It’s
a
story
of
frustration
that
many
buyers
and
agents
can
relate
to.
Buyers
repeatedly
reaching
out
to
listing
agents
to
see
properties,
only
to
receive
no
response.
Calls
go
unanswered,
questions
linger
and
access
to
homes
stalled.

That
frustration
is
real
and
deserves
acknowledgment.
Consumers
should
expect
timely
communication
and
professional
conduct.
Where
the
conversation
becomes
complicated
is
in
the
conclusion
being
drawn
from
that
experience.

The
implied
solution
is
that
because
some
listing
agents
fail
to
respond,

portals
are
justified
in
redirecting
buyer
inquiries
to
other,
“better
trained”
agents
who

pay
for
those

leads.
While
that
idea
may
feel
practical,
it
raises
deeper
questions
about
ownership,
accountability
and
who
should
control
the
consumer
relationship.

Credit
where
it’s
due:
the
phrase

“Your
Listing,
Your
Lead”
was
coined
and
promoted
by

Homes.com,
a

portal
that
has
taken
a
notably
pro-Realtor
approach.
Unlike
pay-to-play
platforms
that
divert
inquiries
to
advertisers,
Homes.com
made
a
deliberate
decision
to
route
inquiries
directly
to
the
listing
agent.

That
position
is
not
about
entitlement
or
protectionism.
It
is
about

responsibility
and
transparency.
When
an
agent
earns
a
listing,
that
agent
accepts
both
the
benefits
and
the
obligations
that
come
with
it
—
including
being
accessible
to
the
marketplace.

This
distinction
matters
because
it
highlights
the
real
issue

What
buyers
are
experiencing
is
not
a
structural
failure
of
“Your
Listing,
Your
Lead.”
It
is
a

service
failure
rooted
in
inconsistent
professionalism
and
weak

enforcement
of
standards.

A
structural
failure
would
suggest
the
system
itself
is
flawed.
A
service
failure
means
the
framework
works,
but
the
people
operating
within
it
are
not
meeting
expectations.
Confusing
the
two
allows
poor
performance
to
justify
shifting
control
elsewhere.

When
those
obligations
are
not
met,
the
structure
has
not
failed.

The
performance
has.
The
appropriate
response
to
performance
failure
is
accountability,
not
redistribution.

Consider
a
simple
analogy:
Imagine
a
restaurant
where
a
customer
sits
down
and
cannot
get
the
waiter’s
attention.
Service
is
slow,
the
experience
frustrating,
expectations
unmet.

No
reasonable
person
would
conclude
that
the
solution
is
to
send
that
customer
to
a
waiter
from
a
different
restaurant.
The
logical
response
would
be
to
fix
the
service
problem
inside
the
restaurant.
The
customer
deserves
better
service,
but
the
restaurant
does
not
lose
ownership
of
the
table.

Correct
the
service
issue

Redirecting
buyer
inquiries
away
from
the
listing
agent
follows
the
opposite
logic.
Instead
of
correcting
the
service
issue,
it
removes
the
consumer
relationship
and
sells
it
to
someone
else.
That
is
not
accountability;
it
is

monetizing
failure.

Portals
did
not
move
away
from
direct
listing
inquiries
because
the
concept
harmed
consumers.
They
moved
away
because
it
limited
monetization.
Listings
are
finite,
while
buyer
inquiries
can
be
sold
repeatedly.

By
reframing
the
issue
as
consumer
protection,
platforms
positioned
themselves
as
the
solution
to

agent
underperformance.
The
narrative
shifted
to
the
idea
that
listing
agents
cannot
be
trusted
to
respond,
and
therefore
the
platform
should
decide
who
represents
the
buyer.
That
transferred
control
from
brokers
and

MLSs
to
companies
whose
primary
incentive
is
selling
access.

That
framing
resonated
because
it
was
built
on
real
frustration.
But
acknowledging
frustration
does
not
require
accepting
a
solution
that
creates
new
problems
while
failing
to
solve
the
original
one.

What
are
the
real
solutions?

The
core
issue
remains

performance,
not
ownership.
If
listing
agents
are
not
responsive,
that
is
unacceptable
and
should
be
addressed
directly.
The
answer
is
not
to
auction
inquiry
ownership
to
paying
agents.

The
real
solutions
are
far
less
glamorous,
but
far
more
effective:

• 
  Minimum
  service
  standards
• 
  Required
  response
  times
• 
  Broker
  accountability
• 
  MLS-enforced
  professionalism
• 
  Consumer
  complaints
  tied
  directly
  to
  licensure

These
measures
focus
on
improving
behavior
rather
than
bypassing
it.
They
reinforce
the
idea
that
representation
is
earned
through
competence
and
responsibility,
not
purchased
through
advertising
budgets.

Blaming
“Your
Listing,
Your
Lead”
for
poor
service
is
like
blaming
the
steering
wheel
when
a
driver
stops
paying
attention.
The
tool
is
not
at
fault;
the
person
using
it
is.

Diverting
listing
inquiries
actually
harms
consumers

One
consequence
that
is
often
overlooked:
redirecting
buyer
inquiries
away
from
the
listing
agent
can
actually

worsen
the
consumer
experience.
While
framed
as
protection,
lead
diversion
often
introduces
delay,
confusion
and
misalignment
at
critical
moments.

The
listing
agent
typically
has
the
most
complete
and
accurate
information
about
the
property.
When
inquiries
are
diverted,
buyers
are
routed
to
agents
who
may
not
have
seen
the
home,
do
not
know
the
seller’s
motivations
and
lack
insight
into
timing,
availability,
or
offer
dynamics.

In
practice,
lead
diversion
often
results
in:

• 
  Slower
  response
  times,
  as
  inquiries
  pass
  through
  multiple
  parties
• 
  Less
  accurate
  information,
  due
  to
  lack
  of
  property
  familiarity
• 
  Missed
  opportunities,
  particularly
  in
  competitive
  situations
• 
  Confusion
  about
  representation,
  leaving
  buyers
  unclear
  who
  actually
  represents
  them

There
is
also
a

transparency
issue.
Many
consumers
believe
they
are
contacting
the
listing
agent
when
they
click
an
inquiry
button,
unaware
their
inquiry
is
being
sold
and
rerouted.
That
misunderstanding
alone
erodes
trust.

Direct
connection
to
the
listing
agent
provides
faster
answers
and
clearer
information.
When
standards
are
enforced
and
professionalism
is
expected
that
connection
benefits
both
buyers
and
sellers.

The
problem
is
not
who
receives
the
inquiry.
It
is
whether
the
professional
receiving
it
is
held
to
meaningful
standards.
Diverting
inquiries
treats
the
symptom
while
worsening
the
issue.

“Your
Listing,
Your
Lead”
did
not
fail.
Professional
standards
failed.

Homes.com
was
right
to
emphasize
ownership
and
accountability.
The
answer
is
not
to
abandon
that
principle,
but
to
uphold
it.

Fix
the
service.
Enforce
the
standards.
Don’t
sell
the
table.

Darryl
Davis,
CSP,
has
spoken
to,
trained,
and
coached
more
than
600,000
real
estate
professionals
around
the
globe.
He
is
a
bestselling
author
for
McGraw-Hill
Publishing,
and
his
book, How
to
Become
a
Power
Agent
in
Real
Estate,
tops
Amazon’s
charts
for
most
sold
book
to
real
estate
agents.

This
column
does
not
necessarily
reflect
the
opinion
of
HousingWire’s
editorial
department
and
its
owners.

To
contact
the
editor
responsible
for
this
piece: [email protected]