It seems Daniel Rothman’s video experiment below has been regarded by at least one chafed blogger pup as “deeply insulting by ordinary people” and showing a “profound contempt” for them. According to this blogger, it is pandering and condescending, treating consumers as idiots, morons, and retards.*
Well, rather than purporting to speak for consumers like this chap, we thought it better to just ask folks what they think. Well, what do you think of this video? (Poll note: If you are not a RE professional, please add a comment to that effect. Some folks in the RE crowd aren’t sure you’re out there, or voting.)
PS: The blogger also accuses the video creator of having stolen from this Dylan piece. Gee, we thought it was stolen from silent films (and Kris Berg’s stick figures).*Those with IQs between 51 and 70 were called morons by the psychiatric community. Morons had adequate mental skills to do menial tasks and communicate with others. Imbeciles, those with IQs between 26 and 50, never progressed beyond the mental age of six. The lowest on the mental ladder were the idiots, whose IQs ranged between 0 and 25. Idiots had poor motor skills, could barely communicate and did not usually respond to stimuli. The term “retard” is a slur on the mentally retarded. The terms dolt, doofus, numbskull, ignoramus, nitwit, nincompoop, knucklehead, dimwit and dumbass were not classified by the psychiatric community because they crossed every IQ level and everyone knew who they were anyway. (Source for official mental classifications: Mental Floss: What’s the Difference)
Joe,
This poll will be about as accurate as The Literary Digest poll, of 1932, which predicted a sound defeat of FDR. The Digest used automobile registrations and telephone directories to gather polling data. In 1932, the majority of phone and car owners were Republican and overwhelming in their support of Landon, FDR’s Republican opponent.
…and you’re polling real estate professionals, who are specifically biased in their conclusions of the video. What Greg says is true, Joe. We, as the members of the RE.net become desensitized to consumer preferences because of the fraternal congeniality “our thing” breeds.
If the poll participants were to be truthful, Joe, they would adhere to the first three words of your proposition so professionals would not vote. However, we have all concluded that consumers don’t really participate in the games we play on weblogs, so your random sampling will not be a true sampling.
Had the perpetrator of the criticism been anyone other than Greg Swann, the mob would be rightfully cowed and learn something from this innocent mistake. Since it wasn’t anyone else, the leaders of the mob have engaged in a contest for bragging rights.
Childish posturing at its best.
I’m not a real estate agent and I did not like the video. With the exception of the one person who matters the most, I think the reactions to what Greg said are more over the top than his original critique. Daniel’s follow up to this blog swarm is pure class, and spot on.
There are two issues here:
1) The advice/message of the video
2) The delivery of that advice/message
I believe that the advice/message is absolutely dead on. In fact, I applaud Daniel for not pussy-footing around and really saying what every agent, broker and buyer wants to say to ever seller they come across that has their house priced above what it’s worth.
As for the delivery of the advice/message, the video never called anyone stupid or a moron, directly nor indirectly so I’m not sure what all the fuss is about. The sellers that are upset are most likely the same ones that don’t get it and will overprice their home regardless of what anyone else tells them.
As a refresher:
[Not to rain on everyone’s parade, but Daniel Rothamel’s video is the polar opposite of good marketing. Given that it appeals to you, to Lani Anglin and to Jeff Brown on BHB, that should tell you precisely whom it will not appeal to. The video is pandering and condescending, insulting to consumers. I have huge respect for Daniel and his skills, but this is a good example of how the incestuousness of the RE.net leads people astray. There’s nothing wrong with being cordial, but if we’re so interested in courting each other that we can’t see when we’re sneering at our clients, we’re playing entirely the wrong game. Greg Swann]
That isn’t debate.
I’m not easially offened and attempted to debate the merits of the video, instead, the re.net got a sermon. Greg should apologize for grandstanding, and I’ll be the first to see the middle, but we’re left with what we’re left with otherwise.
Thou shalt not SPIN…
Brian- you mean FDR didn’t lose
Gee, I guess anyone can be wrong then. And how do you know our readership profile? If what Greg says is true (& I agree), most non-professional readers do not comment. Our readers come from all over the world & I do not know any way to discern the pro from the non-pro— do you?
Yes, the poll is unreliable*. So is purporting to know that consumers of Daniel Rothamel’s work will perceive it as insulting. We really don’t know, do we? (If you know, tell me how you know).
You yourself applauded it. Personally, I am neutral on it– I saw simplicity but not insult. (And they are the same ideas expressed by Swann (see my comment on agentgenius here, quoting GS:
http://agentgenius.com/?p=613#comments
Do you really believe consumers who read and/or know Daniel will lose respect for him over this video?
*You might guess that from choice 3. The poll is there to make a point, perhaps it’s too subtle, that assuming is not the same as knowing.
Other points:
There is no mob, only individual voices– you call it a mob because there may be a consensus of these individuals’ opinions. To put the mob label on bloggers is something I’d never do, since my experience has shown me that bloggers are independent thinkers and not of the herding sort. Despite his Shepard analogy, we are not sheep.
As for this post– it might have been completely unnecessary if I could voice my opinion in the comment section of his post. So, as you see, the price of BHB blacklisting is a voicing of my opinion here. That is not so much childish as a means of expressing a dissenting opinion in the face of a censor. And mind you, I do not purport to know if consumers are offended. Thus, I cannot condemn the piece. If we judge consumer opinion along the lines of RE blogger opinion, chances are a small portion of consumers are offended. Par for the course for most things we do in RE Blogland.
As to what Greg says is true– how do you know it is true? And because one statement is true does not mean the video is insulting. The gist of his post is condemnation not a simple truth.
Todd,
Yes we can all like or dislike the video– but few would condemn it as “showing a profound contempt for ordinary people”. I think there is a difference– a huge difference. Greg does not like or dislike, usually,– he is more the Cheez Wiz or Odysseus Medal type of guy– love it or hate it– sorta black and white.
The reactions may be over the top because strong opinions bring strong reactions. It’s quite understandable to me (and Greg). He is not beyond starting a ruckus for ratings. I’m OK with that.
Now, I am 100% pro Greg Swann voicing his opinion. I defend his right to do so. But when you do that, you ought be prepared for strong dissension.
In closing, to use Greg’s biblical analogy– I’d say that GS’s post is going after the one lost sheep when maybe he oughta be minding the ninety and nine, unless shooting, I mean criticizing , lost sheep is his mission-critical job.
We have all just proven that we are not an opinion-we are a market.
Obeoman
steven.stearns@obeo.com
Danilo
I think you are dead on.
“In closing, to use Greg’s biblical analogy– I’d say that GS’s post is going after the one lost sheep when maybe he oughta be minding the ninety and nine, unless shooting, I mean criticizing , lost sheep is his mission-critical job.”
He’s doing the exact opposite, Joe. This isn’t about “correcting one lost sheep”; it’s about protecting the flock from potential mistakes. Is that HIS job? Well, one could argue that it is. Certainly, the initial interest list for Unchained suggests that very fact.
I don’t think he was talking to you, Joe, or me, or for that matter the sophomore class that criticizes him. Greg is talking to HIS customers; the throngs of would-be RE bloggers that are too tenuous to get started.
Can you blame them?
“it’s about protecting the flock from potential mistakes. Is that HIS job? Well, one could argue that it is.”
First of all, just because he says it’s a mistake (he does not call it potential, you do) does not make it so. This is precisely the intellectual mistake and danger of following a shepard. Just be wary when he passes the kool-aid cup.
“Greg is talking to HIS customers; the throngs of would-be RE bloggers that are too tenuous to get started.”
I refer you to this seminal post from Weblogging 101 wherein Greg Swann insults bloggers’ styles of writing (he names names)– even to the absurd point of saying that you have to hit the double return—
This is who you would hold up to would-be RE bloggers? If you do, I think you have done more than taken a sip.
http://www.bloodhoundrealty.com/BloodhoundBlog/?p=1487
IMO, this is one of the worst posts to guide a would-be blogger. It holds another up to ridicule for a style of blogging.
The only aspects of blogging that can be taught are the mechanical (how to link, add a photo, plugin, etc) and SEO aspects (not as a religion, but a guide).
THE HEART AND SOUL OF BLOGGING CANNOT BE TAUGHT. NEVER. EVER.
From GS to would be throngs:
“If you have or hope to have a real estate weblog from which you would like to forge relationships with future clients, do not follow the example of BloodhoundBlog.”
At last, something I agree with.
It doesn’t insult me as a consumer - but I also wouldn’t let this guy close to selling my home. He’s right - my love for the house doesn’t matter. However, “overprice” is a notion that is defined by the BUYER - not the SELLER.
A good real estate agent will be able to determine the interest in the house as well as what minor investments can make a huge difference in selling price.
If my Real Estate agent warned me about overpricing before he ever met me, saw the house, or analyzed the market… he wouldn’t be my Real Estate agent.
Maybe I’m just not smart enough to get it, but I can’t figure out how any consumer would be offended by this.
…When the Nike “Revolution” campaign, I was offended:”That song was never intended for this purpose…”
…yaddayaddayadda…the vanity of our perceptions of worth - as bloggers, Realtors, RE consumers - need to be stripped away so the real value is in what we offer the market.
-Sellers are in trouble because they won’t value Realtors OR their information;
-Realtors are in trouble because they will not-for the most part-embrace service, information and technology as being more relevant than personal image.
-Bloggers are starting to have trouble because not everybody can be a blogger - and everyone has been told they should be blogging.
The Zebra tells it like it is. The Consumer will decide what to do with the Zebra.
Obeoman
steven.stearns@obeo.com
anytime we write something, or do something that is origional or maybe just a little different someone won’t like it, especially not the main stream old school re bloggers. As for the message in the video I did not embed it on my site becasue I didn’t think that it gave my readers the kind of information that I like to provide when I write about pricing and value. I did not see it as insulting or demeaning.
I think that the video is very clever. There are several artists, and Daniel is very much an artist, on Youtube who use similar techniques and I think keeping it simple and real is an effective way to use video. I applaud Daniel for being creative and for thinking outside the box and encourage him to keep experimenting with the videos. Our blogs seem to work the best when they reflect our personalties and are real. Consumers may appreciate the honesty, rather than find the message demeaning. Either way it is worth the risk to try something different. It really doesn’t matter what the re-blogers think if the blog is for our clients and I hope that no one is taking any of this seriously.
As always my opinion is different from those of my peers, just like me.
I didn’t think it was insulting, but you may have to ask who is the “audience” for this message. Stating not to “overprice” a home is moot, if the Seller nor the Agent have evaluated the property correctly. The buyers as a whole determines that price.
And this PRICE/MARKET is constantly changing, that’s why both Seller and Agent have to be on the same page. And you have to look at it LOCALLY. It may be just on one subdivision. Case in point, if you have a true seller selling at “market” price and all of a sudden an inventory from the Builder and and 10 properties from Speculators/Investors go into the mix, that Seller now has to re-evaluate how long he is willing to wait to get that “market price”.
In short, Real Estate is local. “Overprice” and “Under Market Value” are relative terms.
Marc Vitorillo
Broker/Owner, Schaaf & Vitorillo Realty
Broker/Owner, CondoLeaf.com LLC
“Featured on HGTV”
He did say it offends “ordinary” people. So, I guess if you are not ordinary, it won’t offend you. Congratulations, Christopher.
Doug, I see your point and I agree that buyers determine what is overpriced for them, at a particular time and place. But that determination, if it is not related to present market conditions, may not result in a purchase for THAT buyer– even if the seller has priced fairly to market. Other buyers who do align their price with current market conditions are more likely to make the purchase with a seller who has ALSO aligned his price with the market. [of course things get a little out of whack in rising and falling markets]
I think it comes down to the word “overpriced”. It is definitely a loaded word. Overpriced might be better defined as that price where a seller will find less buyers willing to pay. It recognizes the fact that buyers will pay a premium for true love at first sight, but it is not something to bank on, especially if you have 2 mortgages to pay.
I further agree that some % of people might not want to hire Daniel based on the video. But it could just as well be the clothes he wears and the car he drives. We are constantly judged and it is impossible to please everyone. But one thing I’m pretty sure of– if you deliver results, you will get clients, despite any videos you might post on YouTube.
But to guide ones blogging behavior based on the proposition that one must write what is least offensive to the most people seems to me like a recipe for pablum.
To Obeoman, Teresa and Marc: Amen.
I found the video humorous- but then again I’m in the ‘biz. The best humor is founded in reality. Most agents have run across the type of sellers alluded to in the video, so we can enjoy a chuckle.
On the other hand, most sellers haven’t run across that situation. And for that reason I think most sellers would find the video condescending, and yes, even insulting.
Humor can be such a double-edged sword sometimes. What’s funny to one is offensive to others. Particularly satire, as seems to be the case here. The video makes sellers look like simpletons- when they most certainly are not.
You could be right Lydia. But knowing Daniel (from his writings and other video), I doubt whether he would consciously produce a video that would insult or condescend to sellers. At worst,it makes it a mistake. There is always a risk in non-conformity and experimentation. But with high risk usually comes high reward. And experimentation may be a necessary part of growth. If he continues, instead of being discouraged by a misstep (if indeed it is) or Swann’s denouncement of it, he will learn and improve. And that is a good thing, I think. I feel the greater error lies in holding up the work of a person, whom you claim to admire (so says Mr. Swann), to ridicule in a public blog post– the nobler (IMO) approach would be to contact him privately to offer your counsel, not to publicly denounce it in such harsh terms. But then again, that’s just me.
And yes, I quite agree humor is a double-edged sword. Personally, I saw it more as clever than funny.
I know this is not decisive, but the so-called bubble blogs did not find the video offensive– at least the comments I read on several of them— some found it refreshing honest. If you believe most of those readers are consumers, perhaps the insult Greg applies is a mislabeling on his part– based merely on conjecture and not facts.
Was this video co-sponsored by Glenn Kelman and Redfin. Afterall, didn’t they recently discover that overpriced listings don’t sell?
> This isn’t about “correcting one lost sheep”; it’s about protecting the flock from potential mistakes. Is that HIS job? Well, one could argue that it is. Certainly, the initial interest list for Unchained suggests that very fact.
Come on, Brian, are you kidding me? Protecting the flock? Did I miss the coronation ceremony which elevated Greg to the standard of high king of real estate blogging?
His arrogance is based on the notion that any dissent is stupidity withering in the shadow of his brilliance. How is that defensible in any way shape or form?
Who are you or Greg or anyone to say what I should post on my blog or what others should post on theirs?
Choose to listen to the gospel if you choose but frankly I have NOTHING to learn from Greg other than the art of self-promotion and ridicule of the masses who may dare to think independently.
after a couple of days of this, it’s a bit surreal to think of what has transpired with Daniel’s video - so we do have to commend him for roughin’ up some feathers in the real estate blogging world.
We have to be open to the fact that different people will interpret the message differently - I decided to embed the video on miamism because it hits a subject that affects our daily market and the fact that we keep turning down listings because the sellers choose to overprice.
The whole debate on “think of your audience” or ” think of permanence in the web” I personally find offensive. That’s like asking the architect in me if I know how to draw.
I think we should put this to rest and do with it what each of us thinks it’s best - not go see Mariana’s video because it really cracked me up!
Jonathan,
I do envy your writing style. Dang journalists!
Ines
Yes, I agree. I did see Mariana’s video.
Frankly, I believe this was all contrived by Greg Swann. He is known for all manner of linkbaiting schemes to drive traffic to his blog. (That’s why we did not link to his post.) His agenda is not the same as a working agent’s.
Merry Christmas!
then he’s probably laughing himself silly! : )
Merry Christmas to you!
I was infinitely more and most offended by Greg’s reference to “retard” and that’s all I have to say about that.
How to tell? Look at their meaning on the dictionary…:)
Thank you Jonathan.
Ya can’t beat a good debate when people have the left and right halves of their brains connected!
HappythanksHallowHannukahkwanzaSeasonlsGreetingstoallmas!
Steve
In design school we are taught that LESS IS MORE.
I think the video broke the message down to its “least”… which I really liked.
THAT being said. As for the controversy, pointing it out as bad or good on your blog site is not right or wrong. THAT is shrewd. Why? because I found myself bouncing around from site to site trying to catch up on the controversy. Bloggers LOVE traffic!
Then I rememembered the words of on of my favorite bloggers (KK)… this too shall pass.
Me
http://www.stpaulrealestateblog.com/weenie/2007/12/this-comment-an.html
Once upon a Time, the Blog World was created… and it was Good. Baby bloggers opened their eyes, and talked about Transparency, and Truth. The world was to be a better place with such values, and all rejoiced.
Over time, bloggers grew and shared, and the communal community delighted in their freedom and knowledge.
Then, as in all societies, the age of Rules began. You can be Transparent…. within certain guidelines. You can speak the Truth…. in a proper manner. Go beyond the ‘proper’ boundaries of blogging 2.0 and face the consequences. New baby bloggers watched… and learned… and went off to blog with cautious optimism and concern.
The ‘new deal’ of Transparency is starting to look a little cloudy…..
Quite right Sondra.
What example are we setting when we hold up another blogger’s work to public denouncement? We are sending a message that “we know better than you” what’s appropriate for consumers/readers. How condescending indeed.
Why didn’t Greg Swann just send his friend, whom he respected, an email instead of a public whipping. Surely he knew (so he says)that his post would generate a response from others in defense of their respected friend too.
I’m not into Real Estate, and I don’t see anything wrong in that video.
*sorry for late response.
Thanks ipanema.
According to our unscientific poll, 89% of those voting agree with you.
Well, I don’t get to vote, because I’m not a real estate professional. But just for the record, he stole this video from me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcp9TkV8GfQ
Woops, make that I AM a real estate professional.
Must have been a 2007 market update Freudian slip.
John,
Watch out, you too may feel the Wrath of Swann.
Important safety tip.
I’ve never cared for the argument that centers it’s basis around, ‘Thats not how things are traditionally done, therefore it’s wrong.’
Consider for a second: How old is Daniel? Does he really give a shi* what baby boomers think? How many potential (Gen ~X, Y and Z) buyers or sellers have now seen Daniel due to his videos popularity? Could the video lead to business, yes of course.
Daniel (likely) achieved exactly what he was looking for…Attention, because that is what successful marketing is supposed to create.
Honestly, I’d heard of Daniel before, but now I visit his site and he’s in my Feedreader…Why? Because he did something original and remarkable…which is more than most people do.
Couple other thoughts:
I know alot of very smart morons, and brilliant idiots.
The videos is as likely to gain an acurate polling here at Sellsius as it would/did at BHB…
The video didn’t offend me, but I’m biased.
The BHB is developing a ‘cultish’ love em or hate em type aura…either way, it’s a winner for BHB.
What’s the ‘Inman After Hour’ itinerary Rudy?
I agree the video was effective marketing because it got attention, helped by the person who held it up to public ridicule.
90% voted the video non-offensive. It is not proof positive of consumer truth, but, not knowing the sample, I cannot say it is unreliable either. But, IMO it is certainly worth more than one person’s vote of condemnation.
I disagree that the poll would get different results on BHB. I believe you’d see the same overwhelming majority vote. In fact, I challenge Greg Swann to put the same poll on his site and see what results he gets.
What I find offensive is to haul another person’s work out for a public whipping. If
Swannthe desert blogger was being truthful that he respects Daniel and regards him as a friend, then that blog post should have been a private email to a friend. He is either a liar or a friend I could surely do without.I do not know about smart morons or brilliant idiots, but I know someone who is probably blogging in the desert sun at high noon— meaning it does not make any sense to publicly condemn a friend, or someone you respect, on your blog for cybereternity.
As to BHB, I just dislike when the mutt poops all over the public carpet.
–jf
…well…after reading JeffXs’ post, I feel like I have to be a moron with an original idea to get invited to the Inman after-hours gig…since I am a marketing-consulting carbon unit, I am used to that.
Blogging may be the last democracy or the new republic; free speech is governed by those engaged in it, and the quality of the discourse determines the development of the discussion-and the community.
My late Aunt Treva, bless her Irish soul, said it best to me in my younger days:
“Words are like bullets, when you let them go, you can’t get them back…”
Happy New Year to all!
Steve
steven.stearns@obeo.com
Your Aunt Treva had it right. Words are like bullets. So make sure you’re shooting at the bad guys.
Happy New Year Steve.
Ring us up when you come to town. 646-714-2720
I am a real estate professional and before any BHB stuff happened, I went to watch it because someone somewhere linked to it. I got to the one minute mark and clicked away from it. I was bored. So, is it offensive? Maybe the last minute is, but the part I saw wasn’t offensive. It was just boring, imho.
“I disagree that the poll would get different results on BHB.”
I say there would be a difference on BHB b/c readers would have been predisposed to Gregs rant…and since most people read to have their personal beliefs instilled for them, there’s likely to be a higher % agreeing w/Greg, just b/c he says it should be so.
Here at the Sellsius carnival, you guys are pretty non-judgmental, even encouraging, where others try to repress (which is why I love you guys, there was a day when jf stood up for me over on RCG)…so the readers here are less likely to ‘find’ the video insulting.
Anywhoo…Joe, Rudy wheres the party(s)??? Don’t make me wander Manhattan looking to crash one…
I’m an original idiot/moron….or so Ive been told
Thanks X. Like you, we just call it like we see it.
We believe in experimentation, risk taking and envelope pushing. And we don’t care much for blogging rules or weblogging gurus. Anyone who purports to know the best way to blog should be avoided like a
rabid dogpuddle of mud.Call us at 646-714-2720 and we’ll roll into some parties together.
Happy New Year Jeff!
Great way to declare peace:
Sellsius 12/23/07:
“Happy Christmas - The Real Estate Blog War is Over”
Sellsius 12/31/07:
“What I find offensive is to haul another person’s work out for a public whipping. If Swann was being truthful that he respects Daniel and regards him as a friend, then that blog post should have been a private email to a friend. He is either a liar or a friend I could surely do without.”
Sellsius 12/31/07:
“Anyone who purports to know the best way to blog should be avoided like a rabid dog.”
Athol Kay made the comment that it takes two to declare peace, which I believe is incorrect. It only takes one. (c.f. Buddha: Hatred is never cured by hatred. It can only be cured by love. ).
But you have to be sincere for it to work. If it’s just another post title and a play for a Jackie Chan movie link to you might be destined to hold the job of Greg Swann’s publicist for the next twenty years.
Better you than me. Being two thousand miles away from anyone’s A List is a mixed curse at best, since I get to read what I want and don’t have to appear au courant.
Thus my reading list often includes you guys and never includes Greg (even though I still accidentally click through once in awhile).
I wish I could honestly say that I read you for the Inman Connect announcements, but us C-List types don’t need those. The pathetic truth is that I am entertained by the morality play of you guys relentlessly seeking to escape from your unfortunate role as Swann’s incoming link bitch.
I have this awful habit of running to the defense of folks I respect. And poking fun at the hoity toity.
I only wish all wars were like those in the blogateria– all bark and no bite.
–jf
I suppose it’s none of my business — I just hate it when I’m a rubber necker.
It’s tough to fight human nature, John