Tech Thursday: Are you addicted yet?

After a Wacky Wednesday, I thought it might be time to return to real estate technology…

ShackPrices adds mass transit to their listing search and Greg continues to be impressed(so am I)

USA Today provides an idea for a potential update to ShackPrices… What if Galen included the emotional map of each area?

Speaking of new online mapping tools, Joel has a nice write up on a new home search site out of Toronto called Real Estate Plus that was built by Fraser Beach

The vFlyer folks published a huge list of Web2.0 sites… There are some obvious omissions (I would have found a place for sites like Cyberhomes, Sellsius, PropertyShark, RealEstateShows, HomeHugg and, of course, Shackprices), but overall, it was a valiant effort to capture the cutting edge of the online real estate front…

[photopress:dustin_reptile.jpg,full,alignright]The Real Estate Zealot gives some good background on using Yahoo’s JumpCut to edit and stream real estate videos… (If YouTube made the previous list, then JumpCut appears to have earned a spot as well…)

Nothing too big, but I have been working with some others to build some new themes and widgets for a WordPress website for a Move Trends website that went up a little bit ago… (Note: I also took control over the “hat” at the top of Move.com, so don’t be too surprised if I start sending traffic to random places! LOL!)

The release of the updated Google Analytics has been a real joy! I spent way too much time this evening clicking on the “Entrance Sources” option for popular pages on RCG (it feels much more informative than the previous layout). In the process, I’ve learned a ton about where and how traffic is reaching the site and I’ve actually learned that some of my previous assumptions were completely wrong. (However, considering I’m not using any of the goal tracking or funnel analysis, Seth thinks I should just quit… but I’m having way too much fun to quit…)

I’ve also been wasting spending way too much time on Facebook recently (it ramped up after Joel’s recent post). Fight it if you wish, but I predict online social networking is in your future…

UPDATE: Shortly after hitting publish, Trulia announced some major enhancements to their websiteBloodhound has the details (including a podcast by Bryan).

What do you mean I already "picked" MY agent!?!

“I was told at work that if I see even ONE house with an agent, that agent becomes MY agent.”

It’s a scary thought that seeing one single house with an agent, locks you into some kind of long term unwritten contract with that agent. I have heard the quoted statement more than once from my clients, so to keep this article as short as possible, I’m going to answer it with examples. The underlying principles involved can be addressed by responding to questions in the comment portion.

Example #1:

Buyer Consumer passes by a house for sale, pulls out their cell phone and calls the number on the sign and asks to see the house. Agent who answers the phone says I’m two minutes away, if you wait there I’ll show it to you. Buyer sees house and decides to make an offer, but doesn’t like the agent who showed up and intends to leave and submit an offer through an agent who is NOT the agent who showed them the house. Can they do that?

Clearly a consumer cannot be forced to use an agent they don’t like or know. The question is not what the buyer can or cannot do as their next step. The question is can the agent who they choose to write the offer and represent them end up not getting paid? More to the point, can the agent who gets paid be required to give the money back months after it closes? That answer to both of those questions is yes.

Buyer can choose their agent always, buyer can’t guarantee that the agent will get paid for their efforts in most cases.

Example #2

Buyer Consumer calls phone number in an ad and asks to see the property in the ad. Agent shows up and shows them the house and they want to make an offer.

Example #3

Buyer consumer goes into an Open House, likes it, wants to make an offer.

Example #4

Buyer consumer looks at houses on several separate occasions with an agent. They find house they like and ask the agent several questions. Buyer not satisfied with answers regarding advices at this point and decides to find a different agent to make an offer.

Example #5

Buyer consumer sees that they can get a “rebate” if they use a certain agent to write the offer. They thank the agent, who they liked very much, but decide to use a different agent in order to get “cash back at closing”.

These are all real life every day examples of what happens out in the real world. So let’s get back to the original statement. “I was told at work that when I see a house with an agent…that agent becomes my agent.”

The people who quoted that statement seemed to think that the agent who showed that one house became “their” agent, even if they didn’t want to buy THAT house. So the simple answer to those people is NO. If you see a house with an agent, that agent does not become your agent long term when you decide to buy a different house. UNLESS you signed a Buyer Agency Agreement with that agent in order to see that house.

Never sign a Buyer Agency Agreement just to see one house (or make an offer on one house) with someone you are not choosing to be your agent long term. I would think that is obvious, but for what it’s worth I’ll say it again. NEVER sign a buyer agency agreement with someone you are not selecting to be your agent into the future.

Once you DO, IF you do, sign a Buyer Agency agreement in order to see a house or make an offer, understand that piece of paper could come back to bite you in the butt, when you least expect it, many months later.

If you do not sign a Buyer Agency Agreement you have the freedom to choose your agent at ANY time. What you can’t decide is whether or not that agent will be paid. But there is no rule for consumers that says they are not free to choose their own agent, as long as the agent is willing to risk not getting paid.

Where should the MLS end and the IDX begin?

The whole ruckus over the NWMLS no longer sending its member’s listings to realtor.com inspired many unlit pixels of commentary and many more wasted bytes of hard drive space. As I pondered a while ago, the industry appears to have a healthy appetite for technology. However, one of the comments was really insightful….

I still feel that this decision made by the board was wrong. As was the decision last year to disable the client email updates from Locator. We have the technology but are unwilling to use it. I have no love of REALTOR.com but I see no problem with sharing a limited set of data with them and offering our sellers maximum exposure of their listing. In fact, perhaps one of the reasons they discontinued the feed was because as Galen said, “Realtor.com was given the exclusive non-broker feed…” and they were getting pressure from Google and others to get a similar feed. I say give it to them. NWMLS has the ability to provide its members, all of them, with the technology usually reserved only for those with very deep pockets.

The whole thing got me wondering if this just a tactic for the big brokers to keep their upstarts at bay? Because of the MLS system, the big brokers share their listings inventory, with the smaller and independent brokers. However, perhaps the big brokers want the technology out of the MLS, because it harms the smaller upstarts without withholding listings from them?

Maybe there’s a less nefarious motivation. Since the NWMLS board appears to be dominated by members that belong to big brokers, perhaps they don’t want the NWMLS spending its’ limited computing resources (at the end of the day, even the Google’s & Microsoft’s have limited budgets, they just have a few more zeros at the end than most of us do) in areas where a big broker’s IT department or a motivated IDX vendor could do a better job. Regardless of the motivations, it does bring an interesting issue to light.

What should the MLS responsibilities be in terms of listing change notification, statistics/reporting, automated listing distribution, listing access via mobile devices or any number of things that either an MLS or an IDX vendor could provide?

I’m sure the big brokers are less enthusiastic about this type of thing because some have probably already invented these kind of technologies in house years ago (and paid for it out of their own pocket). They probably also see the MLS as competition for viewer eyeballs and would rather the MLS make it easier to combine listings data across their empires instead of being a shared technology provider. MLS regionalization is probably much higher on their MLS IT wish list. After all, the point of an MLS is to share listings data, not share listings technology.

The independent agents and the smaller brokers, probably want the MLS to provide these services, so they don’t have invest any more money in their IDX vendor / IT infrastructure that they don’t have to. I also suspect a lot people in that market segment see technology as an expense and not as an investment. They only want it, if they don’t have to pay for it.

As for me, I’m just an IDX vendor (I don’t have a dog in the fight). From my biased perspective, the less the MLS does, the more valuable my technology becomes, the more useful my services become, and the more opportunities for paying customers I get. I want you to spend money on your IT infrastructure and your IDX vendor! Apparently, the big brokers want you to do the same via their MLS policy direction!

Because it was a Wacky Wednesday…

Will Hicks lets us know that there are plenty of US embassies still on the market

Ron Ares leads us to the ultimate real estate ethics guru: Ted Truitt

[photopress:wacky_wednesday.jpg,thumb,alignright]Because Flipping should only be practiced by professionals

How not to show a home

It’s the little things that get so darn messy

If you’re willing to follow, Marlow leads us toward a worldly journey of kitchens, bathrooms, bedrooms, etc where there is no normal: Normal Room

And, of course, the original: Wacky Wednesday

Bribery to Work with the Builder’s Preferred Lender

When ever I’m working with a home buyer who may be considering new construction, I know I might lose them to the builder’s in house lender.   Often times the builder will offer an enticing credit to the buyer’s closing costs only if they obtain their financing from the builder’s preferred lender.

How can having a Loan Originator (in this case, they are a retail sales mortgage person, or what ever Jillayne refers to them as  🙂  since they wait to be fed from the builder, often sitting at the construction site) who’s livelihood is supported by the Seller (i.e. the Builder) be in the Buyer’s best interest?    Who is looking out for whom?  How do you know the Loan Originator will not disclose the Buyer’s private information to the Builder if pressed?

Enough of my questions…here are some of my recent dealings with the Builder credit when working with the preferred lender.

UPDATE 12/12/2018: Unfortunately, it looks like part of the this original post is missing.

What's in the best interests of agents?

Jan at the logical dog has set up a petition that requests the NWMLS board to reverse it’s decision and continue sending listings to Realtor.com.

This got me thinking about the often-interesting dynamic between the “best interests” of brokers vs the “best interest” of agents, which is something I’ve heard Russ Cofano talk to quite eloquently. However, I really don’t have a feel for how agents feel about this issue. Is the decision to stop sending listings scene as something that was “thrust” upon agents, or is it something they advocated for? Because of the NWMLS unusual status of a “broker-owned” MLS, I’m assuming the former, but I’ve been wrong before so I’d be interested in hearing from agents in the audience…

Homepages.com – Now less bad

I was reading an article on HouseValues on the Motely Fool. I discovered they relaunched their site recently. Anyway, here’s a quick rundown of the things I noticed…

  • They are now using MS Virtual Earth instead of their old flash map
  • I like how they integrated “Home Buying”, “Home Selling”, “Loans” into tabs onto one site
  • Home value feature is still a lead generator for agents
  • More ads from non real estate advertisers (T-mobile, Dish Network)
  • Site feels sluggish

It’s a little better, but not by enough to change any business issues that the company has.

Home Valuation "Tools"

I spend a great deal of my time determining the value of real estate.  So much so, that sometimes I can’t turn off the valuation tool in my head.  Even when I take a “power walk”, I’m clicking off the value of property as I walk by each house.

I can clearly understand the confusion of homebuyers and homesellers and Zillow.  I took just a couple of blocks of homes this morning and found these values for “price per square foot” in the mls :

$470, $700$330, $430, $530, $400, $365, $415, and $660. 

Doesn’t seem very likely that homes in the same block would have such a variance in the price per square foot, does it?

I then went to Zillow and hit comparables and found these values for price per square foot of LOT in Zillow:

$67, $87, $243, $24, $49, $15. – a little clue for Zillow there 🙂  

Doesn’t seem very likely that one lot is worth $243 per square foot and another nearby is only worth $15 a square foot, does it?

We do know that price per square foot CAN be the great equalizer, and yet no one has developed a tool for valuing property that is remotely reliable in certain neighborhoods.

So how do we in the business value homes?  I’m going to write a couple of articles today.  This one will focus on the area noted above, which happens to be in a view corrider.  You can use this method for valuing any neighborhood with view considerations.  First you have to find “the free house”.  If you see a house sell, and walk by later and see the house is gone, that house was FREE. 

In this example, I found “the free house” and determined the price per square foot of the lot was $130.  House sold for $700,000, lot was 5,385 square feet, house was torn down immediately after sale, so the price is the value of the lot. 

Now let’s go back and look at the house that sold for “$700 per square foot”.  If you go to the tax record, you will see that the property is 50% improved.  The tax record of “the free house” shows 4% improved, which we know to be 0%.  Now we take the lot of 9,500 square feet and multiply that by $130 per square foot as determined by “the free house”.  So now we know the value of the dirt UNDER the house is $1.2 million  Now we take the square footage of the house of 3,000 squre feet, we take the sale price of $2 million, we subtract the value of the dirt.  The house sold for $800,000 or $265 per square foot and not the mls price of $700 per square foot.

Now you can value all of the property in the aea with better accuracy than the tools at your disposal, that being the MLS and Zillow.  All you have to do is take the $130 times the square footage of the lot and $265 per square foot of the house.  You do need to adjust the square footage price of the house based on age and condition.  A better way to do this would be to keep the value of the lot a constant, and come up with the house per square foot as NEW, as REMODELED and as needs remodel but not a tear down.

I’m about to go on my “power walk”.  I’ll pass the house that didn’t sell at $1.4 mil.  I’ll click off the lot value at $1 mil. after subtracting from the $130 per square foot of lot for middle of block vs. corner and street frontage vs. depth of lot.  The $1.2 has more view frontage and less depth.  This lot has more depth and less view frontage.  This house has 4,000 sf with 3,000 of it above ground.  The other house is 3,000 sf with none of it underground.  At $1.3 mil, this house will sell for $75 a square foot vs. the other house which sold for $265 per square foot.  Let’s give the basement only $10 per square foot and the rest of the house $100 per square foot and do that again $1 mil for lot + $10,000 for basement + $290,000 for house equals $1.3 million.  Offer price should be $1.2 mil and then the buyer and seller can figure out where to agree between the asking price of $1.4 mil and the offer price of $1.2 mil.  If they meet in the middle, it will have sold at “fair market value”. 

Now look at the house that was 89% improved and lot only 3,900 sf that sold for $1.8 mil.  Lot was only worth $500,000. The house sold for almost $450 per square foot.  Ooops.  Don’t think that was such a great deal, even though the MLS price per square foot of $655 made it look like a better deal than the other at $700.  The dirt of the $700 per square foot in MLS being worth $1.2 mil vs. $500,000.

One you remove the value of the lot, and look at these homes as selling for $290,000 vs. $800,000 vs. $1.4 million, you can more readily see if you are getting a bargain, or if you are overpaying for the property as a whole.

Adventures Revisited – Is Realtor.com brain dead or just dead?

As you may have heard, the NWMLS has decided to no longer license the display of its member’s listings on REALTOR.com® or to continue sending those listings on a broker’s behalf, effective June 1, 2007. You can read details about this here. Perhaps this is the beginning of the end for the old standby? The lumbering beast that is Move.com reminds of another lumbering beast that was once in a state of corporate old age. However, I don’t see Louis V. Gerstner, Jr. (IBM’s CEO alumnus) coming to Move’s rescue any time soon.

Anyway, because of this decision, if a broker wants to get their listings on Realtor.com it is now the IDX vendors responsibility to export or upload their client’s listings to Realtor.com. Of course you could use to just Move as your IDX vendor, but given the general lack of innovation they’ve had on their web properties, I wouldn’t want to go that route.

This is significant for many reasons. The first of which is the increased responsibility of IDX vendors now face. Historically, we just had to download MLS data and maintain web sites. Now, we have to do that and create & maintain feeds or mechanisms to other 3rd party consumers of real estate content (Trulia, Propsmart, GoogleBase, etc). Sure there are vendors like vFlyer or Postlets that help with this dilemma, but I suspect many brokers with any significant inventory would rather have their IDX vendor just automate everything.

The second of which, is now Realtor.com has to compete for the mindshare (to paraphrase Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer) of “IDX Vendors, IDX Vendors, IDX Vendors” and “Brokers, Brokers, Brokers”. If the happenings with NWMLS, become a nationwide movement and Realtor.com no longer has MLS support, then it will have to compete against Trulia, Zillow, and a cast of dozens for your listings.

I’m sure brokers and agents have many interesting things to say about Realtor.com, however as an IDX vendor I really don’t care about the industry politics. I just want to serve my clients in a cost effective manner, make them happy, and make a fair profit.

Unfortunately, whoever designed this specification really has no clue as to how things should be done in the 21st century and didn’t read my Adventures in Digital Listing Land blog post. Sure, if this had happened in say 1992, the approach they took for listings data uploading would’ve been a reasonable approach. And although I liked 1992, I don’t use 486 66’s anymore!

For comparison’s sake, here’s what I had to do to support Trulia (BTW – Oodle and Propsmart were equally easy to support, I’m just using them as an example because they read my blog posts).

  • Create an XML document that contains listing data, not unlike an RSS feed (OK, change some XML tags and tweak a few things, whatever)
  • Make sure listing photos are accessible via http urls (I already have them on a web site, so this is easy enough to do)
  • Tell Trulia what the url is for the feed, watch the listings appear on Trulia with no additional effort on my part
  • Blog about the pleasant experience

And here’s what I’ll have in order to provide a feed for realtor.com

  • Set up an FTP account with Realtor.com (great, one more username and password to lose)
  • Realtor.com requires pipe delimited text for listing data (everybody else uses XML, grrrr)
  • Realtor.com requires I upload the listing data to them via ftp (everybody but GoogleBase downloads it via http, yuck)
  • Realtor.com requires I upload the images to them via ftp (everybody else downloads them via http, lame)
  • Realtor.com requires I package said images up in a zip file (Nobody else has this requirement, Lame)
  • Realtor.com requires I name/number the images a certain way (Nobody else has this requirement, LAME)
  • Realtor.com prefers I resize the images to certain size (Nobody else has this requirement, LAME!!!)
  • Realtor.com prefers I only do incremental photo uploads (Nobody else has this requirement, are you kidding me!?!?)
  • Complain to Dustin (WTF dude!)
  • Explain to customers why I have to bill them for 8 hours of engineering time, instead of 2 hours (It sucks, I’m sorry, it’s not my fault)
  • Blog about the whole rotten experience while I write my image zip / ftp uploading code.

When Zillow, MS Live Expo, Realtor.com 2.0 or the next great startup wants to get into the digital listing importing game, I have 3 words of advice, Embrace and extend. Or to put it in terms more people would understand, Copy Trulia.

Sellers — are you getting SC@EWED by the lender? Fight back!

Over the last few weeks, there have been a few posts here on RCG discussing the means by which loan originators enhance their income by “harvesting” seller paid closing costs that otherwise would have been retained by the seller.  In a nutshell, the process works like this: In the purchase and sale agreement, seller agrees to pay “up to” a certain sum in buyer’s closing costs.  Immediately prior to closing, when all costs are known, the loan originator determines that the closing costs are less than the maximum amount to be paid by the seller.  The loan originator then increases the loan origination or related fees to “soak up” the difference between the “actual” costs of providing the service to buyer and the amount that can be charged based on seller’s obligation to pay up to a certain amount.

As I (and many others) noted in comments on the above posts, this conduct is dishonest and reprehensible.  Why should the loan originator (or other service provider, such as escrow) be paid an amount beyond that quoted in the Good Faith Estimate or elsewhere?  The service provider agreed to provide a service for a set fee, but then increases that fee at the last minute not because of additional work, but because there is additional money “available.”  Clearly, this constitutes a windfall to the loan originator at the seller’s expense. 

In Washington, there is a law, the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), that prohibits any unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of commerce.  If a person is the victim of conduct that violates the CPA, that person has a legal claim against the wrongdoer.  If the plaintiff prevails on such a claim, the plaintiff is entitled to an award equal to the amount they lost as a result of the wrongful conduct, plus an addition sum equal to three times that amount (up to $10,000), plus their attorney fees and costs incurred in pursuing the claim.  The legislature specifically enacted this law to create “private Attorney Generals,” private citizens who would have the incentive to seek out and punish unfair or deceptive business practices.

If you are a recent seller, you may have been victimized by the conduct described above, and you may have a claim under the CPA.  To find out, first determine whether you agreed in the purchase and sale agreement to pay “up to” a certain sum in closing costs.  Presumably, the more you agreed to pay, the more likely it is that some of those funds were “harvested” by the loan originator or other service provider related to the transaction. 

If you agreed to pay “up to” a certain amount, then you need to research further.  Ask your Closing Agent to provide you with a copy of the buyer’s HUD-1 Settlement Statement, which will show the amount paid by you (on buyer’s behalf) in closing costs.  If your Closing Agent will not provide you with a copy, contact your agent (if you used one), as the purchase and sale agreement requires the Closing Agent to share documents with the agents.  Once you obtain a copy, have it reviewed by someone knowledgable about typical closing costs to determine whether any are obviously excessive.  Alternatively, contact the buyers and see if they will share a copy of their Good Faith Estimate.  Comparing the GFE to the HUD-1 should indicate whether there were any significant (and presumably last minute) increases in the buyer’s closing costs.

If it appears that you were the victim of this scam, contact an attorney who is knowledgable about consumer law and/or real estate law.  The attorney may be willing to take the case on a contingency basis (meaning the attorney gets paid only if you recover funds) given the attorney’s fees provision in the CPA.  If it appears that you paid an additional $2000 in closing costs, then you could recover that $2000 plus an additional $6000, for a toal recovery of $8000.  Of course, I would be happy to discuss the matter and would very probably be interested in taking the case.  Regardless, though, sellers need to step up and enforce the protections of the CPA if we are to discourage this conduct in the future.