« New Frontier Hotel-Casino Implosion – Las Vegas
Swapee: For Real Estate Swingers »

Advertising Oversaturation: Is More Too Much?

Published by Joseph Ferrara (2) November 14th, 2007 in Real Estate Marketing. Comments

Advertising real estate property listings used to be easy. List them on your website, your local MLS, Realtor.com and the local newspaper classifieds. Done. Not anymore.

More Channels, More Opportunity to Advertise : A Good Thing Right?

With emerging media providing more channels for consumers to get real estate content, it is inevitable that real estate agents and brokers will want their clients’ homes to be on every channel– search engine websites, video sites, mobile devices, even social networking sites like Facebook. As the consumer surfs the various websites for a home or information on home buying, the hope is they will stumble upon your listing. But– if the same listings are on all web channels, is there an oversaturation effect negative to searching home buyers or the agents who are trying to sell homes? The knee-jerk response is “of course not, the greater the distribution, the greater the chance a buyer will find my property listing.” Yes, we guess in theory that is true. But what about the reality? Are there any negative effects?

The Oversaturation Effect and Brand Loyalty: The Frustration Effect

We wonder if the oversaturation of home listings on internet websites will cause the consumer to lose loyalty to a broker brand in favor of an aggregator brand. Why visit broker websites or the franchises’ main websites, if consumers can just search Yahoo, Google Base, Trulia or Zillow? (Is it possible consumers have no loyalty to broker brands?) Maybe, the consumer will feel overwhelmed by all the choices and just walk into the local broker’s office to have them sort it all out?

Sometimes more is not enough. Ever do a search and a get a gazillion results? I don’t know about you, but I look through the first few pages (at best) and give up. I don’t have the time to cull through all the garbage produced by virtually all search engines. Did you know Realtor.com produces 3,970 search results for an ocean view property in Riverside California? Fine, except someone oughta tell the folks in the search engine room that there are NO properties with an ocean view in Riverside, CA. (Except maybe those folks at the observatory). Fuzzy search = frustrated searchers

Duplicate Content : Getting to the Front of the Line

And with so many listings hitting the same websites, there will be duplicate content– how will the sites determine who gets top billing in the search results? It seems inevitable brokers and agents will be asked to upgrade to featured status, and pay a little more, in order to jump to the head of the line. Then the big boys will get on top. Will the consumer be better served? Will the independent brokers be sent to the back of the line?

Aggregation : Salvation or Devaluation? Is Your Brand at Risk?

What will be the effect of feeding property listing to real estate aggregator sites, be they search engines or listing sites?

There is an interesting comment by retrove (a real estate search engine) on Pat Kitano’s TransparentRE blog post Old Media, Meet Zillow!, which touches on the potential devaluation of listings. In part it says:

The more they continue to feed listings to all of these various sources, the less valuable they (listings) become to both consumers and to search engines as the same content will be available on so many different websites and the SE’s don’t want the duplicate content. When the consumer is giving so many choices of sites to view listings they won’t value any of the sites, as they are all viewed has having more of the same. Maybe that’s why craigslist and continues to grow and the users are so loyal? (full comment here)

If this is true, the aggregator brands that get mass broker adoption and can get out in front of the consumers with a value proposition will garner the most users. Zillow pitched the zestimate– instant value gratification. If the trend continues toward aggregation, brand loyalty may shift from brokerages to websites like Zillow. And once consumers are in the hands of the Zillowists, real estate agents will have to dance to their tune.

The risk may be higher costs. An example comes from our market in New York City. The New York Times Classified section became the venue of choice for people looking to buy a home. As a result, the brokers and agents in New York had little choice but to advertise there– at higher and higher advertising costs.  Brokers will have to ask themselves, “By feeding listings to Zillow, am I helping to create a monster that may one day destroy me?”  (note to David G: it’s hyperbolic metaphor for dramatic effect, (blogoetic license?) — besides, we want them  to click the link to the Selltoon monster.)

With all the choices out there, the future looks fuzzy. How does it look to you?

(Preemptive response to David G: Yes, we know it’s free to list property on Zillow– but Zillow cannot guarantee it will always be free. Plus, homeowners give their consent to zestimates and the rest– in other words, they may be forfeiting their rights– but let’s not get into that whole opt-out discussion again)

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Share This Post
  • N. Kateus
    The whole Zillow concept terrifies me and I'm not even a Realtor, merely an individual who shudders at the thought of someone--anyone being able to get a guesstimate and everything that entails via the Zillow platform. Please allow an 'innocent bystander' of this debate say that as in all other competitive markets, the entity who keeps the edge is the one with the value-added stamp. Nothing beats excellent customer service, sincere attention to the individual seller or purchaser in your cases, to retain customer loyalty. Zwallow that Zillow.
    n.kateus http://www.ipowerdirect.net
  • That's true cellular. If you can't track it, how do you measure your ROI?
  • The problem to is that a lot of these real estate companies will spend big dollars on advertising in so many different places and not track the results. Most companies are unable to tell you where the most sales or visitors come from, they're just blindly spending money.
  • The term "exclusive right to sell" does not translate to the exclusive right to market listings. The value of marketing listings by brokers and agents to consumers, although significant, has been largely marginalized by the bigger players who can afford to fish in the exclusive waters upstream--and who in turn may charge fees for capturing those leads and selling them back to real estate practicioners whether by referral or advertising fee. For the broker and agent in the street, who have completely lost control of listings marketing game for all intents and purposes, they need to look elsewhere to differntiate themselves from the competition.

    IMHO, the term "elsewhere" translates into "local." Meaning that in this brave new world of online marketing, the broker/agent must focus on demonstrating their service value to consumers at the local level. Sure, listings are bait, but, as stated above, everyone is using the same bait. Today's broker/agent must find ways to demonstrate and deliver value to online consumers, and that "value" is not in the listings so much as it is in illustrating to consumers their depth of local real estate knowledge (e.g. market trends, community amenties, sales experience, etc.)

    The focus on local expertise and value must then be delivered to consumers anyway an agent can. Whether it is delivered through blogs, livestreams, social networking sites, vlogs and, yes, even print, the value proposition is the thing we, as brokers and agents, must focus on. It is the only way we can not only differentiate ourselves, but really simply to remain relevant.

    Realtors must see themselves not as mere marketeers, but publishers of quality local content if they are to survive.
  • As a realtor myself, I get pelted with eflyers and I hate it.
    To plaster it on the email and hope that it sticks is not the right approach. It is presumptuous to say the least.
    Buyers are very sopjhisticated and would rather find their proeprties in the still of the night and so they look to simple but helpful websites for the answer. Here is one for commercial deals:
    www.ourcommercialspace.com
    It unites commercial professionals from all over the world and they are doing deals especially pocket listings and private buyers.
    Check it out.
    Facebook is a social networking site that caters to an age group that just graduated from myspace. They do not represent a serious real estate consumer.
  • Personally I think the real estate market in general is getting oversaturated. Its like a year ago everyone in the universe decided that it was a good idea to open a real estate business. At some point something is going to have to break. Are these companies like Z and T making a profit yet?
  • Excellent points made in your post. You say the future looks fuzzy. I'd agree - and say it also makes me dizzy. Every day I stumble on some new fangled-angle of the web 2.0. Which one do you choose? By the time you research a product or program, a new one will be out. And as for newspapers - we are finally getting out from under their thumb. And there are many new thumbs out there waiting for our listings.

    I do not know what is going to happen. The knee jerk reaction is to run fast and jump on the bandwagon or your competitor will surpass you. Hurry, hurry, hurry, driven a little bit by fear. But making wise decisions that could affect the future of your business do take some time. A little waiting on the sidelines may be in order for me, at least until some dust settles, and this decision could be driven by a little fear there too.
  • On the buy side, I dont think there is any question that the agent gets the buyer, not the brand. But do buyers more often walk into name brand offices? For some brokers we met on the Blog Tour, a large portion of their business came from walk-ins-- on buy/rent and list side. Maybe brand helps for the walk-ins? Hmm..

    On the sell/list side, I think sellers are more likely to list with a name brand office. But that brand may not be a national franchise-- it will likely be the brand leader in the local market. That's why local branding is so important. If people see your "sold" and "for sale" signs all over the neighborhood, hear you speak at local events, read about brand sponsored events, etc.-- i.e. brand awareness is high-- they are more likely to list with your brand-- or at least put you on the short list.

    Missy-- the enhancement sell is always just around the corner. In our opinion, it is evidence the websites can;t live on ads alone. That's why we fully expect Zillow to charge for upgrades at some point.
    The enhancement pitch is based on the premise there is too much of the same thing out there and you need to jump in front of the line.
  • This is dead on. When it comes to listings they are every where and I think that consumers, and that includes me, are doing everything we can to ignore advertising. This doesn't just apply to real estate, we are bombarded with ads. As for the big brand real estate companies, they don't sell real estate, agents do. Consumers don't get it, if they did we could disintermediate the middle man, which is the real estate company.
  • I have asked that same question to many people and now you are asking it. With all the syndication, vflyer, point2 agent NLS, realestate shows, they all syndicate to the same sites, so who wins?

    Which site will the listing show up in Trulia from vflyer, or realestate shows.
    I dropped my enhanced listing package with r do c
    I never get leads from it. Now Trulia wants me to do enhanced on it.

    I agree big franchises are losing their loyality for buyers, but not sure about listings. I have a search site and I can tell you the buyers could care less if I am with REMAX. But, would they want to list their home with a no name company? That is the question I am trying to decide.
  • I don't think you should try to do business on FaceBook. If I go out to the bar or to a local event, I'm not trying to do business with peopel I meet. I am trying to make a connection, hopefully that connection turns into a relationship.
  • Excellent points to which I agree. I think you can already see this devaluation of brand. Compare real estates top brand - REALTOR.com to Z & T by looking at an Alexa chart comparing traffic levels over 3 yrs. You can see a trend (no just the obvious slowing of the market as a whole) but Z & T market share increases it appears to take directly away from R (who also spends 20+ million in advertising w/ 1.2 mill advocates – how’s that for brand building?).

    I would also say there already is no “brand loyalty” when it comes to selecting a buyers agent / RE company to find real estate. This is evidenced by CAR’s surveys, which indicate that 71% buyers selected their real estate agent based on who called back first. This is because most buyers initially call agents only to get in to see inside properties they have already identified. Again supported by NAR’s survey, which indicated that only 36% of the time did the buyer purchase a home found by the actual agent.

    When it comes to sellers selecting a company to list with, I suspect there is more perceived brand “trust” not actual loyalty. Sellers often select an agent based on the referral of a friend to an individual agent not the company they are with.

    Regarding… “It seems inevitable brokers and agents will be asked to upgrade to featured status,” or course this is exactly what will happen. But will it be effective in the long run?

    The idea of advertising is to increasee awareness of something by making it stand out. But how much can a listing stand out when it’s on a page that is full of other listings? This solution is what I call the “yellow page syndrome” – just buy a bigger ad – instead of being more creative in your marketing. This is a “syndrome” because you see your competitor buying a bigger / featured ad so you get infected with the need to replicate vs. differentiate. Look at any of the supermarket RE books… all the ads look the same, right?

    As I indicated in the referenced post, craigslist has loyal users because that’s the only place you can see those listings. Imagine what would happen if a major RE brand did the same? They automatically go onto all buyers “short list” of must visit sites. Obvisiously difficult to achieve is they are members of the MLS with the current DOJ issues.

    If the brands continue as they are now doing, real estate agents will move from a profession to simply a service provider. Especially if as you say Zillow becomes that “monster” since they allow FSBO to appear next to traditional listings, which will enable consumers to have the same audience access without the traditional RE costs.
  • That makes a lot of sense. Roger.

    Question: do you personally know of anyone getting business from Facebook? It sounds like a natural place to network but is it too social -- by that I mean do people back off from those trying to do business on FB?
  • You mention briefly social networking sites like Facebook. This is really the "sleeper" in marketing online. A lot of internet marketing types are rushing over there and creating accounts, then leaving after a couple of days because they're not making their overnight riches.

    It's really a natural fit for people in real estate. RE people trained and conditioned to work with people long term - as long as it takes to buy or sell a property, right?

    Take that same principle and apply to the online social networks.

    Go to something like Facebook and really become part of the community. Join groups and make useful contributions. Over time you will gain a following and when people are ready to buy or sell they're not going to make a decision based on the company you work for (for the most part) but based on the "you" that you have presented to the community.

    This goes past "oversaturation" and goes straight to getting their "attention" because you have become a trusted source.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Blog Widget by LinkWithin