"It was conceived as a place to make people happy"

Carol Lloyd's recent column reminds me of Celebration, Florida. Or, really, any place that's so micromanaged that happiness becomes a commodity.

"The real estate agent's very purpose is coming into question."

Very interesting Slate article on a C-21 attempt to boost the idea of your friendly local Realtor.

"Home-buyers have discovered they can use the Web to scout out listings on their own," it reads. "Meanwhile, sellers are demanding flat-rate deals and a la carte services in an attempt to minimize the agent's cut. People are starting to wonder: Why do I need a real estate agent at all?"

Agents want to be known as the go-to people, taking people through a process that they cannot understand as well on their own. They want to be marketed as a buyer's shrewd best friend.

But, as the Slate article points out, only one half of this might even be necessary: "Sure, it's great when an agent becomes a pal and confidante, consoles you with tender notions about 'memories,' or (as happens in the spot titled 'First-Time Buyers') hands over your new house keys, says 'Welcome home,' and gives you a big bear hug," it reads.

"But thoughtful gestures and congenial chitchat are not services worth thousands of dollars. Much better would have been a campaign that portrayed these agents as shrewd negotiators, or sharp assessors of a home's true market value. Those are the skills people might be willing to fork over that 6 percent for."

What the article misses is the friendly factor. Is a personable agent, the one who's going to bring you flowers upon a succesful close, the best one for you? Quite possibly not. But people -- and Americans in particular -- respond to the smile, the soft sell. Agents know this. I agree with Slate -- nice, schmice, get me the best deal at the best terms -- but sometimes the nice guy doesn't finish last.

"Andrew died"

A really weird death of a really rich developer.

"Another ... in a litany of P.R. stunts"

Looks like Wal-Mart is extending a hand to its smaller rivals.

What's next? Are Borders and Barnes and Noble going to start sending customers to the tiny used bookstore on the corner?

Doubtful. More likely: They want to clean up their image, and they're counting on public gullability to do it. Good luck.

Development-free zones

A bit of heartening news from the New York Times.