3. I am so totally disheartened by REColorado’s response. As Realtors we work in a cooperative environment. REColorado’s attitude is anything but that. What’s the hurry? Why do we need to learn a new system in the busy season? Why the bullying? Why are they hurting their own “revenue units” as well as those of us in “the north?” Why do they care so little about the consumer? Looks like we will all be using Zillow.

    1. Sadly all REColorado subscribers who worked in overlapping areas needed both systems for a very long time. Sadly, according to this blog, the ‘other side of the story’ isn’t being published.

  4. All of the MLS providers are so irrelevant, it’s sad any of them exist. How about low cost or free MLS access, one state MLS system, and uninterrupted syndication to every single estate website in existence. Agents and brokerages could choose how they want to syndicate. How about robust methods for builders to advertise on the MLS as well? How about an interface that doesn’t look like it’s over 10 years old?

    I’m hoping it’s only a matter of time before these changes are made.

    1. When you say free system – who pays for that? Technology platforms are extremely expensive. I’d like free cable, telephone and electricity too. As for one system, that is where the industry is going. In response to public demand. That is precisely why the data share agreement was failing. It harms only the brokers and the public. Zillow and REDFIN are thrilled at all this infighting.

  5. This was REColorado’s objective from the gitgo. Hopefully there will be a leadership housecleaning in the not too distant future driven by the rank and file who have been hurt by this.

    1. You couldn’t be more wrong. Their customers demanded it. We were tired of being forced to join two, because IRES withheld too much urgent data from REColorado subscribers.

  6. This is such an unbusiness like behavior. Not every offer is ever accepted and yet REColorado, makes an offer and pulls the plug when they don’t get their way. Who does this behavior benefit? Not the real estate agents who use this service. Not the sellers who depend on maximum exposure. REColorado is trying to help the competition he claims he wants to harm. Did he think it through?

    1. The data share agreement was only helping IRES subscribers. It was hurting REColorado subscribers because IRES was withholding data we needed. Many of us in overlapping areas had no choice but to join both. You are lucky you never had to. Now welcome to our world.

  7. Thank you IRES for your strong efforts. ReColorado has some of the most unethical and incompetent people I have ever come across in real estate. They have extremely poor communication and in my experience, do not honor their own membership policies for commercial appraisers and brokers. I hope there will be data share possibilities in the future to assist professionals in real estate, but I refuse to join ReColorado due to many of their unethical and dishonest practices that I have experienced first-hand.

    1. Your perception is grossly false. This has been a one sided agreement for many years. It benefited the IRES users while hurting REColorado users. So many of us were simply tired of being forced into two systems because of incomplete data being provided by IRES to REColorado users. Management at REColorado simply responded to years of overwhelming complaints of a lopsided agreement. Sadly, no opposing opinions seem to get published.

  8. Those of us who work in overlapping areas on the REColorado side have been forced to join both long before all this this erupted because of the inaccurate data provided to REColorado users from IRES. Agreement has been very one sided. Duplicates became extremely problematic. Especially when data differed between the two. Likely why many IRES users are impacted now more than REColorado users. REColorado users have always had to use two systems where IRES users didn’t. Seems like exclusive IRES users are not aware of the real issues, as data share has worked well on their side. It is shocking that the perception is that REColorado are the bad guys. Or unethical. They simply responded to the MANY complaints from those of us required to join both in order to do business. Data share was not working. Mostly because of the pertinent data (like listing history and supplements) that IRES withheld from REColorado users. These posts are handpicked to steer opinion in one direction. Many posts are not displayed. It is unfortunate this attitude is being steered fostered and encouraged. This divided shared community is hurting the public’s perception of our industry. All they see is fragmentation. They don’t care about industry politics.

  9. I will try to be cautiously optimistic about the merger. I know lots of professional and caring people have worked very hard at keeping the wheels on this wagon. Good luck to us all.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: