The landlords are the ones writing the listing, the agent is the one collecting the money for supposedly "connecting" someone, when AT MOST all they did was post it onto a couple websites like AirBnB. I have no problem with the fee a website collects for listings. They provided a service that allowed the listing to be spread. But the agent is now just an unnecessary middleman between the landlord and such services. 9 times out of 10 real estate agents don't meaningfully contribute to the matching of landlord/tenant in the NYC or Boston markets, yet they continue to collect a fee. And as I mentioned this happens even when it is provable that the prospective tenant found the apartment via a source 100% unrelated to the real estate agent (such as a friend in a different unit).

Before you try to argue that landlords wouldn't pay them if they didn't contribute - the landlord doesn't pay! In cities where the landlord has to pay, you will find agents are used much less often and charge cheaper prices for these sort of rental services. The problem is when the landlord chooses the agent but the tenant has to pay. Every agent just charges the max allowable fee, and the majority of landlords stick with this scheme, whether out of stubbornness, loyalty, or kickbacks I don't know - but it hurts tenants far more than landlords. Otherwise you are correct, landlords would stop using them unless their prices went down!

Let me know when a real estate agent makes their own website that gains traction across the city.