For many years, we've had a surplus of several hundred thousand Realtors. And, that does not include the thousands that are not NAR members.

So, the majority of NAR members do not represent the successful agents and brokers in the industry. Let's begin the clean up by the liquidation of NAR. We need a creative fresh start for the industry.

There may be 766,000 Realtors, but we all know that only 20% of them do 80% of the business.  So I think his argument is specious.

Not all licensees are Rs. MANY commercial practitioners don't care about NAR and see no benefit to membership. 
MANY residential practitioners are TIRED of the politics that our money goes toward but we do not align with. 
At the end of the day, the strong will survive and the dead leaves will fall away.
Wanna change the world? REMOVE the 'alphabet soup orgs' all over our country and start with NAR! 

I find it interesting that they base their opinion on just Realtors. Where's the data on license real estate agents?

But no matter like any sales business, the industry always weed out the weak / green peas over time. Especially when the green peas discovered it's a lot more work then they think - LOL...

Real estate is a jealous sport, wants, demands all of you to embrace the hours, dealing with all types of buyers and sellers.  Re-inventing what we do daily is why seasoned agents/brokers/REALTORS weather any "storm" and adjust their "sales". Think customers, hard work and not a quick buck. Getting hunkered down deep in the real estate trenches during a steep incline more difficult market. That's the best real estate beginning to a career so you will never ever take anything for granted @carolinegerado. It's the drive and passion where success happens in any industry if you never ever stop thinking about "how can I help you... save time, money, frustration". 

That is a very long article Caroline Gerardo - I read it all and will revisit again later.  Part of me was thinking of "fake news" "misinformation" and "disinformation" 

One thing I know for certain.  The Glut is REAL. 

My initial thoughts on this are in alignment with Roy Kelley. A fresh start is called for! 

Only read the intro, but it's nothing new at all.  Same stuff from the early 2000s and pretty much every boom cycle.  People get in because it looks easy (and it is compared to a normal market or a buyer's market).  When it takes work they leave.  Same story, different year.  Been seeing it for 30+ years now.

Like a few others that have commented, the numbers are larger for those practicing real estate because not everyone subscribes to NAR. Also, there will be another mass exodus the first of October here, when those who are dabbling or using real estate transactions to supplement another income, will leave the industry (again) because of the shift!

Those of us who have made it through a few cycles will learn as much as possible to continue thriving!

It was well researched.  I'm still digesting it however.  I will add one thing, and that not all licensees are Realtors.  Granted, he did use only existing home sales.  I've found most sales agents at new home developments are not Realtors.  I would agree there are too many Realtors but it helps keep the cost of dues lower if we include those who are less productive and perhaps only work part time in the industry.  

I always find it interesting when people comment on something I have been doing for years/decades/lifetime. Only those in the KNOW really know

In Colorado, one-third are only real estate agents.   After a DOJ lawsuit, there is no rule you have to be a REALTOR.

I admittedly didn't real the entire thing, but in response to the TL:DR synopsis, the real estate industry (real estate agents & mortgage loan officers) is too bloated with "professionals".  Those of us in the trenches know our industry is bloated and a tremendous number of people doing very, very little business takes away from those making a true career of it.  

In real estate, this is at best annoying, and at worse, can be disastrous for consumers (when inexperienced or unprofessional agents screw something up on a transaction of several hundred thousand dollars, it can be a big boo boo!).  In mortgage, it's at best annoying, and at worse, equally disastrous as a loan officer not knowing (or caring to know) guidelines and pretending to know things they don't can cost someone their home, deposits, result in the wrong loan product costing thousands, etc.

I don't know a proper solution because I know some "part timers" that are good and some "full timers" that are terrible, but the problem isn't too difficult to identify.  IMO, the industry would be best served by self-policing, with brokers, franchises, and lenders simply firing the folks that aren't doing a good job and maintaining only high caliber professionals on their rosters.

LONG article, need more time to read and comment.  

There have always been more licenses than homes sold in my 23 year career - yawn- no new news here.
Technology does not equal efficiency - that still depends on the user's abilities. 
Pointing out dramatic differences in numbers from 2000 to 2022 is not news either, the last 22 years has seen the most unprecedented changes in real estate. And in CA, the numbers change about every 3-6 months.
Natural selection always filters our industry. The transactional and unprofessional get swept mostly away in markets where work is actually involved beyond fogging a mirror and the pros like many of us here in The Rain remain to weather the storm and clean up the mess the summer soldiers left behind. I liken the bandwagon agents to the tourist of San Diego: they come and enjoy and polute our beaches, then local volunteers and city workers that are here 24/7 clean up the coastline after they leave. They'll never know the value or pride of ownership because they just rent the experience.
The trends have always been this way and I do not get bogged down by how many agents are in the business because I only associate with and focus on those agents that inspire me and lift me up as do I them. You could add 2 million agents to the market tomorrow and I'm still going to do my annual increasing numbers because my skills pay the bills whether there's 500,000 or 5,000,000 agents. You still need to know how to convert prospects and earn referrals. Great article by the way Caroline, very interesting data.

Couldn't read it all, but cut to the chase to read that we are our own worst enemy.  I think we already know that.  But on the other hand, it's not all about how much money we make, it's about serving the public.  So with more competition, then there should be more opportunities for the public to be served correctly. 

We are in a profession in which only the strong survive.  There's enough business out there for those that know what they are doing, are self motivated, are natural salespeople and understand that contacts make contracts.  We can make the kind of money that Doctors, Lawyers and C{PA's make so it's worth the commitment and effort.

There's definitely a glut of agents and many of them do not do a service to the industry. There should be a higher "barrier to entry". NAR  needs to go! I have not felt any benefit from being a member, but I am routinely FORCED to join to gain access to my MLS. That needs to change!

Numbers rise and numbers fall, doesnt matter to me.

The small number of productive agents know that what others do does not matter, it all comes down to what we each do daily to build our business.

So, I didn't read the entire article because it was too long. Here are a few points.

I do think Real Estate is a business in itself. People getting into the business take classes and pay dues which brings in more money to those who provide classes and services. It doesn't matter if an agent is making money or not, they're still paying money to be an agent.

Brokers want more agents because it helps them control the market even if a single agent is only doing a few deals. 

I do think there should be an apprentice program before someone is left to represent others. I've always felt this way. He does mention how appraisers and hairdressers have these programs. If we're an organization who is set on protecting the public, why wouldn't we?

I do believe we have way too many agents that water down the profession and we'll see people get out of the business when they need to pay bills or when they do their taxes and see what little money they actually made for the time invested.

If an individual did a business analysis and plan like you would do when you start most business, I think they'd see starting a Real Estate business is not a good investment of time and money for the majority. If you were going to open an ice cream store wouldn't you make sure you're not opening it in an area that's saturated ice cream stores? 

Back in the early days of Real Estate, the contract was 1-2 pages long. The average agent may not have had lockboxes or computers but they also didn't have all the paperwork we have. They also didn't have a cell phone and email you were expected to tend to 24/7. They also didn't have to compete with internet "companies" that compete with the agent and ask the agent to pay for leads. There are pros and cons to both times, pre-internet and post. 

When he talks about how many deals an agent can do, he doesn't mention how we have to spend a lot of time and money advertising ourselves. 

The other day I saw my local Chick-fil-a advertising they're paying $16 an hour for employees (mostly kids) and thought, I bet most Real Estate agents don't make $16 an hour. 

I think this profession needs an overhaul in so many ways. And yes, we need fewer agents. I do think Real Estate is changing. If NAR doesn't make some changes, it will change on its own and probably won't need NAR.

It's a good start but a rather incomplete analysis on more than a few fronts. That said- regardless of the specifics of the analysis- it is clear that the weak will leave the business, as it's always been- so this analysis trying to justify a likely scenario highlights scenarios that play out in every economic cycle. There are many specific factors named that don't apply in my market- but the larger trends are identical. Just like any boom cycle- people pour into sectors that are perceived to be easy money...and might be for a brief period. Covid changed a lot of behaviors in the workplace and that also needs to be factored into the equation, along with incomes, inflation, interest rates, age demographics, etc, etc, etc if you really wanted a complete analysis.

Never forget the saying, paraphrased - There are lies, damn lies and then there are Statistics. Numbers can indeed lie when structured in the right way. 

The average agent in my market is barely 1 sale per year- largely because the sales process is different- and most agents can earn a decent income on rentals alone. I would estimate the top agents are doing between 12-15 sales a year on their own- but if they lead a team, it will be a multiple of that based on the size of the team. The agents doing 100+ sales a year are either have a new development and/or it's because of the size of their team- not so much with individual achievement but of course there are exceptions. Deals here are extremely time consuming with condos typically taking 2-4 months from accepted offer to closing and co-op's taking 3-5 months from accepted offer to closing. Both often require more paperwork from the buyer once in contract than a bank will require.    

This industry is STRUCTURED to provide safe harbor for the ineffective.
The issue is NOT NAR (I am NOT a NAR fan) but with every BROKER involved with NAR.
THE FIX.
Compel BROKERS to identify their company based on per agent productivity.
A broker with 3,000 agents and 1,000 closed transactions and average time in RE at 25 years, should be publicly classified in all advertising as "An OLD BONES YARD." (less than on trans/yr per agent)
A broker with 3,000 agents and 1,000 closed transaction and average4 time in RE is 5 years should be publicly classified in all advertising as "A real estate agent kindergarten.' (less than 1 trans/yr per agent)
Brokers create this mess. They should be compelled to fix it by identifying their TRUE nature.
Who knows maybe KW and EXP will be reclassified as MLM instead of real estate franchises.
Bad things in real estate originate with the BROKER, not the membership.
Imagine the change if BROKERS were compelled to provide benefits or guaranteed wage even if just a stipend. 
The sorting and thinning of the herd would be immediate.
The resulting phoenix would be free market at its best.
The TECH is ready, but the spirit is unwilling to change.

If NAR did not exist, there is no reason to believe that the statistics would be vastly different. License agents would not be REALTORS, is the only difference. When the market is such that outsiders think that all you need to do is put a sign in a yard and cash a commission check, agent numbers grow. When the market changes and when agents find out that there is real work to be done to be successful as a real estate agent, agent numbers decline. Until the nest sellers market arrives and then the cycle repeats.