"You'll Have Access to Listings No One Else Can See" — Here's Why That Line Should Bother You

Here's what happened. I have buyers — ready, willing, and able buyers, pre-approved and actively looking — who found out about a home only because they happened to be at an open house for a different property, where the listing agent mentioned it in passing: "if you work with me, you'll have access to listings no one else can see." That property has reportedly been sitting in "private" or "coming soon" status for over a month. Not on the open market. Not visible to my buyers, or to any other agent's buyers, unless we happen to be standing in the right open house at the right time.

That's not exclusive marketing. That's going behind the sign — using a property as bait to recruit buyer clients, while the actual seller sits on an unsold home that could have had real market exposure this whole time.

Who does this actually help?

Not the seller. A seller who signs up for a "private listing" is usually told this creates urgency and demand. But a listing that's been quietly sitting for a month with no MLS exposure isn't creating demand — it's limiting it. Fewer eyes, fewer offers, less competition, and very likely a lower price than the seller could have gotten with full market exposure. The only party who reliably benefits from that scenario is the brokerage that gets to double-end the deal — representing both sides and keeping the entire commission in-house.

Not the buyer either, unless they happen to be talking to the "right" agent. Buyers I represent — buyers with financing in place, ready to move — simply never see these homes. Not because the home isn't a fit. Because the door was never open to them in the first place.

This isn't a fringe opinion anymore

I'm not the only one raising this. The practice of routing listings away from the open market has drawn serious scrutiny over the past year:

• A federal antitrust suit against a major national brokerage and a Chicago-area MLS is actively working its way through court, centered on exactly this kind of private listing network.
• A congressional subcommittee has formally requested briefings from that brokerage over concerns that private listing arrangements limit transparency and competition and could harm buyers and sellers.
• Just last month, a group of renters filed a proposed class action alleging that pulling inventory off public platforms and routing it agent-to-agent inflated what they had to pay.

Regulators, courts, and consumers are all asking the same question I'm asking: who is this actually serving?

What I believe, and how I practice

I believe sellers deserve full market exposure unless they make a fully informed choice to limit it — not a soft sales pitch about "exclusive access." And I believe buyers deserve to see every home that fits what they're looking for, not just the ones their agent happens to have a side deal on.

That's not a slogan for me. It's how I run my business. If you're a seller, I'll tell you honestly what limiting your listing's exposure could cost you. If you're a buyer, you will never hear me say "there are homes you can only see through me" — because that shouldn't be a selling point. It should be a RED FLAG!