Regardless of where you stand (I tend to agree with Greg), it’s incredibly refreshing to see differing opinions presented so clearly and thoughtfully. Huge credit to Rob for fostering open debate, encouraging clear dialogue, and showcasing intelligent perspectives from people who truly understand the business. One thing is clear: Zillow’s decisions are driven by profit, not by a commitment to consumer fairness. Thank you, Rob and Greg!
I spent nearly 20 years in local television marketing. Pitching campaigns, fighting for ad dollars, and proving our value every single time. If we had ever told a client, “If you advertise anywhere else first, you’re banned from our airwaves forever,” we’d be laughed out of the building… and probably slapped with an antitrust suit. It feels to me, that’s exactly what Zillow’s doing. Greg’s right to call it out. This isn’t about protecting home sellers or buyers; it’s about protecting their monopoly. And once a platform starts deciding who gets seen and when, the client’s best interest goes out the window. The bottom line is the choice on how to market a home should be up to the homeowner and nobody else.
Compasss has never sued anyone in 13 years of being in the business. The only two lawsuits are against organizations that are fining (NWMLS) and banning (Zillow) agents for not marketing on their platforms. It’s not ok that agents are fined and banned for marketing off an mls or Zillow. The debate isn’t just about choice vs control or right vs wrong or the best interest in one group vs another. At the end of the day, what Compass is advocating for at the core is that agents should not be fined and band for how they marketing their client’s property.
This was the best comment I read yesterday: “This goes far beyond and Zillow - it's a test of whether innovation in real estate will be driven by open competition or dictated by gatekeepers. Zillow's alleged use of monopoly power to penalize agents and homeowners for marketing outside its ecosystem isn't just anti-competitive-it undermines the very foundation of a free market. Imagine a future where every dominant platform enforces similar restrictions: Amazon banning sellers who list on Shopify, or Google de-indexing businesses that advertise elsewhere. It's the slow death of optionality, disguised as policy.”
Thank you, Rob and Greg, for taking the time to share your thoughts on this issue.
What I find most frustrating is how Zillow continues to position itself as the authority on how real estate professionals should conduct their business. We are the ones who understand what’s best for our clients—both buyers and sellers. Zillow’s primary concern is protecting its own bottom line, and now it's using the guise of “clear cooperation” to do so, simply because it threatens their profit model.
Zillow has grown too powerful and is now overstepping its role. I completely agree with Greg and Compass—let the professionals do what’s right for our clients.
Greg's perspective and outlook are something we all should take note of as it will impact our business going forward. The evolution of the real estate industry is changing rapidly, and we sometimes don't see the whole picture. Zillow in my opinion has overstepped its boundaries placing its profits above what is best for the consumer. Imagine a competitor telling you how to run your business? As a 32-year veteran in the business this is something we should all take a position on. Thank you Greg Hague and Robert Reffkin for taking a stance!
What we are seeing right now before our very own eyes is change. I have spent my entire career in media sales and advertising with NBC, CBS and FOX throughout the West Coast. Currently my career is focused in the real estate sector, but as I see all this play out, I can't help but think of my career and other industries trying to force people how to market. I can't imagine Cars.com or Autotrader ever telling dealerships that if they didn't list their used cars on their platform within 24 hours they would never be allowed to do it. It just doesn't seem right. Thank you Robert and Greg for standing up for the consumer who often times gets left behind and isn't thought of. In a day and age where we talk about protecting the consumer with their data and privacy, etc. this is a big move in an industry that has seen some dramatic change in the last few years.
I've been in the industry for years and oversee the growth and revenue for a national real estate company. It's nice to see Hague and Reffkin sending a message that Zillow is a vendor... NOT our boss!
As someone who’s devoted four decades to this industry and has trained thousands of agents, I felt compelled to speak up after reading Greg Hague’s courageous article. Greg is saying what far too many in our profession have been afraid to say out loud. With clarity and conviction, he’s exposing how the policies cloaked in “fairness” and “consumer protection” are, in truth, undermining the very principles of fiduciary duty, client advocacy, and professional judgment that define our role as licensed real estate professionals.
He is absolutely right! Agents are not order takers. We are trained advisors. Our clients deserve options, discretion, and strategic guidance tailored to their needs, not one-size-fits-all mandates handed down by institutions more interested in control and profit than true representation.
I applaud both Greg and Rob for putting this message out there. They have sparked a conversation we all need to be having, one that challenges the status quo, champions agent autonomy, and re-centers our industry around the people we’re here to serve: our clients.
Thank you, Greg. Your leadership matters, Your voice matters! Keep speaking out, for this really matters to the future of our industry!
Greg, this is a powerful and necessary piece. Thank you—and thank you to Rob for giving space to voices who care about the future of this industry. Most of all, thank you both for fighting the good fight.
I’ve been in this business for decades and have battled Zillow for over ten years. What started as a tool has turned into a titan—a platform that no longer serves agents, but exploits them.
I used to buy their leads. They were recycled and resold to multiple agents, turning every transaction into a bidding war of who could respond fastest—not who could serve best. It was chaotic, overpriced, and never built for agent success.
Today, even my own listings—won through trust, strategy, and effort—get hijacked. Zillow strips my name, sells the lead to another agent, and turns my work into their profit. And now, with this 24-hour policy, they’re locking out any agent or seller who doesn’t play by their rules.
Let’s be clear: this isn’t about fairness or transparency. This is about power and control. Zillow has spent years undermining agents while feeding off our labor and marketing dollars.
I fully support Compass’s legal action. Your breakdown of the antitrust implications is razor sharp. This could very well become the most pivotal case in modern real estate.
Zillow has positioned itself as a gatekeeper—not a partner. If this lawsuit breaks their grip and restores balance to the industry, I welcome it fully.
This isn’t just a lawsuit—it’s a reckoning. And it’s long overdue.
Thank you, Greg and Rob, for your insight and for being such strong advocates in our industry. We truly appreciate your efforts in standing up for both sellers and fellow Realtors.
Interesting read, but I think there’s some contortion here—trying to frame Zillow through the lens of regulated monopolies like telecom or airlines. That doesn’t really hold. Zillow isn’t a product of government policy; it’s a result of consumer demand and market forces. It dominates the pipeline, sure—but it doesn’t control it. People choose Zillow because it works.
What’s missing is that Tech platforms are arguably the only real disruption in real estate since the MLS (also a tech disruptor) was created. And no one would argue the MLS was ever designed with consumer transparency as the top priority.
There’s also some exaggeration in the argument that moral outrage could be launched against Zillow for “using sellers as bait” to sell leads. That knife cuts both ways. Brokers have used listings to generate leads forever—it’s not unique to Zillow, and it’s not new.
And if we’re going to talk about anti-competitive behavior, let’s not ignore that Compass and others are trying to drag price discovery back into a dark room. Their real complaint seems to be that Zillow did a better job using the data that brokers themselves agreed to share—until it stopped working in their favor.
Is Zillow’s “platform lockout” rule bad? Probably. But it started with NAR and brokerages like Compass. If it was okay then, what makes it monopolistic now?
At most, the right remedy here is for the court to bar anyone from locking consumers out—Zillow, Compass, whoever. But let’s not pretend one player invented the game just because they’re excelling at it.
If Zillow were to mount an "industry alignment with CCP" defense, there are numerous aspects of ZLAS that Compass can point to that are far more restrictive than CCP. Your prediction of the downfall of CCP is fascinating — if successful I imagine this case provides a pretty solid blueprint for taking down CCP as well. We will be watching attentively to see how it all plays out. Thank you Rob & Greg for such insightful & diverse perspectives on this issue.
This is the most insightful, well referenced, and articulated pieces I've seen in the real estate industry. I find the vision here, while not guaranteed, is comprehensive and fairly points out the arguments and counter arguments. At the end of the day, why shouldn't a Seller of a home have his or her home marketed in any way they choose? After all, the Seller pays for the home and maintains it. If the absolute true motivation is to benefit the homeowner, then it is essential that that the homeowner has the freedom of choice of how their home is marketed!
I couldn’t agree more with Greg’s insights & the high probability of a negotiated settlement. Zillow is doing the antithesis of what they claim -protecting the consumer by dictating the way THEIR home can be marketed by THEIR chosen professional?
The real estate landscape is indeed shifting. Those who adapt quickly will undoubtedly seize the greatest opportunities. It’s fascinating to see how disruptors, like those you mentioned—Amazon and Airbnb—have transformed their industries, and it’s clear that real estate is on a similar trajectory.
Regardless of where you stand (I tend to agree with Greg), it’s incredibly refreshing to see differing opinions presented so clearly and thoughtfully. Huge credit to Rob for fostering open debate, encouraging clear dialogue, and showcasing intelligent perspectives from people who truly understand the business. One thing is clear: Zillow’s decisions are driven by profit, not by a commitment to consumer fairness. Thank you, Rob and Greg!
I spent nearly 20 years in local television marketing. Pitching campaigns, fighting for ad dollars, and proving our value every single time. If we had ever told a client, “If you advertise anywhere else first, you’re banned from our airwaves forever,” we’d be laughed out of the building… and probably slapped with an antitrust suit. It feels to me, that’s exactly what Zillow’s doing. Greg’s right to call it out. This isn’t about protecting home sellers or buyers; it’s about protecting their monopoly. And once a platform starts deciding who gets seen and when, the client’s best interest goes out the window. The bottom line is the choice on how to market a home should be up to the homeowner and nobody else.
Compasss has never sued anyone in 13 years of being in the business. The only two lawsuits are against organizations that are fining (NWMLS) and banning (Zillow) agents for not marketing on their platforms. It’s not ok that agents are fined and banned for marketing off an mls or Zillow. The debate isn’t just about choice vs control or right vs wrong or the best interest in one group vs another. At the end of the day, what Compass is advocating for at the core is that agents should not be fined and band for how they marketing their client’s property.
Robert - Thank you for doing what needed to be done. The industry will look back in appreciation.
Thank you for standing up for our industry when no one else is willing to do so.
This was the best comment I read yesterday: “This goes far beyond and Zillow - it's a test of whether innovation in real estate will be driven by open competition or dictated by gatekeepers. Zillow's alleged use of monopoly power to penalize agents and homeowners for marketing outside its ecosystem isn't just anti-competitive-it undermines the very foundation of a free market. Imagine a future where every dominant platform enforces similar restrictions: Amazon banning sellers who list on Shopify, or Google de-indexing businesses that advertise elsewhere. It's the slow death of optionality, disguised as policy.”
Thank you, Rob and Greg, for taking the time to share your thoughts on this issue.
What I find most frustrating is how Zillow continues to position itself as the authority on how real estate professionals should conduct their business. We are the ones who understand what’s best for our clients—both buyers and sellers. Zillow’s primary concern is protecting its own bottom line, and now it's using the guise of “clear cooperation” to do so, simply because it threatens their profit model.
Zillow has grown too powerful and is now overstepping its role. I completely agree with Greg and Compass—let the professionals do what’s right for our clients.
Greg's perspective and outlook are something we all should take note of as it will impact our business going forward. The evolution of the real estate industry is changing rapidly, and we sometimes don't see the whole picture. Zillow in my opinion has overstepped its boundaries placing its profits above what is best for the consumer. Imagine a competitor telling you how to run your business? As a 32-year veteran in the business this is something we should all take a position on. Thank you Greg Hague and Robert Reffkin for taking a stance!
Well said Greg! Thanks
What we are seeing right now before our very own eyes is change. I have spent my entire career in media sales and advertising with NBC, CBS and FOX throughout the West Coast. Currently my career is focused in the real estate sector, but as I see all this play out, I can't help but think of my career and other industries trying to force people how to market. I can't imagine Cars.com or Autotrader ever telling dealerships that if they didn't list their used cars on their platform within 24 hours they would never be allowed to do it. It just doesn't seem right. Thank you Robert and Greg for standing up for the consumer who often times gets left behind and isn't thought of. In a day and age where we talk about protecting the consumer with their data and privacy, etc. this is a big move in an industry that has seen some dramatic change in the last few years.
I've been in the industry for years and oversee the growth and revenue for a national real estate company. It's nice to see Hague and Reffkin sending a message that Zillow is a vendor... NOT our boss!
As someone who’s devoted four decades to this industry and has trained thousands of agents, I felt compelled to speak up after reading Greg Hague’s courageous article. Greg is saying what far too many in our profession have been afraid to say out loud. With clarity and conviction, he’s exposing how the policies cloaked in “fairness” and “consumer protection” are, in truth, undermining the very principles of fiduciary duty, client advocacy, and professional judgment that define our role as licensed real estate professionals.
He is absolutely right! Agents are not order takers. We are trained advisors. Our clients deserve options, discretion, and strategic guidance tailored to their needs, not one-size-fits-all mandates handed down by institutions more interested in control and profit than true representation.
I applaud both Greg and Rob for putting this message out there. They have sparked a conversation we all need to be having, one that challenges the status quo, champions agent autonomy, and re-centers our industry around the people we’re here to serve: our clients.
Thank you, Greg. Your leadership matters, Your voice matters! Keep speaking out, for this really matters to the future of our industry!
Greg, this is a powerful and necessary piece. Thank you—and thank you to Rob for giving space to voices who care about the future of this industry. Most of all, thank you both for fighting the good fight.
I’ve been in this business for decades and have battled Zillow for over ten years. What started as a tool has turned into a titan—a platform that no longer serves agents, but exploits them.
I used to buy their leads. They were recycled and resold to multiple agents, turning every transaction into a bidding war of who could respond fastest—not who could serve best. It was chaotic, overpriced, and never built for agent success.
Today, even my own listings—won through trust, strategy, and effort—get hijacked. Zillow strips my name, sells the lead to another agent, and turns my work into their profit. And now, with this 24-hour policy, they’re locking out any agent or seller who doesn’t play by their rules.
Let’s be clear: this isn’t about fairness or transparency. This is about power and control. Zillow has spent years undermining agents while feeding off our labor and marketing dollars.
I fully support Compass’s legal action. Your breakdown of the antitrust implications is razor sharp. This could very well become the most pivotal case in modern real estate.
Zillow has positioned itself as a gatekeeper—not a partner. If this lawsuit breaks their grip and restores balance to the industry, I welcome it fully.
This isn’t just a lawsuit—it’s a reckoning. And it’s long overdue.
Thank you, Greg and Rob, for your insight and for being such strong advocates in our industry. We truly appreciate your efforts in standing up for both sellers and fellow Realtors.
Interesting read, but I think there’s some contortion here—trying to frame Zillow through the lens of regulated monopolies like telecom or airlines. That doesn’t really hold. Zillow isn’t a product of government policy; it’s a result of consumer demand and market forces. It dominates the pipeline, sure—but it doesn’t control it. People choose Zillow because it works.
What’s missing is that Tech platforms are arguably the only real disruption in real estate since the MLS (also a tech disruptor) was created. And no one would argue the MLS was ever designed with consumer transparency as the top priority.
There’s also some exaggeration in the argument that moral outrage could be launched against Zillow for “using sellers as bait” to sell leads. That knife cuts both ways. Brokers have used listings to generate leads forever—it’s not unique to Zillow, and it’s not new.
And if we’re going to talk about anti-competitive behavior, let’s not ignore that Compass and others are trying to drag price discovery back into a dark room. Their real complaint seems to be that Zillow did a better job using the data that brokers themselves agreed to share—until it stopped working in their favor.
Is Zillow’s “platform lockout” rule bad? Probably. But it started with NAR and brokerages like Compass. If it was okay then, what makes it monopolistic now?
At most, the right remedy here is for the court to bar anyone from locking consumers out—Zillow, Compass, whoever. But let’s not pretend one player invented the game just because they’re excelling at it.
If Zillow were to mount an "industry alignment with CCP" defense, there are numerous aspects of ZLAS that Compass can point to that are far more restrictive than CCP. Your prediction of the downfall of CCP is fascinating — if successful I imagine this case provides a pretty solid blueprint for taking down CCP as well. We will be watching attentively to see how it all plays out. Thank you Rob & Greg for such insightful & diverse perspectives on this issue.
This is the most insightful, well referenced, and articulated pieces I've seen in the real estate industry. I find the vision here, while not guaranteed, is comprehensive and fairly points out the arguments and counter arguments. At the end of the day, why shouldn't a Seller of a home have his or her home marketed in any way they choose? After all, the Seller pays for the home and maintains it. If the absolute true motivation is to benefit the homeowner, then it is essential that that the homeowner has the freedom of choice of how their home is marketed!
I couldn’t agree more with Greg’s insights & the high probability of a negotiated settlement. Zillow is doing the antithesis of what they claim -protecting the consumer by dictating the way THEIR home can be marketed by THEIR chosen professional?
The real estate landscape is indeed shifting. Those who adapt quickly will undoubtedly seize the greatest opportunities. It’s fascinating to see how disruptors, like those you mentioned—Amazon and Airbnb—have transformed their industries, and it’s clear that real estate is on a similar trajectory.