New Signage Rules - MI Realtor Association

This rule will violate my franchise agreement, cost thousands of dollars and is completely uncalled for. Please tell me who sponsored this idiocy.

This is my 40th year as a Realtor. The business has undergone many changes during those years. One of the biggest changes is the business gas become agent centered. The signs, business cards, web sites, post cards, shirts, any and all of our promotions will have to be redone. The cost to agents will be THOUSANDS of dollars. This a poorly thought out idea. The days of brick and mortor buildings is over. The days of buyers calling offices for information is over. People want instant info and that means agent sites and cell phones on the signs.

I am opposed to any changes to existing law regarding advertising by licensed Real Estate Salespersons.

This law is unnecessary.

This would be a very unfair regulation

Equal size is ridiculous ... maybe 20 or 30 percent. And that is on sineage only.... it would be nearly impossible on promotional items such as calendars os ball point pens or keychains etc ... due to space limitations.

I am going to have major expense changing all the existing advertising that I currently have. My Broker doesn't pay for any of my advertising, so why should Company name be the same size as MY NAME?

This proposal is an outlandish attempt to micromanage how INDEPENDENT contractors conduct their business. It is NOT public driven, but shamefully conceived by companies that promote themselves first, above their agents. Less government intervention is imperative and freedom to choose MUST prevail!!!

Thank you

This is wrong! I have spent thousands of dollars to build and differentiate my brand. It is becoming increasingly more clear that real estate agents are NOT in fact independent contractors. The breadth and extent of the regulation in favor of the brokers is clearly indicating that agents are not truly independent. Are we becoming employees? While everyone agrees that identifying the associated broker name and either address or phone number on signage, etc is necessary in order to adequately advise the public, the increase in size does not in anyway better support this purpose. The ONLY intent and purpose for this requirement is to support the brokers interests OVER the individual agents. This potentially dilutes the individual agent's brand, takes business from the agent, and panders to the agents who are not willing to spend the money to promote themselves or their businesses. By compartmentalizing this issue a few brokers and associations, this has become a political and special interests agenda. In most circumstances, the brokers provide very little support for the agents development, growth, and advertising or promotion. Quite the opposite. It is the agents who are typically spending thousands to promote and represent the brokers interests. Associated regulation should potentially consider regulating franchise fees and broker splits. After franchise fees, broker splits, and all of the normal and customary overhead costs of running a business, most real estate agents have a very difficult time making a decent living. This legislation will only cause additional undue burden and harm to the agents and is not necessarily to accomplish the stated objective of identification. "This causes an undue hardship on individual agents who are solely responsible for the costs associated with creating these materials. It is not the brokers or the associations who are bearing the costs of marketing and advertising materials, it is the individual agent.

This legislation is detrimental to the lively hood of the independent realtor. Please reconsider this legislation.

I don't know if any other industry of independent contractors that require this. Specifically the securities industry, which is very heavily regulated, doesn't even require this. This is completely excessive.

I'm new to the industry and I know I have spent a nice chunk of money to build my brand. I can't imagine the agents that have building and maintaining their brand for years. This is a waste of our hard earned money in an industry that already costs so much to make a good living.

See no benefit to the consumer.

Definitely against this. No need to change the current rule, too expensive to change all the signs and other marketing materials.

This law is much too restrictive for individual agents.

Reason 1 for this, Can't think of ONE, and the person or company that will will benefit this??? Can't think of ONE. The public will benefit because??????

I request that no changes be made in the area of advertising for Realtors

It is good for the agents to differentiate themselves from their broker and promoting the agents personally!

The lack of notification and transparency on this issue from MR and RPAC to its members was very disappointing. Whether it’s true or not, it gives the appearance that MR intentionally favored certain business models over others. MR knew this issue would effect a huge number of brokers and agents, yet they intentionally chose not to notify members on a large scale. MR routinely notifies members on issues that are substantially less impactful. Overall there is no wide-spread problem with the public being able to identify the broker. Even if LARA received hundreds of complaints each year (or thousands), this is statistically insignificant given millions of consumers have no issue at all. If an average person can quickly discern who the broker is, this is sufficient (some consumers wouldn’t understand even if it were posted in bold letters on a billboard). Having said this, a small percentage of brokers and agents have intentionally made it difficult to identify the broker, and these exceptions should be dealt with. This could be accomplished through enforcement of a reasonable minimum sizing standard. Instead MR negotiated a unreasonable standard that is burdensome and costly to its members. It will create as much confusion to the public as it removes by making it more difficult to discern who the first point of contact should be.