A
vis, Budget, and Payless are all part of the same parent company, just as Hertz, Dollar, and Thrifty belong together. Real‑estate firms are following the same pattern. When Compass Inc. announced its $1.6 billion purchase of Anywhere Real Estate—reported by the New York Times and expected to close in 2026—the number of competitors in the Chicagoland market is set to shrink dramatically.
Anywhere owns well‑known brands such as Coldwell Banker, Century 21, Jameson Sotheby’s International Real Estate, and Corcoran. Compass already owns @properties Christie’s International Real Estate, another acquisition. This consolidation is more than a quest for market share; it reflects a strategic shift toward “exclusive inventory.” These are homes and apartments that have not yet appeared on the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) or on free‑to‑use sites like Zillow. While most listings eventually surface on the MLS within a week or two, the current scarcity of inventory in Chicago and its suburbs means that buyers who want the best deals must monitor new listings closely—much like arriving early at an estate sale to snag the best items.
Exclusive listings give Compass a competitive edge. They attract agents who can promise clients early access to off‑market properties and keep commissions in-house. Agents can tell buyers that only through Compass will they see the freshest listings; if they wait until Zillow, they risk missing out. Zenlist is an example of a platform that hides inventory behind an agent login, illustrating how access is restricted to a select group.
Beyond the usual concerns about megamergers stifling competition, this model raises fairness issues. Limiting the newest listings to a closed network can create conditions where discrimination is possible, even if it is not the same as historical redlining. A truly fair market would provide equal access to all inventory.
Recent settlements have also addressed the way commissions are split. Traditionally, a 5% commission in Chicago is divided roughly equally between buyer and seller agents. Buyers could add the buyer’s commission to their offer, but listing agents often insisted that the seller pay it. The new framework should allow buyers to negotiate commissions more freely, potentially saving half the fee by working only with a listing agent. However, the rise of exclusive inventory may pressure buyers into hiring Compass agents to access the best deals, undermining the intended savings.
The real‑estate industry has long resisted lowering commissions, despite legal challenges and settlements. This resilience is notable, but it also exacerbates the housing crisis in Chicago, one of the nation’s most supply‑constrained markets. A market that relies on exclusive inventory for a privileged few is not the most transparent or consumer‑friendly.
Regulators, plaintiffs, and anyone seeking lower transaction costs should monitor how these developments unfold. The public interest demands a market that is open, fair, and accessible to all buyers and sellers.
