Sellsius real estate marketing blog

You're not really surprised are you? Would you allow an ad on your site ripping you or questioning your data? Maybe you'd still take the money and run, I don't know.

I'm not seeing nefarious censorship at work. It's like me running an F*** Re/Max ad. Not gonna happen.

lol... So not suprised.

Yes, I am surprised.

First of all, it is nothing like you running an F*** Re/Max ad. Profanity is not the issue. The issue is transparency & truth. If you preach it, you should practice it. And Zillow preaches it.

Are you saying that I could not ask the question in zillow Q&A; "Is this zestimate accurate"? If you say I CAN ask the question, then you MUST allow an answer which is "No, the zestimate is inaccurate".

If what Carole is saying is true, is she not providing the consumer with useful information?

You also realize, Jonathan, that zillow itself admits that its zestimates are not 100% accurate and can in fact be way off. What's wrong with Carole saying it?

Sellsius, I think you are trying to make something out of nothing. I bet anything that Zillow is just automatically not allowing the use of their registered trademarks and blocks automatically anything with %Zillow% and %Zestimate% in their ad system as I am sure they block F****.

Just like Carol states in her blog - looks like you can freely use these two terms in the community via QnA.

Are you suggesting the computer program that blocks %Zillow% in an ad is not blocking it in Q&A;? That's interesting. Do you suppose they think unzillowable is an infringement of their trademark?

> Just like Carol states in her blog - looks like you can
freely use these two terms in the community via QnA..

Carole (with an e) says no such thing on her blog. You must be reading Carol'z (with a Z) blog.

This is going to be another great one. Good find Sellsius, I dont know how you did up all this stuff.

Dalton - I would love to see that one tested too....we are willing to give you some free ad space on condoDomain for it too :)

Joe - that picture is still priceless...it may make it to my screen saver!

Hey, would you guys please stop using the word "F***" and "Re/Max" together? Geez!

I think the real topic for discussion here might be that Zillow's model is advertisment-based. This is how they make their money. Now, I cannot speak for the rest of the country, but here in the Northeast (specifically Greater Boston) there aren't a lot of Realtors or any "other" persons signing up for the EZ ad program.

Question is: how are they gonna attract more vc funding if they can't get people to advertiZe on their site? Based on what I see--and I've been close attention to ads on zillow--the EZ ad program ain't a happenin' thing for them. Having said that, you would think they would be a bit more relaxed with their advertising rules in order to generate some income.

One last thing, the click-thru ratios have been pretty poor (20-30 clicks on 20,000 impressions)--surprising because Boston is a HOT market right now. I may just have to suspend Zillow for the rest of the summer...:)

Un-zillow that!

I'd probably ban "anti-me" ads on my own website too. Just seems common sense.

You wouldn't let me pay money to have my sock puppet saying "Sellsius Sucks" on the side of your blog bus would you?

(Not that you guys suck, it's just an example to make a point)

Honestly, if they didn't punt ads and users like that off their own website, I'd think less of them. The the fact that you can obviously try and give Zillow the finger on their own website and all they do is freeze your accout until the offending material is edited seems fairly benign. Some other places would simply ban you for good.

How is the term un-zillowable equivalent to giving them the finger? How is using the term zestimate in the ad headline the same as using the f*** word?

I would bet that their police bots had nothing to do with finding the term "unzillowable" abd blocking it. More likey that some person at zillow took offense and manually had it removed. To be honest, I really don't care about any of this nonsense. I'll advertise on zillow only as long as it generates leads for me. So far not so much....

I see your point Athol and agree with it for the most part. It's their website and they make the rules. But then the question becomes is "unzillowable" or "inaccurate zestimate" the same as "zillow you suck". If it is, we agree. But sucks "F*** C21" and the like seem to be over the line of acceptable speech on someone's turf. I think the ads are benign. You must also consider the "transparency" philosophy of zillow and whether to allow these words in Q&A; and not on ads is a fair distinction. Perhaps it is.

But here's the most important point---zillow chose to put the zestimate (possibly grossly off) next to someone's house and will NOT remove it, even if asked to do so by the owner or listing agent (you're OK with that, right?)---so if it is my listed house for sale,I think I should have the right to effectively advertise (if you invite me to advetise) to dispel the notion that this zestimate, imposed on me, which buyers are forced to see, is accurate.

Oh I think "inaccurate zestimate" and "unzillowable" rankle Zillow far more than a simple "zillow sucks" does. Ad homien insults aren't nearly as annoying as a conceptual arguement or a reasoned negative evualation.

I'd use an example using Sellsius to make my point to see which you felt a worse emotional reaction to, but I don't want it indexed in Google for forever. :-)

Random thought: Transparency isn't easy.

At some point badly inaccurate zestimates probably become libel. Ultimately this will have to be tested in the courts. It's obviously not an appraisal, but publishing an opinion of value to the detriment of the seller would seemingly have a legal recourse of some sort.

Of course proving that will be a whole different kettle of fish.

Hi, it's David G from Zillow,

This is my response just posted to Tim and Carole on their AR blog;

"Thanks for keeping your sense of humor and please accept my apologies; your second ad (“Inaccurate Zestimate?”) should have made it past our ad review process.

Guidelines for EZ Ads content can be found here. One of these guidelines requires advertisers to make appropriate use of trademarks in their ads. As you can imagine, we’ve had a slew of agents claim to be “The best Realtor on Zillow” and so the trademark guideline has been abused since EZ Ads launched but we’ve clearly become over-sensitive to it. “Un-Zillowable” is a negative derivation of the Zillow trademark and while we haven’t objected to people using that term to criticize the Zillow service, we can’t allow others to promote a service with that term – I hope that you understand.

It is entirely appropriate to talk about an “Inaccurate Zestimate” and I agree with Jonathan; it is smart marketing. I will work with our moderators to improve their understanding of fair use of trademarks but I do understand where their confusion comes from .

Please go ahead and change your ad content back to read “Inaccurate Zestimate?” if you'd like. I'd like to add a few dollars to your ad budget for your troubles and will call you today to get the relevant details to do so. Thanks for your business – and for your patience."

This just in from David Gibbons of Zillow:

>>Tim & Carole,
Thanks for keeping your sense of humor and please accept my apologies; your second ad (“Inaccurate Zestimate?”) should have made it past our ad review process.

Just in from David Gibbons of Zillow :

>>Tim & Carole,
Thanks for keeping your sense of humor and please accept my apologies; your second ad (“Inaccurate Zestimate?”) should have made it past our ad review process.

Mr. Gibbons was kind enough to follow-up with a phonecall. An impressive effort and sure sign that Zillow care's about its customers.

As far as I'm concerned, this case is closed. And thank you Mr. Gibbons for you responsiveness..

p.s. to those above that suggested the term "inaccurate zestimate" was equivalent to giving them the finger, well allow me to salute you with same:)

The EZ Ad Guidelines that I referred to above can be found here;
http://www.zillow.com/ezads/ContentGuidelinesPo...

To follow up on some of the comments on this thread;

Jonathan -

Thanks and yes, we do reserve the right to moderate any ad content though we obviously don't intend to make it difficult for our advertisers. We have a fairly thick skin when it comes to discussing inaccurate Zestimates.

Erika -

Yes, we do automatically block "F***" but since trademarks can be used fairly in EZ Ads we don't block them automatically and they do go through a manual review (like all EZ Ads). In this case, we were over-sensitive to the ad that said "Inaccurate Zestimate?" -- that is fair use of the Zestimate trademark.

Carole -

Thanks to many early adopters like yourself, the demand for EZ Ads has actually exceeded our forecasts. It's early days for EZ Ads but so far, so good. Click through rates on EZ Ads do vary greatly by ad content and geography but on the whole they look great. That said, you shouldn't measure the success of your ads by clicks alone -- since you've included your phone number in your ad, people can contact you without clicking your ad.

Athol -

"Transparency isn't easy" --> AMEN --> but it's worth it. As I said to Jonathan, we actually have have a thick skin when it comes to discussing inaccurate Zestimates and we in no way suggest that Zestimate values are the final work on what a house is worth.

Athol -

Typo: "final work" = "final word"

Carole,

Happy to hear David called you and removed the restriction on your ad. It is effective marketing IMO.

Thanks David for explaining Zillow's side of things and allowing "inaccurate zestimates" to be used in ads. I salute zillow for that. Unfortunately, this is something zillow must be willing to accept if it does not allow owners to "opt-out" of having an inaccurate zestimate beside their most valuable asset. It's only fair to offset the negative connotation of an inaccurate zestimate, which only creates a barrier to the marketing and sale of one's home.

"Unzillowable" in not an insult. It is a coinage which we, and others, believe, is indicative of the shortcomings of valuation by computer. This includes any AVM, not only zillow. Unzillowables can add, as well as detract, from the value of a zestimated home. So, to say "I have an unzillowable (priceless?) view" is not a negative detraction.

David,

Unzillowable is no more a trademark violation than 7-Up's "Un-Cola" slogan of some time ago. Besides, the use of trademarked terms must be in a similar business, or one the trademark owner may be likely to go into---consequently, I suspect I could market and sell "Zillow Pillows" without legal problems.

Trademark law PS:

In legal terms, one trademark infringes another if it is substantially similar AND likely to cause confusion to the public as to the source of the goods or services. I suspect zillow has not taken legal action against users of the term because of the uncertainlty of meeting this legal burden. Both transparency and trademark law ain't easy ;)

accident or an about face- I'm leaning about face on this one. If nothing else, the pressure on the PR team must be great to keep them from spewing some finger words in the direction of those who would bad mouth them- hats off for smiling through your teeth.

This makes me wonder how many items have been filtered in the zillow blog and the user pages over the past months. I guess we will never know unless users speak up... Transparency is easy, just let it all hang out and let the folks decide- that is what you've asked of us.

B.R.

If Zillow only respected owners' and listing agents' rights with respect to marketing and selling property, i.e, gave them the right to opt-out of a zestimate, they would do themselves a big favor. For some reason they think we advise this course of action as some sort of trick and they hold fast to that albatross. Zillowists are not real estate people so they don't get the importance of controlling the marketing of one's property and the negative effect of false pricing (inaccurate zestimates). Inaccurate zestimates, admitted first steps, are an unnecessary obstacle when the last step has been taken, ie. pricing for sale. We did a poll (not scientific of course) and the vote was for the right to opt-out. If zillow REALLY believed in Q&A;, they would pose the question to owners ---but I suspect, zillow does not want to hear the answer. I ask you David G---can you ask the people whose homes you use to attract visitors to the site if they want the opt-out right?

It seem reasonable to want to ban ads from your site that have a negative impact on it.

Yes, agreed-- but the zillow case is a bit different I think because the zestimate is FORCED upon the owner & listing agent. They have no choice but to have an inaccurate zestimate near their home.

So, do you think it was a bad move for Zillow to remove the ban from Carole's "Inaccurate zestimate" ad?

I think they've gotten tremendous mileage out of it, with a little help along the way.

I also think the word "transparency" is being beaten into the ground and soon will have little to no meaning.

And, Michael, sorry ... it hasn't shown up on the Google search yet, right?

One other quick thought ... if Zillow is denying transparency by not allowing certain wording on an ad, would a homeowner be denying the world transparency by opting out of a zestimate?

Or is that okay because they never signed up to be transparent in the first place. Seems a little flimsy.

>would a homeowner be denying the world transparency by opting out of a zestimate?

No, if it was inaccurate. It is, in fact, a public service to the world to get rid of inaccurate valuation of homes. Think of the ripple effect of misinformation---Zillow uses zestimates to create Housing Trends Reports. How could anyone support having inaccurate zestimates in Housing Reports? Transparency is not a license to disseminate inaccurate information, is it?

This seems like a no-brainer to us. We don't see "transparency" as applying to inaccurate zestimates. An opt-out right gives control to the homeowner to protect the world from misleading valuation attached to their asset. Do you support an opt-out right for homeowners/sellers, Jonathan? Support the opt-out ---For the good of the world, man! :)

In the end, to their credit, Zillow did not deny transparency---they allowed the "inaccurate zestimate" ad (the unzillowable ad was seen as a trademark issue & that's a justifiable exclusion. Ultimately it is an unresolved legal TM issue, which I believe zillow would lose. But until a court decides it, it is their right to take the position it is a violation of their TM).

Bottom line: If a zestimate (a AVM creation) is inaccurate and attached to my home, I as the homeowner do not like it or want it attached to my home---would you?

Consider this analogy: I stand in the public sidewalk in front of your "for sale" sign holding my Z sign saying the value of your home is really $50,000 (or whatever number would offend you) less than what you list it for. Who is this helping, hurting? I as the homeowner would object. Would you? If you agree that an owner should be allowed to object, you should agree with the opt-out right. Right?

>> if you’d like. I’d like to add a few dollars to your ad budget for your troubles..

just checked my account. They gave me $20 per ad extra...I've given them over $1000 in ads....hmmm.

It isn't about innacurate zestimates or transparency. In then end, Zillow's success or failure will be decided by consumers--not real estate professionals, industry insiders, other potentially disruptive web 2.0 companies, etc.., but by the end-users and their individual experiences with Zillow. This is as it should be.

It is this consumer experience that has me concerned for Zillow's future.

Recently, I had an encounter with a rather irrate and frustrated buyer who found me through one of my Zillow EZ-ads. Let's call him consumer Z allow me recount his story:

Consumer Z had heard about all the Zillow hype and, like so many others, decided to check it out for himself. The reader should know, as I realized during the course of our conversation, that consumer Z was seasoned real estate investor who had purchased many a property of the years. He went on Zillow looking for investment opportunities in Boston for Multi-Family dwellings. After searching around for a bit he came across what was reported to be a multi-family home with not one, but three different prices associated with it, that were:

The listed price
The Zestimate
The owner's adjusted estimate

At first, he told me that he was little confused at the three differing prices being presented for this one property, but being the veteran in the practice of buying and selling real estate he persisited--determined to figure it out for himself. After some time he ended up calling me for some clarification after seeing my EZ ad banner proudly waving at him. So, I went ahead and took a look for myself to see if I could help him out. What I saw confused me as well. What we both saw was the following:

A list price that seemed very low
An owner's estimate that was also very low
A Zestimate that was significantly higher that even the owner's estimate.

It took me a little time and a little research to figure this out. Eventually I was able to determine that this property was no longer a mulit-family but rather it had been converted to three condomiiums about a year ealier--and been sold as such a while back. Apprarently, the public records that Zillow pulls were not nearly current enough, which would explain why there was such a difference between zestimates, owner's estimates and listing prices. What was listed for sale was a condo, but what was being displayed was a multi-family.

My point here is not to attack Zillow for its' innacurracies--not at all. My point, as I stated at the outset, was what Zillow should be on guard against and protesct at all costs--that is the end-user expereince. The last thing this random, but seasoned, consumer said to me was that he would never visit Zillow again. I thought this was kind of harsh--but apparently this was one comsumer who had what to him was a very frustrating experience--and I understood that completely. So, as I said earlier, estimates are just that--estimates. And it does not matter if the real estate industry has a problem with them, or other industry insiders. What matters is the experience. If you want to build a community around ephemeral data the only thing htat matters is a positve conusmer experience--and then maybe they'll come back, and talk.

Well put Carole. And an interesting story. Yes, I wholeheartedly agree that zillow's success or failure will be determined by end user satisfaction.....BUT

I submit the cooperation of agents and homeowners/sellers is necessary for a useful end user experience. The zestimate-only site was a one visit, see you later, user experience. A curiosity. It was not until agents & homeowners got involved with correcting data, adding for sale listings, Q&A;, and ads, did the user experience improve (I'm guessing).

If homesellers/agents decide they want the right to object to inaccurate zestimates and have them removed because they interfere with the ability to market and sell a home, and Zillow refuses (as they have to date), those homeowners & agents may in turn abandon zillow, leaving the end users in the lurch.

Isn't web 2.0 about what the users say-not what Zillow says?

Plain and Simple Zillow has been striving vainly since day one one to be the annoited the authority on homevaluations.

It must irk them that Yahoo put Reply (who?)and eppraisals side by side next to them in their Homevaluation center.

Running public data through a algorithm and spitting out valuations is nothing unique. HomeGain did it back in the last century.

Cyberhomes does it, abc real estate does it, eppraisals does it, reply does it and HomeGain is doing it again.

Did Zillow really think that just coming out and claiming that that they are the authority (Kelly's blue book of home valuations, blah blah blah) and adding a Z to everything they Zay would make it Zo?