By definition, unintended consequences are the results of an action different from what was expected or planned. They are often referenced in relation to changes in policies. I have heard the term used for years, primarily related to government policies. Still, I didn’t realize until recently that much has been written on the subject, and most experts believe that there are three categories of unintended consequences:
This week’s big news in real estate was the settlement of the class action lawsuits directed against the National Association of Realtors (NAR)…Despite what you may have heard from the media, if the settlement is approved, this would be a modest victory for both realtors and homebuyers. The lawsuit’s deeply misguided proponents, including Steve Brobeck from the Consumer Federation of America, have been calling for an outright ban on broker cooperation. In that regard, they didn’t get what they wanted.
For years, large companies have been outsourcing to India and China, but the politics with China is unpredictable at best, and India has its limitations as well…However, Mexico and Latin America are just on the other side of our southern border, in the same time zone as the U.S., and with a talented and plentiful population of eager workers. There are also a number of companies that make the process of hiring a nearshore team practically turn-key.
This week, in a brief to the judge of a major antitrust lawsuit known as Nosalek, the U.S. Department of Justice called for decoupling buyer and seller agent representation. If the DOJ gets what it wants, it would mean that listing agents would no longer be permitted to share their commissions with agents representing buyers, and buyers would have to pay out of pocket to have an agent represent them.
If you’re not familiar with the Sitzer class action lawsuit against the National Association of Realtors and several of the largest real estate brands, it centers on how real estate agents are compensated. The lawsuit claims that the practice of seller and buyer agent cooperation or sharing of commissions is an anti-trust violation and has resulted in inflated commissions paid by consumers. While a jury in Missouri has already sided with the plaintiffs, the judge has not rendered a final verdict.
If you have been following the news on the recent resignation of the President of Harvard over her unfortunate congressional testimony on antisemitism on college campuses, you might have read Bill Ackman’s post on X (formally known as Twitter) which essentially blamed everything on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policies on college campuses. Ackman’s post was reposted by none other than Elon Musk, the owner of X, who wrote “DEI is just another word for racism. Shame on anyone who uses it”. Musk’s over-the-top response prompted Mark Cuban to jump into the conversation by defending DEI and calling it smart business. Cuban has since challenged Musk to a debate on the subject.
I believe deeply in taking the high road; it is rarely good to lose your cool, especially in business. It’s part of what we call emotional intelligence…However, it’s not always best to walk away from a fight. There are some things worth fighting for, and for the right reasons…Historically, NAHREP has been friendly with consumer groups. We have not always agreed on everything, but I respect them and have worked hard to have a good relationship with them. But…
The incomparable NAHREP at L’ATTITUDE (NAL) event in Miami. This year, the crowd will be bigger and the speakers will be even more impressive! If you are not familiar with some of the names, let me provide some additional color: Eddy Cue is a Cuban-American and the second-ranking executive at Apple, Orlando Bravo is the wealthiest Latino in America with a net worth of more than 8 billion dollars, and Priscila Almodovar is the only Latina CEO of a Fortune 100 company. Beyond this incredible list of headliners, the hallways at NAL will include…
Attorneys General from thirteen states sent a letter to the 100 largest corporations in America, advising them that they believe the ruling extends to private companies. In their letter, the group of Attorneys General stated their view that “racial discrimination in employment and contracting is all too common among Fortune 100 companies and other large businesses.”
The United States ruled that colleges could no longer consider race as a factor in admissions policies. There would be no need for affirmative action in college admissions if every young person had equal access to safe housing, healthcare, and quality educational resources during their formative years.