Jared, should a seller who chooses broker-to-broker exposure through the RLS be able to keep that listing off a consumer-facing platform like StreetEasy? I mean,

look, it goes back to, you know, what's right for the seller.

So if they chose to do participants only where it is only visible behind a password, you know, to revenue members, to industry professionals, there was a reason it was done, right? And, you know, for instance, you look at VHS.

So we have in Manhattan, we have a 12 to 15%, let's call it market share of active listings.

When you look at the amount of participants only, we have about 20.

So it is not frequently used, but there's about 20 sellers right now that a BHS agent is working with that has a reason to be able to do this.

And if they chose to do it, then they want to be able to co-broke because they're open to that, but they don't want it all over the consumer-facing sites or out from the public.

when you're looking at it, what's wrong with the way we used to always do

It's

beautiful.

It's whatever.

What is your opinion on that? I don't think it's inherently more beneficial to one or the other.

I think the reality is that buyers may be more happy with the information they're going to gleam off of AI from a price history than sellers, because it's going to tell the seller that your property, depending on when you bought it, you may be underwater.

I think the other very interesting phenomenon in our market, right, is that the... obviously we have what, 60, 65% cash, right? So financing as a whole makes up a small subset.

And then the average amount of financing is arguably pretty low.

Do you think today they're becoming more strategic advisors, as Andres just said, or are they just kind of going through the typical normal motions that they normally would? Are there better agents out there bringing in a lot of business? Are they kind of changing strategically? to

What is that impetus, you know,

generally speaking? From a global standpoint, you know, owning a piece of New York City or Manhattan in particular is generally seen as a status symbol, right? So from a global international consumer perspective, right? And then you boil it down, as we talked about before, there are certain buildings that have certain reputations or have certain people.

And then essentially you're buying into the club.

It's no different than if you were joining a specific country club or some other group of people.

Some buildings in our market, as other markets have, have become this club within a club.

Mickey's correct that much of what when we talk about a luxury purchase is all about how do they get back time? How do they improve their quality of life? It's a calculated decision.

that spending this money is gonna result in X amount of satisfaction, sure, or X amount of time saved or X amount of minutia removed from their day, right? And that's true in looking at, you know, the incredible amount of house staff, right? And the demand that has gone through the roofs for that.

What is the biggest misconception agents have about the wealthy consumer? Or what's the reality when they're faced with a wealthy person wanting to buy