One of the best parts of BHB for me, is taking the ideas and the round tablediscussions that happen here and bringing them to the street. (I must admit an occasional guilty pleasure taken, when I use the knowledge I glean from BHB to steer and even dominate these discussions. I am shamelessly looking forward to Unchained, that I might return a 600lb gorilla in gorilla marketing.) There has been some very interesting debate recently, both here and on other blogs, over the valuation of real estate services. It is a tough dialogue because large amounts of money are involved and strong feelings abound.
But asking the agents I work with what they think of the NAR, their sense on the moral obligation of a contract and how they value their services opens up new view points and sheds more light on these issues. Recently I was talking to a Realtor I know and respect about how to answer the question of commission and agent value. Now, there may be many right answers to this question; but I have yet to hear one that cannot be debated and diminished. Not due so much to anyone’s superior skills as a wordsmith but rather the multi-faceted nature of the topic. This agent and I, however, after deciding that the premise of the question itself was suspect, eventually decided that there is one answer that is inarguable, morally justified and epistemologically sound. The very simple answer to the question of how one justifies their commission is this:
I am a real estate agent and, by definition, an entrepreneur. I am in business to make a profit. I charge what the market will bear.
Dear real estate agent,
To understand what MLS’s primary function is, you need to go back to the beginning. The first MLS predates the founding of NAR by more than 20 years. It goes all the way back to 
