In a new case study, Carolina One Real Estate details how it consolidated its tech stack with Rechat, streamlined workflows across 18 offices, and achieved a 65 percent agent adoption rate, all while strengthening its people-first culture.

President and CEO Michael Scarafile understood that adoption depends on ease of use. “There are some things that will allow agents to do 47 different things, but they’re not going to do 47 different things,” he said. “I’d rather focus on doing 10 or 12 things really well and getting a much higher adoption level, which we really have with Rechat.”

From Chaos to Clarity

Before Rechat, Carolina One’s agents used a patchwork of systems that fragmented their work and diluted the company’s culture. Rechat changed that by merging marketing, CRM, MLS integration, and AI-powered content creation into one cohesive platform. The shift helped agents focus more on people and less on process, a perfect fit for a brokerage that has built its reputation on relationships.

Results at a glance:

• 65% agent adoption, far above the industry average
• Agents voluntarily pay for Rechat, signaling true satisfaction
• AI assistant “Lucy” cuts marketing creation time from hours to minutes
• Unified communication and branding across 18 offices
• Lower tech costs, with one agent noting Rechat costs less than Canva
• 1,200+ agents working under one connected system

A Simpler Way Forward

Carolina One’s results show that efficiency and culture don’t have to compete. The right platform can elevate both. By focusing on simplicity, leadership built a framework where agents feel empowered, clients stay connected, and the brokerage thrives.

For brokerages focused on connection as much as production, Carolina One’s journey shows how the right technology can reinforce both. Download the full report to discover how Carolina One aligned innovation with culture.

The post Simpler Tech, Stronger Culture: Inside Carolina One’s 65% Adoption Win appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.

A federal class-action lawsuit filed in Seattle has pushed Zillow into its most serious legal challenge to date. Plaintiffs allege the company operated a coordinated system through its Flex referral program and Zillow Home Loans that misled consumers, inflated commissions, and violated federal racketeering and RESPA laws. The RICO claims indicate that the court will review Zillow’s behavior as an organized scheme rather than a set of isolated practices.

The lawsuit also names Las Vegas REALTORS (LVR) President George Kypreos and his brokerage GK Properties. Their inclusion ties national platform behavior to local brokerage issues and raises questions about governance, transparency, and consumer protection.

What plaintiffs allege Zillow did

The complaint describes a structure that routed consumers into systems that financially benefitted Zillow. Key allegations include:

Deceptive lead routing

Consumers who click “Contact Agent” or “Request a Tour” expect to reach the listing agent. Instead, they reach a Flex agent who pays Zillow a forty percent referral fee that is not disclosed.

Pressure to send business to Zillow Home Loans

Twelve confidential witnesses say Zillow managers delivered expectations for lender steering verbally so the instructions would never appear in writing. Agents who did not comply risked losing Flex leads.

Monitoring agent communication

Flex agents were required to use Follow Up Boss. Plaintiffs argue this gave Zillow visibility into conversations and let the company identify when agents recommended competing lenders.

Damages sought

Ten buyers across eight states seek up to twenty five thousand dollars each. Exposure could reach hundreds of millions. Hagens Berman, known for the Moehrl litigation, represents the plaintiffs.

Why Las Vegas is part of the lawsuit

GK Properties, led by LVR president George Kypreos, is one of the brokerages named as part of the alleged enterprise.

Claims centered on GK Properties

The complaint says GK Properties helped funnel buyers to Flex agents and Zillow Home Loans, exposing consumers to hidden fees and steering.

Zillow profile discrepancies

The George Kypreos Team shows more than seven thousand lifetime sales and nearly four hundred in the past year, yet several agents with “Top Agent on Zillow” badges show zero or near zero production. Plaintiffs argue this may reflect Flex participation rather than performance.

Leadership concerns

Kypreos became president after the elected leader resigned two days into his term following allegations of election irregularities. Some members also questioned whether he explored selling the MLS to a private buyer. The RICO complaint adds new scrutiny.

Kypreos and GK Properties declined to comment.

The broader issue facing traditional brokerages

The mechanics described in the lawsuit resemble long-standing practices across the brokerage landscape.

IDX lead routing often lacks transparency

Company listings go to the listing agent, but most IDX leads are routed to a company agent who pays an in-house referral fee of about twenty five percent. Consumers rarely know that the routing decision is tied to the brokerage’s internal fee structure.

Mortgage partners and consumer expectations

Many brokerages promote preferred mortgage partners on their websites. Buttons that offer prequalification or lender introductions often route consumers to a partner who pays for placement or participates in a joint venture.

These practices can be legal and RESPA compliant. The issue is clarity.

Consumers deserve to know:

• That the connection generates a fee
• That a mortgage partner is not neutral
• That alternatives exist

The Zillow lawsuit magnifies how a lack of disclosure creates legal and reputational risk.

New national momentum for transparency

Delegates of the National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) recently voted to require that referral fees be disclosed in advance by the referring broker. This policy direction reflects the growing belief that hidden referral systems erode trust and put brokerages at risk.

MLSs are already acting: the California Association of REALTORS example

Last week, the California Association of REALTORS® announced a new rule requiring referral fee disclosure.

The California Association of REALTORS® decision signals that MLSs can play a leading role in consumer transparency. Their rule requires that brokers disclose referral fees clearly and in advance when routing a lead. 

Source: https://www.car.org/aboutus/mediacenter/newsreleases/2025releases/referralfeestatement.

This move aligns with national policy trends and sets a standard that other MLSs are likely to consider.

Why brokerages should self-adopt referral fee disclosures now

Brokerages do not need to wait for NAR policy implementation or MLS mandates. The simplest way to reduce liability and build trust is to self-adopt a clear referral fee disclosure policy.

Early adopters will benefit by:

• Reducing compliance exposure
• Improving consumer trust
• Aligning with emerging national standards
• Preparing for MLS and regulatory requirements already moving in this direction

A single statement at the point of lead capture can meet the spirit of the new expectations and protect the brokerage from future claims of undisclosed financial motivation.

Why employee-agent models sit in a different risk category

Redfin and Rocket Homes use employee agents and integrated mortgage structures. Their lead routing and lender introduction systems sit inside one corporate framework. Leads are not sold internally for referral fees, and mortgage introductions do not involve cross-company payments. This reduces the complexity and disclosure liability that independent-contractor brokerages face.

They are not exempt from regulation, but their structural risk is different.

Takeaways for MLSs and brokers

The Zillow lawsuit, combined with the new NAR delegate vote and CRMLS’s disclosure mandate, marks a shift toward more explicit transparency in referral systems. MLSs and brokerages can demonstrate leadership by adopting policies that plainly explain how leads are routed and how partners are selected.

WAV Group will continue tracking developments and advising clients as the industry enters a more transparent era of lead management and consumer communication.

The post RICO charges against Zillow raise broader questions for brokerages, MLSs, and industry leadership appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.

In mid-November 2025, at the National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) annual conference (NAR NXT in Houston), a major proposal to increase transparency in real estate commissions faced a surprising setback. NAR’s Board of Directors had overwhelmingly approved an amendment to Article 6 of the Code of Ethics to require Realtors to disclose any broker-to-broker referral fees to clients and obtain the client’s consent . This would have closed a long-standing loophole dating back to 1999 that exempted agent-to-agent referral fees from disclosure requirements. The Professional Standards Committee that drafted the change argued there was “no valid reason to continue this exclusion” and that clients have a right to be aware of any financial benefits a Realtor may receive from recommending products or services. In other words, if an agent or brokerage is in the position to earn a referral fee for sending a client to another brokerage, the client should be informed upfront.

Despite strong support from leadership – 83.5% of directors voted in favor of the transparency measure – the final decision lay with NAR’s Delegate Body. The Delegate Body (composed of local REALTOR® association presidents or their alternates) convened just hours later and narrowly rejected the referral fee disclosure rule . Because changes to the Code of Ethics require a two-thirds supermajority of delegates, even a solid majority was not enough. In a razor-thin vote (66.3% in favor, just shy of the required 66.7%), the proposal fell short and was defeated . Many delegates voiced general support for transparency but expressed concerns that the policy was being rushed and could have unintended consequences if implemented without further study . The result left the Code of Ethics unchanged – referral fees between brokers can remain undisclosed to consumers under NAR rules, at least for now.

Why Referral Fee Transparency Matters for Consumers

Broker-to-broker referral fees typically involve one brokerage paying a portion of the commission to another for referring a client. Such fees are common in real estate, but consumers are often unaware of them. In a real estate transaction, consumers should be made aware of all fees and commissions that impact the deal, and that includes any hidden referral fees. When an agent refers a client to another agent (for example, to a specialist or an out-of-area colleague), a referral fee is usually paid out of the commission – often around 25%, but sometimes as high as 40–50% of the total commission . That means a significant portion of the money changing hands is going to a third-party agent’s brokerage, yet the buyer or seller is typically in the dark about it. If the client doesn’t know a referral fee exists, they have no chance to negotiate it or question it, and they might not understand that the referring agent had a financial stake in steering them to a particular brokerage.

Transparency advocates argue that undisclosed referral fees create a potential conflict of interest. The referring agent might choose a recipient agent based on the fee arrangement rather than purely who is best for the client. For this reason, industry leaders and legal experts have been calling for full disclosure as a way to build trust and reduce liability. “Complete transparency is essential for our industry to survive long term and for the public to trust us,” wrote one brokerage CEO after the vote, calling the delegates’ refusal to require disclosure “a very bad policy decision” . In the wake of several high-profile lawsuits challenging real estate commission practices, the push for transparency has only grown stronger. (Notably, NAR’s own leadership framed the referral-fee disclosure proposal as part of aligning the organization with the 2024 Sitzer/Burnett legal settlement over commissions , which demanded greater clarity and fairness in brokerage compensation.) There are even new lawsuits emerging that target hidden referral fees – for example, Zillow’s “Flex” program is currently being sued for allegedly driving up consumer costs via undisclosed referral fees charged to agents . All of this underscores that keeping consumers in the dark about any form of compensation is a risky strategy in today’s environment.

Importantly, referral fees do affect consumers. While the referring and receiving brokers split the commission behind the scenes, that split can influence a client’s experience. If an agent knows they must pay 30% of their commission to a referrer, they might be less flexible on fees or less invested in a lower-priced transaction. Or the client might have chosen a different agent or negotiated a different commission had they known about the referral cut. As Justin Haag, CEO of Northwest MLS, put it: “Buyers and sellers should have complete transparency regarding all fees paid to a real estate brokerage firm, including referral fees paid to another firm” . His organization, Northwest MLS (one of the nation’s largest regional MLSs), moved proactively on this issue in 2025 by introducing a Referral Fee Disclosure form to ensure clients are informed. “Some referral fees can be as much as 50% and may impact a buyer’s or seller’s decision about which broker to engage,” Haag noted, emphasizing that such information can be crucial to consumers’ choices . Disclosing the referral agreement at the outset of the client relationship – rather than at closing or not at all – is essential for an open, trust-based transaction .

The Road Ahead: Pushing for Transparency at Midyear and MLS Level

The defeat of the referral fee disclosure amendment has left many in the industry disappointed, but not deterred. Given how narrowly it failed, there is already talk of revisiting the issue at NAR’s next governance opportunity. The REALTORS® Midyear Legislative Meetings in May 2026 will be the next major gathering of NAR decision-makers, and it could present a chance to bring back the proposal and “do the right thing” for consumers. The need for transparency isn’t going away – if anything, ongoing legal pressures and consumer scrutiny will keep this topic front and center. NAR’s Board of Directors clearly signaled its support, and you can expect member leaders to continue making the case that disclosing referral fees is in the best interest of both clients and the industry’s reputation.

In the meantime, there’s another route to greater transparency: action at the MLS or brokerage level. Individual brokers who believe in upfront referral disclosure can certainly implement it within their own companies – but there’s a catch. In markets where this is not universally required, a lone brokerage that mandates disclosure might face resistance from its agents. Agents worried about uncomfortable conversations or potential loss of referral business might simply “walk” to a competing firm that doesn’t require such disclosure. This is exactly why many believe the onus should be on MLSs (Multiple Listing Services) or regional associations to set a common standard. If the rule is market-wide, the friction is the same for everyone. No single brokerage is put at a competitive disadvantage by being more transparent, and consumers across the board get the benefit of full information.

We’ve already seen a real-world example of this strategy: Northwest MLS’s transparency push. NWMLS didn’t wait for NAR’s mandate; it created a disclosure form and encouraged all its member brokers to use it, resulting in widespread adoption of referral fee disclosure in that region . This kind of MLS-led policy creates a level playing field – every broker in the MLS is playing by the same rules of engagement with clients. Brokers and agents then can’t avoid the conversation by switching offices, and consumers in that market will come to expect disclosure as a normal part of hiring an agent. It’s a bold approach, but one that could be replicated by other MLSs or state Realtor associations if there is sufficient will. After all, when transparency becomes the norm everywhere, those initial awkward explanations about referral fees will become as standard as explaining any other aspect of commission.

Bottom line: 

Hidden referral fees have no long-term place in a profession that is striving to rebuild consumer trust. The recent NAR delegate vote may have tapped the brakes, but it also sparked a deeper conversation: Shouldn’t our clients know exactly who is getting paid in their transaction? The next few months will be critical in answering that question. NAR’s leadership has another chance at the midyear meetings to champion transparency, and local MLSs can take up the charge in the interim. Have you spoken to your MLS about adopting a referral fee disclosure policy? If we make it market-wide, the transparency “friction” is the same for everyone – and together the industry can move toward doing right by the consumer, which ultimately benefits us all.

Sources:

• National Association of REALTORS®, Special Report from the Nov. 17, 2025 Board of Directors Meeting
• HousingWire – Brooklee Han, “Transparency? Not today. NAR delegates reject referral-fee disclosure rule” (Nov. 18, 2025)
• Real Estate News – Dave Gallagher, “NAR in 2026: A new plan, new leaders, fewer members” (Nov. 17, 2025)
• NAR Delegate Body Notice – Exhibit A (Oct. 2025), Proposed Code of Ethics Amendment to Article 6 (Referral Fee Disclosure Rationale)
• Real Estate News – Dave Gallagher, “MLS extending push for transparency to referral fees” (June 27, 2025)

The post NAR Delegates Reject Referral Fee Transparency Despite Board Support appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.

For decades, one of the thorniest issues between MLSs and homebuilders was compensation. Builders often resisted participation because they didn’t want to publish offers of compensation to buyer’s agents. That single policy barrier created a decades-long divide, keeping thousands of new construction homes off the MLS and out of consumers’ search results.

But today, that barrier is gone.

With the removal of mandatory compensation fields from MLS participation, the path is finally clear for a new era of collaboration between MLSs and homebuilders. The timing couldn’t be better.

A new research report from 1000WATT, Builders and Realtors: Working on a Dysfunctional Relationship (September 2025), surveyed more than 600 real estate agents nationwide to explore the friction—and opportunity—between builders and Realtors. The findings paint a clear picture: most agents want to work with builders, consumers are open to buying new construction, and the biggest barriers are simply communication, transparency, and accessibility.

That last piece, “accessibility,” is exactly what MLSs were built to solve.

Unifying the Marketplace for Today’s Buyers

When new construction homes aren’t listed in the MLS, they disappear from the consumer experience. Homebuyers searching through portals or broker IDX sites rarely see new homes alongside resales. Agents must toggle between separate systems, builder websites, or third-party feeds just to find complete market data. The result is a fragmented experience that hurts everyone, especially consumers.

By opening the MLS to builders, the industry can deliver a single, unified marketplace where buyers can easily compare new and existing homes side by side. Agents get a fuller picture of local inventory. Builders gain access to a trusted, high-exposure marketing channel. MLSs expand their data footprint and long-term relevance.

Why Builders Win by Joining the MLS

MLS participation isn’t just about exposure, it’s about intelligence and efficiency. Builders who list within the MLS ecosystem gain powerful data advantages that improve both operations and sales performance:

• Comparable Market Data (Comps): Access to accurate resale and new-home comparables helps builders price inventory competitively and adjust incentives with confidence.
• CMAs and Market Analytics: MLS tools and broker dashboards allow builders to understand neighborhood absorption rates, pricing trends, and buyer demand in real time.
• Days on Market Tracking: Transparent performance metrics give builders insight into how their homes are performing versus resale inventory which is vital for managing construction timelines and release strategies.
• Showing and Scheduling Systems: Integration with MLS showing platforms streamlines access for buyer agents while protecting builder site operations and security.
• Automated Syndication: Listing once in the MLS ensures distribution to broker IDX sites, portals, and marketing platforms without the need for manual duplication or third-party vendors. Some builders even pay to display listings on Zillow and other websites.
• Lead Conversion and Data Integrity: MLS data is standardized and verified, meaning leads from participating brokers are higher quality and easier to track.
• Professional Collaboration: Builders who participate build stronger, more respectful relationships with local agents, who, as the 1000WATT research shows, are eager to help sell their homes when communication and clarity exist.

In short: MLS participation delivers both marketing reach and business intelligence that independent builder websites simply can’t replicate.

A Moment of Alignment

1000WATT’s research found that many agents already view working with builders positively, citing smoother processes, easier transactions, and happier clients. They want builders to “visit our offices,” “share materials we can use with clients,” and “quit making it so hard to work with you.” These are all needs MLSs can meet through standardized data, marketing integration, and consistent communication channels.

At a time when inventory remains tight, the opportunity for MLSs to integrate new-home data is enormous. Doing so strengthens relationships with brokers, creates new growth paths for builders, and most importantly, serves consumers with the full picture of available housing options.

The Old Objections Are Gone. The Time Is Now

With compensation offers now optional, the historic barrier between MLSs and builders has been removed. What remains is pure opportunity: to grow participation, expand consumer choice, and create a richer, more transparent marketplace for all.

MLSs were designed to connect professionals and elevate cooperation. Extending that mission to homebuilders is the logical next step.

It’s time to build bridges with builders and grow the marketplace together.

The post Now’s the Time: Why MLSs Should Bring Builder Listings Into the Fold appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.

This anxiety plays out in real estate every day. Agents rarely leave because something is wrong. They leave because they think something might be better. FOBO doesn’t come from dissatisfaction. It comes from doubt.

Emotion drives retention

Brokers often defend retention with logic. They talk about commission splits, technology, and leads. Yet people make decisions emotionally and justify them rationally. Agents stay when they feel connected, supported, and part of a story that matters.

When emotion fades, logic can’t keep them. A recruiter only needs to tell a better story.

Culture is built by platoon leaders

Culture isn’t a slogan. It is leadership in motion. Office managers are the platoon leaders of brokerage culture. They carry responsibility for the well-being and performance of every agent they support.

The right metric is not time spent in the office. It is time spent with agents. Managers who coach, listen, and guide earn trust. Trust is their most valuable asset. It must be handled with humility, because agents give it freely but take it back quickly if neglected.

Great managers know their agents personally. They understand individual goals and challenges. They measure success not only by production, but by connection.

Vision quiets the noise

Real estate professionals follow vision. Every brokerage needs a clear and inspiring picture of the future that agents can believe in.

When someone asks an agent, “How’s your company doing?” your goal is for them to answer with your vision, not their most recent transaction. “We’re building something remarkable together” should come naturally.

The future should sound more promising than the present. Vision gives direction when the market shifts and focus when competitors come calling.

When agents or managers call me about leaving their company, I ask one question: “Are you running away from something or running toward something?” Unless safety is at risk, the right answer is always to run toward a vision. The same is true for brokers. Your job is to give agents a vision worth running toward.

Pick a fight and define the enemy

Every strong culture rallies around a cause. Sometimes that cause takes the shape of a shared enemy. The enemy does not need to be another brokerage. It can be mediocrity, transactional thinking, or large tech companies that erode professional value.

When you define the enemy, you give agents purpose. You invite them to join a mission that matters. That mission replaces FOBO with focus. Agents stop searching for “better” because they already belong to something significant.

Technology supports, but people sustain

Technology should strengthen leadership, not replace it. The constant promise of new systems can actually fuel FOBO by suggesting that success lies somewhere else. Real progress comes from consistent human connection supported by technology, not overshadowed by it.

Build and measure what matters

Culture can be measured. The best brokerages track:

• Manager time spent in one-on-one or group meetings
• Participation in mentorship and culture programs
• Agent trust and confidence in leadership
• Alignment with company vision

Data shows trends. Trust builds loyalty.

Ask your leadership team to write your brokerage vision in one sentence. Share it with your office managers and have them discuss it with every agent this week. When agents can repeat that vision naturally, you’ve built a culture strong enough to silence FOBO.

Brokerages can work together to strengthen culture, clarify vision, and measure engagement. If you are interested in collaborating with other firms to evaluate leadership rhythms and cultural health to create strategies that build connection, loyalty, and long-term retention, let us know below. 

FOBO fades when agents believe in their leaders, trust their managers, and see a vision worth running toward. That is how a brokerage becomes more than a company. It becomes a cause.

Reach out below if you would like to talk to us about strategies that can get you ahead.

The post Brokers need to manage against FOBO appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.

The 2025 NAR Realtor Technology Survey confirmed what we already know: eSignature is the most heavily used technology in the real estate industry. Seventy-nine percent of realtors report using eSignature tools, edging out even social media and drone photography as the most adopted technologies. When adoption reaches this level, it signals more than convenience; it marks a category that shapes how the industry does business.

Forms: The essential ingredient

WAV Group has long studied transaction management adoption, and our foundational research in this area still holds true today: forms are the essential ingredient.

As we noted decades ago, “Without forms, transaction management systems are empty shells. They are the currency of the contract, the most important asset of every REALTOR® association, and the foundation of cooperation with the government for the benefit of consumers and professionals alike.” 

That statement still applies today.

Forms and Forms Libraries are copyrighted, typically owned by REALTOR® Associations, and remain one of the most valuable member benefits. They represent decades of REALTOR® association collaboration with government at the local, state, and national levels. For realtors and consumers alike, even in states where attorneys manage closings, these forms are essential.

The signature is the most vital legal event on the contract. eSignature platforms will highlight their feature sets, but in the eyes of the law, every leading provider delivers a binding, legal signature.

• DocuSign holds the brand lead and consumer trust. Consumers may experience Authentisign in a real estate transaction, but they use DocuSign for everything else.
• Authentisign enjoys powerful industry adoption through Lone Wolf’s platform bundling.
• Sabal Sign, a new entrant through Florida Realtors’ Forms Simplicity platform, offers REALTOR® associations a path toward technology sovereignty.

The Agent vs. the Transaction Coordinator

From the early days of transaction management, a key adoption challenge has persisted. Agents often view transaction management systems as bloated and cumbersome, while transaction coordinators and administrators embrace them for compliance and workflow oversight.

Our research has consistently shown that “agents adopt transaction management when required for commission disbursement, but they rarely champion it. Compliance officers and transaction coordinators, however, consider it indispensable.” 

This divide continues to define adoption patterns, and it explains why, despite decades of availability, transaction management hasn’t achieved the same universal embrace as eSignature.

Interoperability: The unsolved problem

The larger issue isn’t usability. It’s interoperability. WAV Group has authored many papers on this topic, and the challenge remains unsolved. 

As one of our earlier reports put it: “Transaction management fails when systems cannot talk to each other. Real estate is inherently collaborative, yet our tools remain stubbornly isolated.”

Real estate is fundamentally about two companies collaborating. If Broker X and Broker Y are using different transaction management systems that don’t communicate, the system fails. The challenge doesn’t stop at brokers; mortgage, title, insurance, inspection, and appraisal companies all run their own systems, creating a patchwork of disconnected silos.

The entry point of AI in transaction management

The entry point of AI into transaction management is already well underway. Leading firms are actively working with WAV Group’s wholly owned subsidiary, Fluente, to address two persistent enterprise pain points:

• Forms selection: AI is proving adept at learning the rules that govern what forms are required for a transaction. By reducing the risk of a missing form—a problem that can delay closings and frustrate REALTORS® and customers alike—AI ensures greater compliance and smoother workflows.
• Contract review: Today, contract review remains one of the most labor-intensive parts of transaction management. Fluente projects are training AI to become expert reviewers. These AI assistants are sharp-eyed, flagging potential errors or inconsistencies ahead of human review. The human will always be in the middle, but now they’re supported by an AI force-multiplier that enables more transactions to be processed with greater efficiency and fewer mistakes.

Looking ahead: AI, sovereignty, and MCP

It’s not likely to be solved in 2026. But by 2030, we speculate that adoption of MCP servers across companies could enable Agentic AI workflows that securely bridge systems. These AI-driven platforms would allow brokers, lenders, title, and other transaction participants to collaborate seamlessly without forcing everyone onto the same transaction management system.

Such solutions will tend to favor the large incumbents like DocuSign, who already have global scale and brand trust. But sovereign solutions, like Sabal Sign’s entry, will continue to appeal to REALTOR® Associations determined to keep control of their contracts and protect member benefits.

As we wrote more than a decade ago, “Transaction management will only achieve its full potential when interoperability is solved. Until then, adoption will remain partial, compliance-driven, and uneven.” 

That prediction continues to shape the path forward.

As consultants, we recognize this is speculative. But part of our role is to see first what others eventually see. Interoperability, powered by AI and MCP, is the missing link and the future battleground in transaction management. And let’s not forget that Fidelity’s Skyslope and Zillow’s DotLoop are still in the game. 

Size matters in this battle. If State Associations and leading Franchises that serve over 100,000 real estate agents start selecting the same provider, a king will be crowned. Position your business now. Reach out below to explore how AI-driven interoperability and next-gen eSignature solutions can future-proof your transactions and give your agents the edge.

The post Why eSignature is real estate’s most essential technology—and its next battleground appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.

Here’s a deep dive for brokers, MLSs, vendors and policy workers in the real estate ecosystem. What Zillow’s new lawsuit may change, what you should watch, and what WAV Group believes the industry must do. A shout out to South Carolina REALTORS® and their real estate commissioners for wrangling on this topic with me. I am surprised that this case was not filed in South Carolina where buyer agency agreements and business practices have been activated for years.

What’s going on

Law firms Hagens Berman and Cohen Milstein (who helped bring Moehrl) have filed a draft complaint in U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington alleging that Zillow’s Flex referral program inflates homebuyer costs. 

Key claims:

• Zillow charges Flex agents up to 40% of their commission for successful sales.
• Buyers and sellers allegedly aren’t told about the referral/fee structure when they use a Zillow-Flex agent.
• Buyers clicking “Contact Agent” on Zillow may believe they’re reaching the listing agent, but are routed to a Zillow-affiliated buyer’s agent.
• Zillow’s Listing Access Standards are also under fire: sellers are required to comply within tight timelines or risk being removed or penalized, reducing agent discretion.
• The complaint seeks class status for all U.S. buyers in the past four years via Zillow referrals, invoking Washington consumer protection laws, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), and antitrust theory.

Andrea V. Brambila’s reporting provides the foundational coverage. See “Moehrl law firms target Zillow in new class-action lawsuit” in Real Estate News.

Why this is a big deal for paper brokers

“Paper broker”: an entity licensed as a broker or agent whose primary function is to generate and refer consumer leads, rather than to provide direct representation in real estate transactions.

Zillow Flex is a prominent example but there are many others and some operate within full service brokerages. Many large firms, “Teamerages”, and teams run their entire business in partnership with paper brokers.  

Curating clients from the internet (online leads), nurturing those clients (buyers typically take over 360 days of nurturing from lead to close), counseling homebuyers on the marketplace dynamics and educating them about loan options is a big part of the real estate business in the digital economy. Zillow is a leader in that part of real estate. Consumers vote with web traffic and that is where Zillow meets them eye–to-screen. It’s hard work to nurture the consumer into a place where they are ready to meet with a Realtor.

But here is my observation: the Zillow client does not know they are a client; the lawyers are going to try and prove that Zillow may not disclose the brokerage-client relationship well enough for consumers to understand. 

I do not believe that they can prove that Zillow is not working as hard as a real estate brokerage, or delivering value to web visitors. They are. I am no expert on procuring cause, but I understand it to be a clear disclosure of agency that buyers must pay for. Does the buyer know that Zillow is representing them as agents in these conversations and digital transactions?

Does the Zillow brokerage client know that Zillow is getting paid? And do they know the amount that they are getting paid from them? Or – more clearly – that they get a referral fee from that real estate agent they connect them with and have every right to negotiate that rate with the agent receiving the referral? Does the Zillow brokerage client know that they can negotiate those rates with Zillow?

 The lawsuit raises serious structural concerns:

• Negotiability and transparency: If referral fees are fixed (or modeled without room for negotiation) and not disclosed, consumers cannot meaningfully choose alternatives.
• Steering effects: Agents may feel pressure to accept Zillow referrals, maintain platform relationships, and preserve commission splits, possibly to the detriment of buyer advocacy. Remember too – I think that the Zillow agent must introduce their client to Zillow Mortgage.
• Cost impacts: Plaintiffs argue Flex’s referral fees force sellers to maintain high gross commission rates; since buyer agents net less after the referral, they may push for higher list prices to preserve their compensation. I wonder if Rayse will be providing evidence in this case as the leading buyer agency tool in real estate. They can definitely show the differences between trades with referral fees and trades without. 
• Platform dominance and policy leverage: Zillow’s volume (alleged ~66% share of U.S. real-estate-search audience) and its Listing Access Standards may allow it to set terms that squeeze out alternatives or impose costs on participants (agents, sellers) who don’t conform.

What this signals for WAV Group and stakeholders

What WAV Group recommends

1. Push for first-contact fee disclosure
   Brokers and portal partners should require that when consumers click “Contact Agent,” a short notice appears: who you’re contacting, whether there’s a referral or platform fee, and how large a range or percentage might be.
2. Lead provenance documentation
   Create standard forms or clauses capturing where the lead came from, whether the agent is part of a referral contract, and who pays what. This helps for compliance, audit, and consumer trust.
3. Audit portal “Contact Agent” flows
   Mystery-shop as a consumer would: where does “Contact Agent” really lead? Is it clear who the person is, what their relationship is to Zillow (or equivalent)? Was the Zillow Agent licensed in your state? What fees are disclosed, if any?
4. MLS/association policy work
   Ensure MLS rules do not force listing agents into restrictive timing rules that disadvantage them or that allow portals to demand exclusivity via listing access. Align policies to ensure seller and agent choice. Whenever you force all competitors in a marketplace to do anything related to how they represent the consumer, you risk anti-trust. Don’t force anything, make volunteering to participate an honored custom that makes the market work better than any other nation in the world.
5. Consumer education
   Transparently explain representation options, fee negotiation, and the drawbacks of unseen referral fees. Perhaps a WAV Group consumer guide: “How commission and referrals work: what you should ask your agent or portal.”

What to watch next

• Whether the lawsuit is certified as a class covering all U.S. buyers via Zillow referrals in the last four years.
• Any judicial findings about what “disclosure” means: what level, when, how.
• Outcome of this in Washington and whether other state consumer protection or antitrust laws get involved.
• How Zillow (and other portals) respond — policy changes, disclosures, design changes at the portal interface, modifications to Listing Access Standards.
• Whether similar suits emerge (or pending ones expand) against other paper broker / referral-based models.

WAV Group sees this lawsuit as a likely pivot point. The combination of scale, opaque referral structures, and platform listing policies makes this more than just another commission lawsuit. If the allegations hold, the industry will either need to raise its transparency, shift fee practices, or face regulatory and litigation risk. Agents, brokers, MLSs, and portals should assume change is coming and plan accordingly.

Primary Sources

Here are the source URLs I found relevant to the Zillow / Compass / Flex referral topic:

1. “Moehrl law firms target Zillow in new class-action lawsuit” — Andrea V. Brambila, Real Estate News, Sept. 19, 2025
   https://www.realestatenews.com/2025/09/19/moehrl-law-firms-target-zillow-in-new-class-action-lawsuit  
2. “The fight over real estate listings heats up as Compass targets ‘Zillow ban’ in new lawsuit” — Business Insider, June 23, 2025  
3. “Compass files lawsuit against Zillow for allegedly stifling competition for home listings” — Reuters, June 23, 2025  
4. “Zillow is fighting back against a push to make real estate listings more exclusive” — Business Insider, April 11, 2025  
5. “Secret listing? Banned? Why Zillow isn’t showing you the whole market.” — Washington Post, June 25, 2025  

The post Zillow class action and what it means for paper-broker referrals appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.

Agents describe what they want in human terms: support, mentorship, training, family. They will put up with imperfect technology or less-than-ideal economics if they feel genuinely connected. But if that connection is missing, no compensation plan or tech stack is enough to keep them loyal.

The patterns are consistent

• Agents who leave large firms often want autonomy, personal connection, and mentorship.
• Agents who leave smaller firms are usually chasing polish, efficiency, and brand recognition. Many of them end up missing the sense of belonging they left behind.
• The phrase that captures the balance is “big enough to back you, small enough to know you.”

Where brokers fall short

The biggest disconnects are not financial, they are relational. Technology overload and lack of support come up again and again. One agent said, “KW Command felt like a full-time job.” Another said they only spoke with their broker ten times in 13 years. Those are not technology failures. They are leadership failures.

Lessons from the greats

I have been fortunate to learn from some of the best brokers in the industry. Bob Peltier, who built HomeServices of America, drilled into me two principles:

1. Burn shoe leather. Get out and visit your offices. Be present.
2. Do not build offices for Easter Sunday. Design for everyday needs, not occasional peaks.

My business partner Mark McLaughlin lived this every day. He never had an executive office. Instead, he rotated from office to office, running the business alongside agents and managers. That visibility built trust and loyalty in a way no memo or video call ever could.

The paradox of size and lessons for Associations and MLSs

This dynamic does not stop at brokerages. Associations of REALTORS and MLSs face the same tension between scale and intimacy. My partner Marilyn Wilson has spent years benchmarking customer experience through WAV Group’s CXI (Customer Experience Index) research. Her work proves that excellence is not a function of size.

Small organizations often outperform their larger peers. Charlie Munger describes the reason well. Big organizations suffer from bureaucracy. They overthink, overprocess, overmanage, and move too slowly. Small organizations make decisions quickly, implement change faster, and stay closer to their members.

The synthesis is clear. Large organizations need to operate small. Success comes from being with your people. I once worked with a large MLS that was struggling with its largest brokerage firms. We spent a week driving around to meet them. For many of the brokers, it was the first time the CEO had ever set foot in their offices. In fact, the CEO did not even know the location of the largest multi-office broker’s headquarters. Those visits broke the ice. The MLS board responded by requiring the CEO to present a call report of broker meetings at every board meeting. It changed everything.

What brokers and managers can do right now

If DelPrete’s research is a reminder, here are ways to close the gap:

• Show up. Do not delegate culture. Be physically present in your offices.
• Be accessible. Get out of the executive bubble. Take calls, walk the floor, listen.
• Simplify tech. Offer fewer and better tools. Focus on usability, not volume.
• Invest in managers. They are the daily connection to agents. Train them, support them, and hold them accountable.
• Right-size operations. Build for consistent relevance, not one-off moments.
• Balance scale with intimacy. Deliver both polish and connection, every day.

For Associations and MLSs, the same rules apply. Spend time with your members, be visible, and avoid drowning in bureaucracy.

Communication as a cornerstone

Another cornerstone of deepening relationships is communication planning. We created WAV Group Communications under the leadership of Kevin Hawkins because MLSs, Realtor Associations, and Brokerages are notoriously bad at communications. Strong communication programs provide the air cover that supports the hand-to-hand relationship building you do in person.

Look at the way The Keyes Company uses social media. Mike and Christina are talking with their people every day, creating visibility and trust. Or consider Robert Reffkin, who spends time in the offices and makes a point of attending open houses with his family every weekend. These are not marketing tactics. They are communication disciplines that reinforce culture and leadership.

The bottom line

Brokerage, Association, or MLS. None of them are really about real estate. They are about relationships. Forget that, and your people will remind you when they vote with their feet and walk out the door.

Contact us below if you’re interested in how WAV Group’s team of industry experts can help you on any level.

The post What agents really want in a brokerage and what brokers can do about it appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.

The same shift is happening with floor plans. Our new WAV Group Floor Plan Consumer Interest Survey shows just how far consumer demand has grown. 82% of buyers believe the industry should require a floor plan on every listing.

And it’s not just about meeting expectations. Floor plans deliver results:

• Higher engagement
• Longer time spent on listing pages
• Stronger buyer interest

Buyers say floor plans help them picture life in the home, understand the layout, and make faster, more confident decisions. Sellers see them as a sign of professionalism.

Forward-thinking MLSs are already taking action. Some are making floor plans standard—and seeing positive results in consumer engagement almost immediately. Technology has made creating them simple, quick, and affordable. In many cases, it takes less than five minutes.

If photos are the baseline, floor plans are the next step in staying competitive and delivering what today’s buyers want.

[Download the WAV Group Floor Plan Consumer Interest Survey] and see the data for yourself.

The post Pictures Are Required. Floor Plans Should Be Too. appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.

Now the company is going further and integrating with other popular technologies in real estate. Lone Wolf Technologies has officially announced a direct integration with Follow Up Boss, one of the most popular CRM solutions in real estate. This new integration connects the dots between lead nurturing and the rest of the real estate workflow, including Lone Wolf’s Contacts, Transact, Cloud CMA, Boost and Back Office accounting found in their industry cloud – Lone Wolf Foundation. 

For agents, that means a smoother, more stress-free experience from first contact to closing and makes it easier to create seamless transactions and help nurture customers for life. 

With this integration, setting up a new prospect in Follow Up Boss is just the beginning. As the prospect advances from lead to client, the Lone Wolf platform streamlines the entire process, automating each step intelligently. Say goodbye to double entry and disconnected systems. Instead, enjoy a seamless experience designed to match how real estate truly operates. 

“Even though Lone Wolf also offers a CRM product,” said Jimmy Kelly, CEO of Lone Wolf, “we’re excited to integrate with Follow Up Boss because our mission is to make it easier—and more profitable—for agents and brokers to do business using our technologies, support, service, and training.”

And this is just the beginning.

Lone Wolf is also pushing the boundaries of AI, using it to reimagine how agents nurture client relationships for life. With new tools on the horizon, the platform will offer next-level intelligence that simplifies workflows, supports smart decision-making, and unlocks new ways to scale with less effort and more confidence.

Kelly’s advice for brokers?
Use this slower market to focus your energy. Build stronger partnerships with your tech providers. Set up your platform for scale. And embrace AI, not as a buzzword, but as a practical tool to elevate analysis, action, and profitability.

To watch the entire interview with Jimmy Kelly or read the full press release. 

The post Lone Wolf enters a new era of Integrations starting with Follow Up Boss to Deliver a Seamless CRM-to-Transaction Experience appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.

Times of unrest can make recruitment challenging, but it can also present unique opportunities for savvy brokers who understand how to position their firms as safe harbors for ambitious real estate professionals.  Below are the essential strategies for recruiting talent when times are tough.

Lead with Stability and Support

During uncertain times, agents prioritize security over flashy promises. Highlight your brokerage’s financial stability, established market presence, and track record of supporting agents through previous downturns. Share concrete examples of how you’ve helped agents navigate challenging markets, whether through enhanced training programs, flexible commission structures, or increased marketing support. Agents want to know they’re joining a team that will invest in their success, not abandon them when times get tough.

Emphasize Training and Professional Development

Market challenges often reveal skill gaps among agents. Position your brokerage as the place where agents can sharpen their expertise and expand their capabilities. Offer comprehensive training programs focusing on market-specific strategies like working with distressed properties, first-time homebuyers in tight credit markets, or investors seeking opportunities. Provide ongoing education on emerging technologies, digital marketing, and customer relationship management. Agents who feel confident in their abilities are more likely to thrive regardless of market conditions.

Offer Flexible and Competitive Compensation

Traditional commission splits may not be enough to attract quality agents during difficult periods. Consider implementing graduated commission structures that reward performance, providing upfront financial support for new agents, or offering bonuses tied to specific achievements. Some brokerages find success with salary-plus-commission models that provide income stability while maintaining performance incentives. Be transparent about your compensation philosophy and demonstrate how agents can build sustainable income streams within your organization.

Leverage Technology and Innovation

Agents increasingly expect their brokerages to provide cutting-edge tools and technology platforms. Invest in customer relationship management systems, digital marketing tools, virtual tour capabilities, and mobile-friendly platforms that help agents work more efficiently. During challenging times, agents need every advantage they can get, and brokerages that provide superior technological resources stand out from competitors still relying on outdated systems.

Build a Strong Company Culture

Market stress can take a psychological toll on real estate professionals. Create a supportive, collaborative environment where agents feel connected to something larger than individual transactions. Foster mentorship programs pairing experienced agents with newcomers, organize regular team-building activities, and maintain open communication channels between management and agents. A strong company culture becomes even more valuable when external pressures mount.

Create an Inclusive Environment for Diverse Perspectives

During politically charged times, agents from various backgrounds may feel uncertain about workplace dynamics and whether their perspectives will be respected. Establish your brokerage as a professional environment that welcomes agents regardless of their political views, cultural backgrounds, or social perspectives. Focus recruiting conversations on shared professional values like integrity, client service excellence, and business ethics rather than divisive topics. Implement clear policies that ensure all agents feel comfortable expressing their authentic selves while maintaining professional standards. Emphasize that your brokerage’s success depends on serving diverse clients effectively, which requires a team that understands and respects different viewpoints. This approach attracts top talent who may be leaving other brokerages where they felt their perspectives weren’t valued or where workplace tensions affected their ability to focus on serving clients.

Focus on Long-term Vision

While addressing immediate concerns, articulate your brokerage’s long-term vision and growth strategy. Agents want to join organizations with clear direction and ambitious goals. Share your plans for market expansion, service diversification, or technological advancement. Help prospective agents see how their career growth aligns with your company’s trajectory.

Recruiting during difficult times requires patience, authenticity, and a genuine commitment to agent success. Brokerages that invest in their agents’ professional development and provide stable, supportive environments will emerge from challenging periods with stronger, more capable teams positioned for future growth.

Looking for assistance with Recruitment & Retention? 

Download our white paper:  365 Days of Growth:  The ROI of Year-Round Agent Marketing

Schedule your complimentary recruitment consultation

The post Recruiting in times of Unrest appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.

Zillow’s latest policy demands that agents post homes to the MLS within one business day of any public marketing. If they don’t, Zillow will remove the listing from its platform — a move the company says protects consumers by ensuring homes receive “maximum exposure.”

But here’s the problem: Zillow built an entire line of business explicitly designed to avoid that kind of exposure. For example – they do not have a requirement for FSBO to list with an MLS to appear on their site – nor do they require new home builders to list their home in the MLS to appear on their site. If the MLS is so important – why are they carving out exclusions for consumers or builders?

From 2018 through 2022, Zillow Offers — the company’s failed iBuying arm — bought more than 20,000 homes directly from sellers without putting those homes in the MLS. These were off-market deals, advertised as convenient and fast, often framed as “no showings, no staging, no open houses.” Sellers were encouraged to avoid the hassle of listing — and avoid the MLS.

Now, the same company claims that not listing a home in the MLS is a disservice to the homeowner.

“By ensuring listings are widely marketed, sellers benefit from maximum exposure, which research shows typically leads to higher sale prices and a quicker sale.” – Zillow, 2024

It begs the question: Was Zillow wrong then — or are they wrong now?

Because it can’t be both. Either:

• Zillow Offers spent 3.5 years quietly convincing homeowners to take less for their properties than they might have received with full market exposure, or
• Zillow’s current research promoting MLS transparency is deeply flawed.
  

Either Zillow intentionally underpaid sellers during the iBuyer craze, and continue to encourage non-mls listings for FSBO and Builders – or their newfound commitment to MLS-first transparency is theater.

A double standard dressed up as consumer advocacy

Zillow’s policy doesn’t just apply to agents — it applies only to agents (again – not FSBO or Builders).

If a broker posts a photo of a listing on Instagram before putting it in the MLS, Zillow removes the listing. But if a homeowner wants to sell their property FSBO, Zillow publishes it — no MLS required. If a homebuilder wants to bypass the MLS and syndicate listings directly, Zillow accommodates.

Even Zillow’s own brokerage division, which operates lead-gen services and has direct control over consumer pathways, is exempt from these standards when it suits their business model.

This is a selective enforcement strategy. Not a universal consumer protection policy.

Power, not policy

Zillow is no longer just a portal. It’s a brokerage, a media platform, a lead arbitrator, and a self-appointed compliance officer for the industry.

What’s being enforced here isn’t ethics. It’s control.

By forcing brokers to play by rules that Zillow itself doesn’t follow — and didn’t follow when it was in the homebuying business — the company is setting up a hierarchy where compliance is only required of its competitors.

That’s not just hypocritical. It’s structural leverage disguised as policy.

What brokers should do next

The MLS community and the brokerage community have a right — and a responsibility — to question the legitimacy of this policy. If Zillow wants to be a compliance gatekeeper, it must hold all sellers to the same standard. Not just the brokers they compete with.

WAV Group encourages MLSs and brokerage leaders to ask hard questions:

• Why is MLS compliance being enforced selectively?
• Why were 20,000+ off-MLS Zillow transactions acceptable, but a coming-soon post from an agent is not?
• And who benefits when Zillow controls not just the consumer audience, but also the rules for how listings are allowed to appear?
  

Zillow’s policy isn’t about consumer protection. It’s about consolidating power — and rewriting the rules of competition, one exemption at a time.

P.S. Another thing that I have been thinking about that I could not really fit into this article is an observation about the conflict of unfairness in IDX policy interpretation.

In the way back machine of our IDX policy was a time when companies did not want to share IDX listings with discount brokers. The DoJ got fired up and shut that practice down. Effectively, a broker does not really have the option of withholding listings from a competitor. What the policy does not state is that a broker must display the listings of another brokerage. This is the case with Zillow saying that they will not display a competitor’s listing. Not displaying listings because of a broker’s business practice seems just as bad as withholding listings because of a broker’s business practice. Am I right?

The post The ultimate hypocrisy: Zillow bans pocket listings — unless they’re its own appeared first on WAV Group Consulting.