Rascoff explained that Zillow really has “no skin in the commission game” when it comes to what real estate professionals get paid, comparing Zillow to information provider WebMD.Not accurate at all. For one, Zillow could do about 1000 things to promote competition among realtors, but it doesn't do that.
It could remind people that in 1950, the Supreme Court ruled that putting a hard-coded "6 %" on a real estate contract is, in fact, illegal price fixing.
It could remind people that "6 percent" of a sales price often equates to a much larger number when it comes to equity lost (e.g. if you have 250K equity in a house worth 750K, the commission amounts to ~ 21.3333 % of your equity.
It could remind Realtors that attempting to get people to sign contracts that they refuse to negotiate on is coercion, and it could help people sue Realtors who participate in cartel-like practices.
But it doesn't do that.
For those interested: The Supreme Court case from 1950: UNITED STATES v. REAL ESTATE BOARDS https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/339/485.html
Factual findings of the Court
Enough has been said to show that under our decisions an illegal price-fixing scheme has
been proved, unless the [339 U.S. 485, 489] fixing of real estate commissions is not included
in the prohibitions of 3 of the Act. Price-fixing is per se an unreasonable restraint of trade.
It is not for the courts to determine whether in particular settings price-fixing serves an
honorable or worthy end. An agreement, shown either by adherence to a price schedule or by
proof of consensual action fixing the uniform or minimum price, is itself illegal under the
Sherman Act, no matter what end it was designed to serve.