Sellsius real estate marketing blog

I was wondering when someone was going to suggest that. It would be a great visual demonstrating that the listing agent seldom brings the buyer.

Hi, it's David G from Zillow,

We agree that it's a great idea to have buyers agents receive recognition on Zillow for the transactions that they participate in. In fact in early meetings between Realogy and Zillow execs it became obvious that buyside VSS will be an awesome tool for buyers' agents. Kevin Boer was also all over this opportunity when we met in Vegas yesterday.

I'd love to get more suggestions from REALTORS about the specifics of this program. The relationship between listing agents and sold homes is an easy one to verify but the buy-side scenario is less transparent (which is obviously why it's such a great opportunity.) What data do you suggest we collect from buy-side agents when they associate with the homes that they've helped sell?

Buyers' agents should note that you can to some extent associate with sold homes on Zillow today. If you read bloodhoundblog you may already be uploading photo's of the homes you've helped sell to the site - and there's no reason you couldn't link to those properties from your profile page or EZ Ads.

I'm very glad to see you guys come around on VSS; the feature was tremendously received at the NAR convention and we're excited about the value it adds for the brokerages and REALTORS using Zillow.

Well in Connecticut the buyer agent is always the one that closes out the MLS listing from a Active/Deposit status to Closed. It's right in the MLS.

I assume if you're getting the feed to show listing agents, there must be a way to pull the buyer agent out of the feed too.

@David G

Kevin Boer is a bright fellow and I hold his opinions in high regard.

Greg Swann is a blacklister (he even blacklists his contributor's commenters), who sanitizes the conversation of contrary opinion. Consequently, I am unable to address his suggestions in the context of his posts.

As for uploading photos to Zillow-- if they are the seller's photos, Mr. Swann has no right to republish them without the seller's consent (the copyright being with the seller). If he took the photos (of the interior & private spaces), I submit they were allowed to be taken for the purpose of marketing the house and not for marketing Greg Swann on Zillow AFTER the house is sold. So, IMO, without the homeowner's consent, his suggestion is illegal, immoral, and fattening (of the ego). I would even argue that, once sold, the house is no longer a "listing" and any photos of the home's interior and private areas should require the consent of the new owner before being posted on Zillow (or any third party site)-- would you want photos of the interior of your new home on the internet when it is not for sale? When is someone going to think about the homeowner and not a good place to pee?

(I do applaud him, however, for removing the Zillow API ad-- it was the height of hypocrisy to have it on his blog.)

--jf

@Athol

Great point. What is the MLS policy around distribution of that data? Our listings feeds are mostly provided by brokers and listings aggregators - it will be interesting to discuss receiving the buy-side data from both of them. However, it would also be great to allow buyside agents to pro-actively claim their deals, even if the listings weren't posted for sale.

@Joe

As I say; facts first, post second.

You are wrong. Greg advocated uploading a single exterior photo from the street. They are attributed to the agent; it's brilliant, legal and respectful. You're also wrong about photo's on Zillow; they're removed at the owner's request.

The advertising excitement in this game has always been around the listing, not the purchase. Why? Partly because a new listing generates a flurry of activity, while a closed transaction is, well, kind of boring. Another reason, I believe, is simply the limitations of technology.

Now, however, technology enables an exciting story -- and an advertising message -- to also be created around the buy-side of the transaction.

First reported here, in Latin, no less. (Warning: gratuitously self-serving link back to my blog.)

So Sellsius,
Take a look at http://www.johnlscott.com/ They actually keep the primary photo of sold listings and show them on their site. It enhances the search experience if you can connect the sold home with the outside picture. What is wrong with that and are you going to petition johnlscott to remove it as well?

Also I don't get your zillow api ad comment about Gregg's blog. How was that different from your big Trulia banner on your home page and your nice blog?

David has solicited feedback from REALTORS about his zillow "sold" sign program, and I would be happy to offer my feedback were it not for one thing: Zillow has, for the past several years, been nothing more than the annoying aunt who rides in the back seat and kills the sale after each showing. I can count over a dozen potential transactions I have lost or had unecessarily complicated because some poor slob looked up a house on Zillow and screwed up his asking price or offer based on the dubious "zestimate."

If you stop valuating homes that you haven't appraised or inspected and done a CMA, I'll give you all the constructive feedback you want. That's my deal.

David

My comment re: uploading photos was prefaced on certain prerequisites:
1. IF (read the word in my comment) the seller took the photo -- the seller owns the copyright. Exterior photo notwithstanding, Greg can't post it to zillow without owner consent.
2, IF (ditto) interior or private area photos (which may be an exterior shot BTW) were taken-- no right to republish on a third site without owner consent.

If Greg's photos are either of these, IMO, they are illegal to post on Zillow without the owner's consent. If he is uploading a non-private, exterior photo HE took, my comment does not apply, does it? That would be a subject for a whole another post. (for the record, your comment did not state any facts about his suggestion & I had not read it-- hence the prerequisites)

Re: Zillow photos removed at owner's request--- why? Does Zillow recognize some homeowner right here? If so, what is the right? What photos will zillow remove? Exterior? Interior? Private areas? Can you give me some specific facts? It is good news nonetheless.

Erika re: JohnLScott
-- Same response at to David above. If the photo prerequisites dont exist, my comment has no application. But if they are seller photos or interior shots and private area shots-- I would say you need homeowner consent. Dont you agree? (if you have the consent, fine)

Also, is John L. Scott a third party site? If not, it is not the equivalent of zillow. (Also if Greg posts photos of sold houses on his site, that's also a different story & not the same as posting on zillow (again, same prerequisites applying).

Furthermore, if the primary shot on John l Scott is an interior or a private area, I think that must get homeowner consent-- don't you? If it's an exterior, non private area, no problem

Re: the differences between Trulia ad/Sellsius and Zillow api/BHB: Short answer: Ours is an ad, his is not.

Longer answer:
These are quotes from Greg Swann re zillow zestimates:
It is the duty of the entire real estate community…to guard consumers from hoaxers, con-men and frauds….If we are silent when confronted with the public’s gullibility toward the Zillow.com fraud, we are complicit in that harm. (Greg Swann, from Tell the world: Zillow.com is bunk: http://tinyurl.com/2wkq3z)
http://tinyurl.com/2ndn35

He later put a zillow api on his blog (he has since removed it)
It was not a "paid" ad. But it was put there to send traffic to zillow for valuations -- a proactive supportive gesture-- an endorsement of sorts. Of course, that's his right, and anyone else's, to do. But given his position on zillow zestimates, it seemed more than a tad hypocritical to send consumers over there for a taste of Zillow kool-aid. Just an opinion.

Trulia on Sellsius
It's an ad. We take ads. (BHB does not)
In any case, we do not have a record of anti-Trulia posts. If we had bashed Trulia, called them a fraud, and took their ad, your comment would be dead on correct.

Ah technology.. the more advanced we get the more problems we encounter. I do think that if Zillow is going to allow listing agents to post information then the buyer's agent should also be able to post that they sold the property.. After all it only gets to be a "sold" listing because of the buyer agent

I think the posting of both listing and sales agents on Zillow properties is a fine idea. This information is already available in many MLS systems when closed/sold listings are displayed.

The photos shown are those originally submitted by the listing agent to the MLS. Both the listing and selling agents' names are shown as clickable links. That would work fine for Zillow as long as they are able to retrieve this information from the MLS systems.

Question: How far back, pre-Zillow, could we report (with our own exterior shots)?

Here's the funny thing; Zillow will do whatever Zillow wants to do.

They've moved the conversation from behind the closed doors, of the MLS, to the public. They offered a collaborative reporting effort to tons of agents and neighbors. Contrary to industry belief, the REALTORs don't have a monopoly on information.

The Zestimate is wrong! The Zestimate is dead on! Who cares? Consumers like the little gadget and understand it for what it is.

Now that Zillow is getting consumer traffic, they don't even have to listen to our opinions.

Brian,

Unless you have some inside info, you can't know the breakdown of visitors to zillow? -- agents, mortgage brokers, real estate pros vs. buyers (consumers)OR the nature of their visits? --- is it mostly curiosity or serious business? That's the thing about the net-- visitor counts are misleading. Unless there some conversion mechanism, you cannot tell how successful the site is with consumers (or pros who advertise there).

But I agree-- Z doesn't need to listen to our opinions. But they do have to listen to homeowners. It is the homeowner's asset which Z is peddling for profit-- it's really that simple. You can certainly think it's oK to sell ads around your house, have inaccurate estimates of its value, have others list it for sale and do Q&A; on it without your consent --- & accept being made to claim your home to prevent it-- but, as a homeowner, I don't.

Just pay a visit to the Zillow discussion forum and you will see that everyone does not share your tolerance of zillow. Home owners want an opt out of the zestimate-- that is clear. Many claim it interferes with the marketing of their home. And it can-- I don't think anyone disputes this possibility.

We have posted on the exclusive rights of homeowners. They are:
The right to decide:

1. where their property is listed for sale (or not listed)
2. how it is marketed and advertised
3. not have false or misleading information attached to the home, and
4. who will list, advertise and market their home as their agent

IMO, Zillow violates these homeowner rights. Yeah, they can keep doing it until some owner steps to the plate and sues them. Then they won't be able to do whatever they want.

Just curious, do you agree that homeowners have any of these exclusive rights? I have asked David G on several occasions and he refuses to answer.

-jf

PS: Nice to have you visit, Brian.