The "BIGGER" news on Zillow.com

[photopress:boycott.gif,thumb,alignright]I was intrigued by Kevin Boer’s comment on Galen’s post predicting that the Major Brokerage Houses would be jumping in en masse and posting their listings on Zillow.com. Kevin predicts that it will be “the little guy” who will hold out. I predict it will actually be the other way around, with the bigger players finding an excuse NOT to post their listings on Zillow.com. Time will tell.

In my link post to all of the blog articles on Zillow’s overnight make-over, I found this obscure post which says what others are not saying:

“RED ALERT” Zillow Wants Our Listings. Before anyone posts their listings on Zillow-let’s get a consensus. I don’t want to aid these people at all, and by posting your listings, you are doing the legwork for them and I think it is a comakazie move. Before agents gang bang the free listing, maybe we can vote on this as a whole. What do you think? They’re not Realtor’s, so this is not an anti-trust violation, is it?”

Joanne Brown of Keller Williams, who wrote this blog article, tread on the thin ice others knew not to step on. But that’s the beauty of blogs. Every once in a while, someone just “let’s it all hang out” there in the blogosphere.

Zillow's new way to spite your neighbor

Mix Zillow’s amazing capacity to quietly market itself and its new feature (list your home on Zillow, FSBO or FSBAgent) and you have a great new service for driving traffic… to your annoying neighbor’s house. List their house at 25% below Zillow’s estimated value and invite people to come by to see the place anytime after 8 on weekdays. You could alternately ‘claim’ their house and hold it until they decide to sell, at which point you get to choose the price, at least on Zillow. To be fair, listing someone’s house has always been possible on Craigslist, but you never had to send in proof of ownership to be able to reclaim your house from them.

More seriously, I’ve been expecting Zillow to launch a service like this for quite a while, but frankly I thought it would take them a little bit longer to get their act together and figure out exactly how it would work.

A few thoughts:

1. Zilllow is making it a pain to bulk upload listings, which gives FSBOs exactly the same capacity to list as the biggest companies. They’re doing this for two reasons: Individuals are more likely to list (and look at ads and puruse the site) if their agent doesn’t say “we automatically list so you don’t have to worry” AND because it makes it harder for competitors to get the same information. If they allowed bulk submit, third party websites would do most of the work posting listings to all the free listings sites on the web. (So Greg, I disagree with you here) Expect an API for listing if people aren’t listing in high numbers (see number 3).

2. Many consumers already believed that Zillow had houses for sale, so this revelation won’t surprise the real estate-casual public.

3. Zillow has the best shot at getting the chicken or the egg (you need one to get the other). Most non-MLS sites (Trulia, Propsmart, ForSaleByOwner, etc.) have had the nasty problem of beginning with no listings and no searchers (no chickens or eggs). Each has tried a novel and somewhat successful way of getting searchers or listings – crawling sites for listings, offering free listings, pay-per click ads to lure searchers, etc. None of them seem to have hit the point of no return: the point at which searchers start using the site exclusively, causing any remaining listers to clamor for inclusion. Based on the marketing buzz alone, Zillow may be the first to hit this point. Once (if?) they hit some critical number (70%? 80%? 90% of listings?), the tide will turn and nearly all holdouts will list themselves. They can always include an API to increase inclusion, but I think they’d rather have agents and consumers list manually and add more information to their Zillow listings.

4. Zillow almost has enough buzz to get the holy grail of online real estate listings – actual people listing their own homes en masse and actual searchers using a non-MLS based site. Uninformed home buyers will probably use it to search for homes until they realize that, at least in the short run, Zillow doesn’t have a bunch of the houses that are for sale.

5. Many local MLS systems will probably fall by the wayside as the primary places that agents and consumers go to search for houses. This is because most of them have too many rules and regulations for using their data, which binds the hands of innovators.

6. Is ‘Make Me Move’ basically a slow motion auction with no end date? You state a “buy it now” price and wait for bidders to inch up to that price? It seems like a surefire way to see get a bunch of homes, but you never know if you’ll find that gem in the rough. It certainly won’t work for commodity-like homes in suburban developments or condos unless the “buy it now” price is really close to the market price.

7. Agents, you’re kidding yourself if you believe that Zillow isn’t going to make your life harder. When anyone can list their home on the web without paying $500 to some brokerage, it’s time to offer real services or get out of the game. Also, if people know someone who has successfully done a FSBO, it’ll seem a lot easier for them to do the same.

Agents and brokers of the future, you’re also kidding yourself if you believe that Zillow is responsible for shrinking commissions (they’re coming) and a changing industry because it’s not: Zillow is just the product of the web’s relentless market and information opening power. We are leaving the time of the agent-leads-consumer model in the real estate industry and we are entering the time of the agent-coaches-consumer model. More on how I hope to participate in this change in the coming weeks and months.

Update: I suspect Zillow will allow for bulk uploads in the future no matter what, but it makes sense to take things like this slowly. They will need to be especially vigilant to keep out listing spammers who could use an API to upload dozens of false homes.

Night shots

[photopress:15.jpg,full,alignright] Night photos have become very popular here in the Seattle Area.  Used mostly for high end homes, rather than this price range of $599,900. 

I’m thinking a digital camera is likely not the best way to take these, though this one didn’t come out badly for an “extra” shot.  Looks fairly appropriate for Halloween. If anyone has any tips on how to best take a photo in the dark with all of the lights on, please post them here. 

And before Galen asks, yes.  I broke my own price tier rule on this one because I already market tested it at $600,000 to $650,000.

Realtor.com takes a step closer to Trulia

Come spring, Realtor.com won’t have access to the Northwest MLS, so only houses from agents who pay to participate will show up. Trulia.com, a site the “crawls” broker web sites to fill its database, will probably have more listings from western Washington from that point going forward (the NWMLS still has the most).

Usually I believe that access trumps all, but it is unseemly for an organization like the NWMLS to give its data away for free to a corporate giant, but block all other interested parties. Realtor.com, I’d like to be the first to welcome you to the rest of the world, where you either have to work with a licensed broker and play by the rules, accept listings for free, or crawl the web to find listings.

Is Trulia totally clueless?

In a post I’ve been meaning to blog about, Trulia asks Is the MLS Totally Clueless? Why is “the MLS” totally clueless (they mean all 1,000+ MLS systems)? According to Trulia, because they don’t allow For Sale By Owner properties to be shown alongside MLS listings. (Is Trulia right, is this dumb? Probably, but I’ll leave that for another discussion.) What is Trulia’s solution? They don’t allow For Sale By Owner properties to be shown alongside their broker listings (see answer number 1). Sounds like someone shouldn’t be throwing stones.

Will Trulia ever allow FSBO listings? My guess is the moment that Trulia gets enough traffic for consumers to care if their house is listed on Trulia, the tables will turn on the brokers they are so eagerly courting right now. FSBO: check. Smaller links to broker sites: check. Data added by users: check. I don’t think they’ll do this out of greed, rather they’ll do it because they have to: if they keep the site the way it is, with limited information about properties and links to agent sites, the rest of the industry is going to pass them by.

Note: Trulia is not a member of “the MLS” and does not need to follow any MLS rules. There was some reader confusion about this.

Redfin is missing 20% of Listings?

I’ve heard a rumor, and I can’t figure out how to verify this using custom searches on Locator, but is it true that 20% of residential properties don’t appear on the MLS feeds to the Redfins and Homevalues of the world (as well as Windermere, John L. Scott, etc.). I was told that a good 1 out of 5 properties don’t have that checkbox selected that gives the MLS permission to ‘advertise on the public web’. First off, I’m surprised that so many agents would bypass the exposure; however, if they are doing it either making individual decisions, or by encouragement from their brokers, the net effect is chilling on the disintermediation plays. Consumers searching for properties using these discounters (or any of the major brokerages web sites), and not having the services of an agent to find the best properties using Locator, are shortchanging themselves.

Can anyone confirm or otherwise clarify this information? If true, it’s a dirty little secret.

The last seven days in Real Estate

Last week of August. Who bought what, where and for how much? Typically a slow week with agents and clients taking some time away with their families before school starts.

[photopress:v.jpg,full,alignright]This is my absolute favorite property that sold this week, in Sammamish for almost $4,000,000. Going home there is like going on vacation every day after work. My definition of “sold” in the last seven days, for this article, is STI or PENDING…people “making decisions” to purchase.

Seattle under $300,000 – 38 people, between $300,000 and $400,000 – 66 people

70 people in each for the $400,000 to $500,000 range AND the $500,000 – $600,000

Then we really drop off to only 20 from $600,000 to $700,000, and then half of that at 10 from $700,000 to $800,000, half that again to 5 at $800,000 to $900,000, and 3 in the $900,000 to a million.

15 from $1 million to $2 million and two just over $2 million, one in Broadmoor and the other a tudor in Denny Blaine.

On the Eastside I used, Bellevue, Bothell (King County), Kenmore, Kirkland and Redmond.

Only 5 under $300,000 this week. 75 between $400,000 to $600,000. 4 between $2 million and $3 million vs. only 2 in Seattle, and about 10 in most other categories.

So all tolled on both sides of the Lake, most homes this week were sold between $300,000 and $600,000. That includes condos, townhomes and single family homes.

Fits into the theory that the average buyer is at $450,000 give or take.

"Carpet" Credits, et al

[photopress:w.jpg,thumb,alignright]We are at that time of year when houses are not selling like hotcakes. So we are back to that age old question, “Can’t I just offer a credit?”

Often agents will tell sellers that they need to remove wallpaper, paint rooms or put in new carpet. A common response from a seller is “Can’t I just offer the buyer a credit?” The short answer is NO. The long answer is, if you offer $2,000 as a credit to the buyer to remove that ugly wallpaper, the buyer will offer you less after having seen the wallpaper AND they will take your $2,000 on top of that as well.

So yes, you can offer the buyer $2,000 and he will happily take it. But he will still take $10,000 off the price of the house, because he hates the wallpaper.

Just because users can post doesn’t mean they will

In spite of all the hype for social websites, there have been a rash of noble attempts that come up short recently. No one has quite figured out the right way to start an open dialog about individual homes yet.

ShackYack, “the only real estate site where you can comment and rate the product, just like amazon, netflix, ebay etc.,” launched in late May. Apparently they have found that houses aren’t mass produced and sold by the millions like iPods and people really don’t have much to post about them. That said, part of the reluctance to comment on properties is probably the buggy interface and their newness on the market.

However! Propsmart’s interface isn’t buggy. In fact, it’s one of the best out there and they encourage comments too. But a random sampling of homes on the site shows no comments.

Why would you want to publicly comment on a house unless you’re the owner or an agent looking for leads? The house, along with your comments, is going to be off the market in a few weeks and, unless you’re an agent, you’re going to be out of the market in a short period of time too. And if you’re an agent, blogging seems like a more public and permanent way to go.

That said, Propsmart’s blogging service appears to be stillborn, with the last post being posted over 2 months ago. Even blogging systems aren’t always a hit.

I feel like I’m picking on PropSmart here, but I’m really not. Whenever you introduce new services, some will be hits and some won’t. Their search site and their interface in particular are great and they are definitely the most straight-talking real estate search company out there (possibly the only one?).

Why I like Zillow and Redfin by ARDELL

[photopress:3ofhearts.jpg,thumb,alignright]I’m still scratching my head as to why agents around the country hate Zillow so much that they want to call it “Z”. Theory is that if they even whisper the name Zillow, they are spreading “the word” and helping it to become even more popular.

Zillow is a system of mathematical calculations, a tool that is easy and fun to use. So isn’t hating Zillow like hating your calculator?

I like Zillow because before they came along, all of the lead generators were about buyers. Buyers went there to look at houses and hit the big flashing “Find an Agent” button and were taken off to never-never-land where the lead generator collected a toll. Buying buyer leads has always been a joke. I can hardly go anywhere without hearing someone talking about buying a house. Every coffee shop, restaurant, the lady in line in front of you at the bank, at least 20% of the people at a barbecue…really. If you need to buy a buyer lead you need to look in the mirror and figure out why you need to trick people into hitting a big flashing button and pay for one. Time to hone up your skills and get a personality.

The innovation of Zillow is that every lead generator has asked that question: “How do we attract SELLER leads?” Even House Values knows that they cannot get enough seller leads, and they can sell them as fast as they can get them. There are more agents willing to buy seller leads from House Values in prime areas, then there are seller leads to go around. There’s a waiting list…I know…I’ve been on it for over a year. Every time they email or call me I ask…you have a seller lead spot available for 98033 or 98034. Answer is always no, but they are trying to sell me something else. Because attracting sellers rather than buyers is something the lead generator industry has been very lax at doing well.

And then comes Zillow. I don’t know what they are selling, but they clearly have the seller’s attention. Did Zillow get an Inman award for that? If not…Zillow now has the ARDELL award for innovation in lead generating sites. Don’t be waiting for the trophy, I haven’t gotten out shopping for Greg and Sharon yet, and you’re behind them.

Kudos to Zillow. Don’t know where you’re running with that ball, but kudos for putting a seller oriented site in play.

I like Redfin, because…

a lot of my past clients who came to me from blogging,

tried them first 🙂