K
ey points:

    - Critics say Compass’s off‑market strategy harms sellers and erodes consumer trust.

    - Proponents argue pre‑marketing helps set price, gives agents an edge, and satisfies sellers who want a “seller‑choice” approach.

    - The core of the dispute—private listings and the Compass‑Zillow lawsuit—centers on data ownership and market share.

    Compass unveiled a “3‑phased marketing strategy” that lists a home off the MLS first, then opens it to the public. Since then, the firm has shifted much of its focus to Private Exclusives. By September, it had just over 9,000 such listings. Executives keep touting “seller choice” as a selling point, but agents’ reactions are mixed.

    **Agent perspectives**

    Some agents see value in off‑market listings to test price and gauge buyer interest. Others worry that the practice limits exposure, undermines transparency, and conflicts with fiduciary duties.

    Baltimore agent Alyssia Essig, 27 years in the business, warned that a flood of private listings would “create a mess” and frustrate buyers. She said it “reduces exposure for sellers and the ability for buyers to find what they want,” calling the approach illogical.

    Seattle agent Darcy LaBelle left Compass in 2021, citing the Private Exclusives push and CEO Robert Reffkin’s aggressive stance toward rivals. She said she felt “used as a tool” and that the strategy eroded trust between agents and clients. LaBelle likened the situation to a doctor who must act in a patient’s best interest, questioning how she could serve clients while promoting a model she didn’t believe in.

    **Ethical concerns**

    Both Essig and LaBelle praised Compass’s tech tools but flagged the private‑listing strategy as ethically fraught. Essig warned that the move would “erode the trust between the agent and the consumer,” already fragile. LaBelle noted that agents on the front lines of Compass’s battle with Northwest MLS faced penalties, further damaging confidence.

    **Support for the strategy**

    Other agents see clear benefits. Chicago’s Rafael Murillo, a high‑end specialist, calls the 3‑phased approach a “great marketing tool.” He uses it when sellers want to test a higher price than he recommends, ensuring the listing eventually hits the public market. Murillo notes that Compass’s reach and market pulse give him an advantage.

    Miami agent Avisha Kassir, who works with ultra‑high‑net‑worth clients, values Private Exclusives for providing off‑market access. She says it makes her feel “awesome, badass” and highlights Compass’s belief that agents are its core assets. The 3‑phased strategy helps navigate complex buyer situations.

    **Data control and the Zillow lawsuit**

    In April, Zillow announced it would ban listings that are marketed publicly but not widely available to consumers. Compass responded with an antitrust suit. Essig said the fight is about data: “If Compass wins, Zillow loses a significant portion of its data.” LaBelle echoed that controlling data lets Compass drive traffic to Compass.com, keeping information in-house and boosting market share as a publicly traded company.

    Murillo warned that this marketing model threatens lead‑generation portals like Zillow. “Zillow’s business is selling leads; if they lack full listings, they risk losing market share among online consumers and agents,” he said.

    **Bottom line**

    The debate over Compass’s Private Exclusives pits agents who value transparency and client trust against those who see strategic advantage in pre‑marketing. The legal clash with Zillow underscores a broader battle for data dominance and market control, leaving both agents and consumers caught in the middle.