If you're reading this than you are on the internet. No doubt you have seen the multitude of real estate websites such as Realtor.com, Trulia, Zillow and others. Although, Realtor.com is "OUR" site they still believe the same thing that all the other sites believe, including Active Rain, and that is, that the information should be available and free and easy for consumers to get a hold of.
Some go further and even suggest that there might not need to be a Realtor, after all, you can get all the data you want on the internet.
I truly love this!
I find it ironic that most of these companies have high "worth" but are struggling to monetize all that data. Why should Realtors pay. It's our time and effort that goes into getting the listing and putting on the MLS so that Zillow and many other can grab it and try to remove us from the picture only to have turn around and pay them for it again.
I have three words for companies that want me to pay for this: L O L
I think it's hilarious, so much so, let's run through it one more time.
"So you are telling me that you have taken my data and generated interest in it and now you want to sell it back to me."
There's not enough money at any of these companies to beat a great agent in the hyper local arena. Sure, I'm going to play the game, my seller's property will definitely be on these sites, I'll answer the questions, I'll link back to my site.
However, they won't be getting money from me until the actually bring real (not stolen or borrowed) value to the table for me or my clients.
Realtor.com has started this trend and unfortunately, there are a lot of agents that use their services.
As a listing agent, I want to expose my clients property to as many people as possible. .I would also like to have a chance to be recognized as the person that brought that listing into the market. .not my broker. .ME!
Josh, you are so right. What's funny is that I previously worked for a large Brown and Gold franchise who's parent company would do the exact same thing. Recycle buyers and sellers and sell them back to the company for a referral fee. It is all a scam and the sooner every agent realizes it the better.
Putting the listing and getting it widely circulated is great for the properties exposure and should bring the buyers. As long as the address is shown and your rider is on the sign an interested buyer will come to you. Let somebody else pay for the privilege of bringing the buyer to you, after all that's what the co-broke is there for.
I totally agree, we are paying for enough.
Joshua - It amazes me that I get all these companies calling me to buy their services to get leads. Just like you said thaty take our data from MLS and put it on their website and expect up to pay for the lead.
Do you avoid shopping at WalMart and instead choose to make your own soap?
I think the value of some of these companies is that they do certain things very well and their scale allows them to do it well cheaper and on a larger scale than MOST individual agents. Some agents can and do market the heck out of their properties. Others however would choose to pay to have that marketing done for them.
I was speaking to a virtual assistant the other day and I posed the question, "I wonder how many agents know how much they make an hour". This gives you a really good baseline to decide whether you want to do things on your own, or pay someone to do them. Let's say it's going to take you 3 hours over the course of a month to get as many eyeballs on your contact information as Zillow can by paying for a $100 advertisement. Well then if your time is worth less than $33/hour it makes sense to do it yourself. If your time is worth more than $33/hour it makes sense to pay Zillow to do it for you.
Obviously there are exceptions to any broad generalities someone throws out there, but for the most part, I do not believe most agents think in this fashion. I ran a brokerage with 120 agents at any given time and there were only a few that knew how much they made per hour.
Now I may have missed the mark a little bit, you were focusing more on companies taking data and packaging it and selling the packaging of that data back to the agents. But I think that is where the value comes in. You have to look at how you could get a similar benefit to what they offer and how much time it takes you. Maybe it NEVER makes sense for you and you never end up paying. Or maybe the companies need to do a better job of quantifying their value proposition but there certainly is one. All of the companies you mention have impressive traffic numbers and have massive amounts of consumers landing on their web site on a daily basis. Their value is in the packaging of the data. Any brokerage could do this, yet only one traditional one is consistently on the top ten real estate websites. Any regular agent can do this, but economies of scale often make it difficult to compete with a national company doing it. You can no doubt do the same thing, but at what opportunity cost.....
How much do you make per hour Joshua (rhetorical question, I would never be so bold as to expect you to answer)?
(kind of a rambling meandering answer.....sorry, it's a friday and I'm ready to head to the beach with my boy)
I love the response Bob.
I agree totally with the points, but the problem is that the marketing on these sites do nothing for ME. My clients must be on these sites, but they don't do anything for me.
If they repackaged their product as something I could brand with my clients, then it would be something worth my money.
Why would I want to sent a buyer to Trulia. Sure the search function is better than my current IDX solution, but my current IDX solution doesn't have other agents on it marketing. OR in Zillow's case, anything on my website will present my attitude, which is decidedly different than Zillows.
So at the end of the day, whether I make $100, $200, or $2 per hour, it doesn't make sense to pay for these sites (as they are). It doesn't take anything off my plate, it just subtracts from my budget at the moment.
(Not like Active Rain - there is some intrinsic value in the offerings here).
Not sure I get it. What's the big deal with paying for advertising on these sites?
Zillow, Trulia, and R.com are the same as advertising on the radio, tv, newspaper, home magazines, etc. They have packaged info that generates traffic. The "traffic" is even more targeted than the radio, tv, or newspapers.
Brad - Awesome! You do get it.
"are the same as advertising on the radio, tv, newspaper, home magazines, etc."
If you are getting qualified leads from that form of advertising, then please post your strategies for me! LOL, you made my point exactly. These other forms are pretty similiar, as in lacking results.
Forget my strategies, instead check out the Top Agents in the country. They are the guys to study.
Check out guys like Russell Shaw, #25, 300+ sides per year. Heavy use of radio and TV. He is getting results.
Brad,
No doubt! Russel does all kinds of things that allowed him to get to a point where the image advertising is working.
It's interesting, Mr. Shaw doesn't appear to be on Zillow or Trulia. LOL, yet another reason not to spend moeny on it.
Wow, very interesting thread. Joshua I actually subsribe to your blog because every thread that I've read is thought provoking and interesting. So thanks for putting in the time and sharing with us.
In my opinion posting on these sites are a must. At some point your marketing will become almost self-perpetuating where having listings on these sites, (amongst other things), will bring you more listings, which intern means that you'll need to turn up the marketing of these listings, which will bring you more listings etc. I posted a blog this morning about syndication that addresses this issue a little. I mean the bottom line is you want your listings to get in front of as many people as possible. The websites will take your listing info and make it available to millions. Your allowing them to basivcally advertise your listings on their, well read, properly optimized site. And if you spend enough money they will advertise the agent too, marketing yourself is a little bit different ballgame). But $25 to have a listing in front of potential millions of viewers is certainly worth it, in my opinion.
Jeff,
I agree in part. If you have 50 listings and it only costs $35 for "enhanced" listings, then it's well worth it. However, the average agent does not carry that many listings. In addition, the listings are on the site as well. The sites that syndicate listings HAVE to put my homes on their site, not because of law or MLS, but rather because consumers demand it. Consumers are going to go where the best and most information is, whether they think that is my website or yours or a s syndicate.
Thanks for the awesome compliment.
I really just thought it was ironic that these companies come out and use our data to build tools for consumers and some suggesting you might not need a real estate agent and at the end of the day, they want the real estate agent to help them monetize their site.
This is so missing the point. If it cash flows do it, if it does not, do not: it is all trackable.
Israel,
That is the point, exactly.
Those types of companies generally sell to lazy people, and since there are a lot of lazy people on earth, there is a need for those types of companies. It's just that you and me are not among the lazy people of the world.
Marketing is trying to find what works for you in your area -- if it works and you get a return on investment -- don't neglect to do it. Consumers are going to these sites and you want to get to consumers in your area -- don't forget to focus on current content on your site and drive traffic to your site too.
Sara from Zillow (jumping into the hornet's nest..haha) - In your main post you make some misstatments about Zillow. First, it is never our intention to displace the agent from the transaction. We are a media company, trying to connect buyers, seller, and professionals. We won't sell real estate any more than your local newspaper would.
Next, we don't charge for you to be on Zillow. 95% of the stuff agents can do on the site is free: Unlimited photos, links to your site, leads sent directly to you, participate in user forums, etc. Listings are just a portion of our site. We don't package anything you give us up and then try to sell it back to you. Our agent products are exposure products (advertising) not functionality (like paying for extra photos) or lead generation (paying for your leads).
A lot of your commenters have it exactly right. It is about exposure. Zillow is good at attracting an audience (due in a major way to the unique content we created on the site in the form of the Zestimate vs listing content). We of course love having listing content on the site, which is why we package this audience up and offer it to the agent for free, in exchange for content. We consider you partners.
If you chose to do more on the site and advertise, fine. If you don't, that is fine too. But you would be missing the opportunity to get in front of a huge audience if you don't have a free profile, upload your listings or partcipate in Zillow Advice.
FYI - Right now you have 5 listings on Zillow that have recieved 278 views and your profile itself has been viewed 236 times (counters at the top of each page). I'd say this is a good return on investment for you.
One more point, in case you think, yeah nice traffic, but I haven't seen any leads - I believe people are using so many sites, it can be hard to attribute a lead to one specific source. For example, I think people may start at Zillow but then as they narrown their search down, they end up on specific agents sites that they find valuable. Also they be out on a Sunday stroll, go to an open house and then come home to research the listing more on Zillow. It can really be a sum of a lot of efforts.
Joshua - It is really very simple. Do you think that you will receive leads by paying for additional marketing on these sites or not. If not, then don't pay for it, but if there is a chance that you will, it may be well worth it. Remember that one lead that turns into a transaction can generate thousands of commission dollars. Plus, I am sure that these web 2.0 sites are not going anywhere soon, and are generating money elsewhere, not just with agents purchasing additional marketing. I try to obtain all the free exposure I can get on these sites, and do participate as much as I can in the discussions. Exposure is not as great as it may seem if you can never turn the exposure into real clients and business.