Thanks for the comment. We all have biases, but the acknowledgment of those biases is key.

Again, my beef is more with the office itself, and not at all with the person. I have no doubt about his qualifications.

The consistent overly-rosy predictions do more harm than good, in my biased opinion.

I wish more people would read the NAR’s predictions as well as bubble blogs, Calculated Risk, WSJ, etc., think and analyze critically and then come to their own conclusions.

I also wish that more people would vote.

By the way, your blog is bias (as is mine), but I think we are both smart enough to digest ALL the facts and make up our own minds. If you want to get upset about this type of thing, blast the average Joe who is not paying enough attention to see the bias in EVERY piece of information. Blogs have helped expose and check the mis-information out there. Yun’s predictions may be overly rosey, but give me one “fact” he states that is not true? Give the Yun hunt a rest. Three months ago is was a mid-level data cruncher for NAR who was so bright that he rocketed to the top spot when given the opportunity. He’s not the problem.

And THAT is my bias opinion.

Scott has a point about Yun’s brief tenure. And, while he’s clearly got a more realistic approach than Lereah, that’s not saying much! I think NAR’s approach may have worked better ten years ago, but the consumer is more sophisticated now and spin almost always plays badly these days.

I think Jim’s right about the need for NAR to stop making predictions. Any economist’s predictions are more likely to be wrong than right given the complex data sets they’re dealing with. The national picture is too complex for today’s models to be much good at prediction. I’d be reluctant even at a local level to go much beyond a quarter in any predictions.

Thanks for the great discussion!

The future and survival of the NAR depends on the MLS and traditional brokerage model. Listing information is definitely moving toward an open forum and as the traditional brokerage model slowly erodes, NAR slips further toward the clif edge. I smell fear.

Warren Buffet and Home Services, as well as all the other major players in the brokerage arena, are the self-professed members whose interests are at the heart of our NAR. As long as their interests are based in the status quo, then that is the position that the NAR will fight tooth and nail for. If those interests happen to filter benefit to the individual Realtor, then that is just a secondary benefit.

Blogs have started the discussions on split commissions but it will not happen while these mega financial brokerage machines have their stakes at risk. The day Warren Buffet divests himself of Home Services is the day the wall will start to crumble from the chinks bloggers started.

That the NAR needs a new business model is about the kindest thing I can say. Their educational programs are so pitiful as to be embarrassing to admit to having one of their designations. It could be so much better!

Keep up the good worD.

Tony – I agree with everything you say.

Scott – I wish that NAR would stop making predictions. Too many Realtors spend too much time building up credibility lost by the predictions that NAR makes.

That NAR is finally acknowledging that all markets are local rather than “the market is great!” is almost comforting.

As far as Lawrence Yun – he’s in a no-win position, and I feel for him. His paycheck comes from the NAR, and their opinions are clearly biased – and more and more of consumers are aware of that bias.

My aggravation is more with the lost credibility than with the unreasonable predictions.

Regarding the rants against the NAR – I agree with your frustration as well. The NAR is broken, but is fixable – that fix will come from the leadership within and from those who criticize without. There are too many good people within the machine, but the machine seems to have lost its pliability and adaptability. (That’s why I do what I can when/where I can and encourage others to do the same)

Lawrence Yun is a good guy. Cut him a break. He’s been in the top position for a whopping three months. He’s already shown that he’s not one of those “It’s-always-a-good-time-to-buy” boosters. If you’ll look at his analysis of market conditions, I think you’ll find it as solid as anyone else’s from a macro point of view. Unless of course, you’re more inclined to believe the partial and incomplete analysis that we continue to see in the media.

And by the way…I give you credit for providing ‘ cogent, pertinent analysis” of your local market. I enjoy your blog and your perspective. But I would note that too many other bloggers seem to be caught up in the Limbaugh-style group rant against NAR and aren’t really adding much to the dialogue except vitriole and self-righteous nonsense. In the blogosphere, I guess everyone can be an expert…for 15 minutes, anyway.