> Walk us through how you think RealPage is going afoul of "antitrust laws". I'll presume you're talking about price fixing, which is a subset of antitrust laws but separate from them (i.e. you don't need to fall afoul of antitrust to be convicted of price fixing.)
If there is a town of 8k rental apartments and I own 4k and you own 2k do you agree that we would run afoul of price fixing laws if we get together in a room to exchange information about our vacancy rates, state of the apartment and rents that we currently charge?
If yes, how can it then be legal for a third party to take the same information and do some "statistical" analysis (the new "it's app so it is not ...") and give us suggested rent prices?
> The thing about price fixing is, it's a matter of prisoner's dilemma. If any one firm in a price fixing regime defects, e.g. they lower prices below the fixed price, they "win" the market. If a bunch of landlords collude to offer rents at $115 / mo, the first landlord to offer similar properties at $100 / mo will immediately win over all prospective tenants.
So your argument is price fixing doesn't work?
> To prove that RealPage is performing price fixing, you'd need to prove that a substantial portion of landlords are using RealPage as a pretext to setting prices concurrently. I find this really hard to believe due to the sheer number of independent landlords available. If anything the housing market is probably more sensitive to price changes because of how constrained the supply is in the US.
To put some numbers behind this, in LA independent private landlords own 33% of rental properties, that means institutional and corporate investors still own the vast majority of rental properties.
The big contention in pretty much all lawsuits is how "optional" the price recommendations really are.
> To put some numbers behind this, in LA independent private landlords own 33% of rental properties, that means institutional and corporate investors still own the vast majority of rental properties.
This figure just shows how many LA properties are owned by an LLC or incorporated entity and is a very dubious figure. Most landlords incorporate to protect their own liability and to have access to business financing. Look at [1] for details.
> If there is a town of 8k rental apartments and I own 4k and you own 2k do you agree that we would run afoul of price fixing laws if we get together in a room to exchange information about our vacancy rates, state of the apartment and rents that we currently charge?
The problem here has nothing to do with using an app or talking to each other. The problem is that there are only two landlords. There is no housing market in the entire US larger than a subdivision that has this kind of a market.
> So your argument is price fixing doesn't work?
Everyone who price fixes has to agree on those prices. If a market has a lot of competition it's almost impossible to get everyone to agree on prices. And at that point, RealPage or price fixing isn't the problem, it's the oligopoly in the market.
[1]: https://cayimby.org/blog/institutional-investors-in-californ...
> If there is a town of 8k rental apartments and I own 4k and you own 2k ...
You can't make policy this way. There is no such market anywhere in America, where 2 players own a majority share. In the case that I cited there is only 1 RealPage client in the city and they manage 100 of 30k homes.
There isn't, it's to illustrate a point. If it's collusion when two players control everything and agree to to raise prices on the phone, why isn't it collusion when it's 300 players and there's a website that they're doing it on?