I know I'm simply expanding on what you already said, but ... one way or another, you have to go look at a house that you intend to buy. And you don't want the seller there. So you need someone who is trusted by the seller to let you in.

If you can put together a service whereby someone other than real estate agents can do that task, then maybe you could gain traction on everything else.

But I have not talked to anybody who is interested in the work of automating everything else until the problem of physical access to homes is solved, because there isn't money in paperwork. The money in real estate comes from two sources - commissions and mortgages. And most marketing plans depend on reducing commissions, not just redirecting them to a new recipient. So it makes much more business sense to ignore the paperwork that agents normally do, and focus on the mortgage process than the inspection, title, closing process.

After all, that paperwork isn't a pain point for buyers or sellers - they don't do it anyway. The agents do. So the attitude becomes one of, "Who cares if an online service automates the paperwork, when you still needed that agent to open the door? Let the agent go do the paperwork, and at least do some work to earn their stupid commission."

So... I am not familiar with this problem. But what about drones to fly inside and snap pics?

Most of the features you described, and the fee structure associated with them, would be in violation of real estate licensing laws. Hence why no one has provided a modern, competitive alternative to real estate brokers: you simply can't under the current regulatory regime. Otherwise, what you've described would almost certainly already exist.

Update: added sources

[0]: http://www.justice.gov/atr/rebates-make-buying-home-less-exp... [1]: https://www.openlistings.com/offers/new

For example, the vast majority of your staff that interfaces with your customers would need real estate licenses in each state you operate in (along with the tens or hundreds of hours of state mandated education to get those licenses). This is in addition to a company brokerage license for each state.

EDIT: Just saw your edits, and that you guys are doing exactly this - good luck! The industry needs more innovation. :)

I can't speak universally for every state (there's 50 different sets of regulations, after all), but no. The carve out for FSBO is predicated on selling your own home. If you're facilitating the sale or rental of someone else's home, it triggers the licensing requirements.

There are certainly valid reasons not to do so. Not the least of which being that if the person quitting the title claims didn't actually hold a clear title, then no ownership will actually transfer. But if you think that it is illegal to bypass the processes, then you are too caught up in the processes.

You're talking about something totally different than I am here. Selling your own home is a distinct concern from facilitating others in the sale of their home in exchange for payment. The latter cannot be done without following state licensing regulations, which is what I'm talking about above.

Uber, AirBnB redux. Provide a service that people want more than one built on cronyism-type relations between entrenched industry and gov't, and the change happens even with the existing law base.

It's not like it's some secret as to how the laws got there in the first place.

Not trying to be a debby-downer here (I'd love to see innovation in the industry), but this would almost certainly get stomped on before it could ever reach critical mass. Uber and Airbnb were able to exploit loopholes in existing regulations, and move quicker than the disconnected, regionally focused incumbents. By the time the incumbents (taxi companies, hotels) caught on, they were left flat footed.

The real estate industry in the United States is a very different situation. The incumbent interests are tightly organized and politically active on a national level. The National Association of Realtors was the third largest spender on lobbying in the USA last year. The only groups that outspent them were the US Chamber of Commerce, and the American Medical Association: https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000062

As a result, the regulatory framework in most states highly restrictive and robust. There are few, if any, loopholes to exploit, since the NAR lobbies heavily on a state-by-state basis for uniform, restrictive regulations: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB112381069428011613

I see little difference between: A) Hiring a real estate agent to sell my home; and B) Selling it myself while hiring:

1) a photographer to take/post my pictures 2) an answering service to answer a throwaway phone number I create; and 3) a tour guide that does not even know their way around

The second someone unlicensed starts to regularly interface with other agents, they will get ratted out and stomped on. If you don't interface with other agents, then you are excluding most of the market.

This is probably why I trust the average Airbnb host/Uber driver more than the average RE.

As a buyer, I was never "found". Without representation, I would seek the listing agents directly and have them give the tour. I figure the listing agent would be very eager to earn a bonus/double commission from their selling client, perhaps to my benefit even though I have no exclusive with them.