Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
For nearly 20 years, the real estate business has framed its future as a fight for survival: agents versus technology, traditional commissions versus flat fees, full-service representation versus for-sale-by-owner listings. Every few years, another wave of predictions claims agents are on the verge of disappearing, tech will make the profession unnecessary and the old model is finally breaking. Yet that collapse has never arrived, largely because the industry has been debating the wrong issue.
Consumers are not lying awake asking whether real estate agents should exist. They are asking how much guidance they need for the home sale or purchase in front of them. That distinction matters, and it is the question the industry has often missed while continuing to replay the same old arguments.
The clearest evidence is the trend that should make the ongoing FSBO debate feel outdated: for-sale-by-owner activity is at an all-time low.
Last year, only 5% of home sales happened without any agent involved, down from more than 20% in the 1980s. At the same time, 91% of sellers worked with an agent. If the future of real estate were truly defined by consumers abandoning agents altogether, the numbers would be moving in that direction. They are not. Buyers and sellers still value professional help. What is changing is more nuanced: they are questioning how much help they need, which services matter most and what they are willing to pay for.
Real estate is finally catching up to everyone else
Real estate remains one of the few major industries where services are still largely sold as a single bundle. Hiring an agent typically means paying for pricing guidance, MLS access, marketing, negotiation, paperwork and professional advice all at once, whether the client needs every piece of that package or only part of it.
Other industries have already moved through this shift. Travel agents were once the default path for booking a trip; now consumers can plan everything themselves, bring in an expert for complex itineraries or choose a hybrid option. Investing followed a similar pattern, giving people the choice to manage their own portfolios, pay a flat fee for targeted advice or rely on a full-service financial advisor.
Tax preparation has split into similar lanes. Real estate, by comparison, has been slow to unbundle because the transaction itself remains complicated enough that full-service support has continued to feel like the safest choice for many consumers.
That’s actually changing, and the National Association of Realtors settlement accelerated it, whether anyone intended that or not. Buyer-agent commissions are now negotiated individually instead of baked silently into the deal, and sellers are no longer required to cover them automatically. Flat fee MLS listings, hourly consultations and à la carte services are becoming real options rather than fringe ones. None of this is eliminating the agent relationship; it’s just giving people more entry points into how much of it they actually want.
Good agents win when consumers get more options
Here’s where the conversation gets a little uncomfortable for some agents and a little exciting for others. The agents who are nervous about unbundling are usually the ones whose value was tied up in tasks that technology was always going to make easier: scheduling showings, generating comps, formatting paperwork, etc. Those things were never really the reason a good agent was worth the money.
The agents who thrive when consumers get more options are the ones whose actual value was always negotiation, judgment under pressure, local market knowledge that doesn’t show up in an algorithm and the ability to walk a stressed-out buyer or seller through a decision that’s bigger than almost anything else they’ll do financially. Unbundling doesn’t threaten that kind of expertise — it clarifies it. When a consumer can choose exactly which services they’re paying for, the services that are genuinely hard to replicate become more obviously valuable, not less.
This is where I’d point to something like Ownli, the flat-fee real estate platform built around the idea that consumers shouldn’t have to choose between affordability and real representation. The traditional model ties commission to home price, so two nearly identical transactions can cost wildly different amounts for the same basic work. And it’s not about stripping services down to a menu; it’s about making the cost of good representation transparent and predictable instead of opaque and percentage-based. Consumers don’t actually want less help. They want to know what they’re paying for and why, and they want that price to reflect the actual work involved rather than an arbitrary cut of their home’s value. That’s not anti-agent. It’s pro-consumer in a way that, if anything, makes good agents more valuable by forcing the market to compete on transparency and real service instead of legacy pricing nobody questions.
The industry keeps fighting over whether agents will survive technology. That’s the wrong question, and the data already answered it. The real question — the one actually shaping where this market is headed — is what level of service each consumer needs for their specific deal. Real estate spent decades as one of the only major service industries that hadn’t figured out how to answer that question flexibly. It’s starting to now. The agents and platforms that understand the difference are going to be in a much stronger position than the ones still arguing about a war that consumer behavior already settled.
For about two decades, the real estate industry has talked about itself like it’s in the middle of a war. Agents vs. technology. Full commission vs. flat fee. For-sale-by-owner (FSBO) vs. full service. Every few years, a new headline declares that agents are about to go extinct, technology is about to make the profession obsolete and the old model is finally cracking. None of that has actually happened, and there’s a pretty obvious reason why. Consumers were never asking the question the industry kept arguing about.
Nobody wakes up wondering whether real estate agents should exist as a category. They wake up wondering how much help they actually need for the specific situation in front of them. That’s a completely different question, and it’s the one the industry has mostly ignored while it kept refighting the same fight.
Here’s the part that should embarrass everyone still arguing about FSBO. It’s at an all time low.
