Oddly, Incredibleagents offered only three agents reviews for the entire State of Oregon. I don’t know if that’s an indictment of Oregon agents’ lack of technology experience, or because agents are too busy buying and selling in a “relatively” stable real estate market.

Homethinking offered no agent reviews, but an impressive list of agents. They show current sales statistics for each agent, but oddly enough, the agents themselves don’t care. Well, most don’t. Two agents are listed as sponsors in Eugene. At the time of this post, no buyer or seller had reviewed these agents. In fact, out of 1013 agents listed for Eugene, zero have reviews. Not very helpful to buyers..yet…

Joel raises the question – why aren’t there more services like this? I don’t know either, but I have my suspicions. Agents either get the internet or they don’t. If they don’t, they probably fear the very technology that can help them maintain an edge in an increasingly challenging real estate market. So sites that cater to tech savvy agents (other than social networks) are few and far between. I believe that many agents don’t want to contribute to (or legitimize) sites like homethinking because those sites take away agents’ innate advantage with clients – controlling and managing information. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this assumption, except that it’s completely wrong. The market already opened that box. There’s no going back.

Technology is not what is hurting agents the most. What’s hurting them is the sheer number of agents battling it out as low-cost seller alternatives slowly erode the pool of available homes. 1013 agents in Eugene (according to homethinking.com), in a city that turns over, at best, about 800-900 homes per quarter. That’s > 1 home per agent, per quarter. You don’t need a degree in economics to see that supply far outstrips demand, and as with most markets, it will seek equilibrium one way or another.

Here’s what they did for the Campbell House. Obviously the Cambpell House isn’t for sale, so not entirely focused on the buying and selling homes, but that’s ok. They claim to limit the fish-eye factor, something that the market can definitely use, although I noticed a little fish-eye business going on. It’s probably the nature of 360′ views to give you a little of that no matter how flat the lens.

$100-200 to “merchandise” a home worth $300k or more seems like a no-brainer. Provided the marketing costs don’t add up too quickly! A good enough reason to put together a Marketing Plan.

Home sellers would not fault an agent for removing a dumpster from a photo or using a little extra light to give the place more panache. What’s interesting about this debate though is that it’s happening at all, and in a public forum.

I feel compelled to point out that there are MUCH better products out there than paint, if you plan to edit or resize photos (ethically). Paint is especially bad at pixelating a photo after resizing it. I recommend IrfanView instead. It’s a solid shareware applications that’s nearly as good as photoshop, but without all the complex layers and tools.

True, this post is not really about dating. But the trackback is. It’s about putting your best foot forward (like you would on a date) using best practices and better tools. Also, cutting out the old fisheye pictures, or limiting their use. Do buyers really like those shots? I personally can’t stand them. Zillow and the Web2.0 real estate startups are proof that buyers want the best information they can get, not more fluff in the form of overworked camera angles.

Biased about local companies?? You bet!!!

And yet…anybody starting out in real estate will need to build some sort of client base first. It’s easy to be Jerry Maguire if the firm is giving you more leads than you can handle, it’s less easy if you’re trying to build a business from scratch in a market saturated with agents.

Here are some marketing tips:

* Setup some kind of web-based presence. Use a real estate agent site template, or create your own, but at least give people a place to go online to reach you.
* Market that site well. Choose keywords wisely. Optimize for search. Don’t overspend on high volume keywords, especially if you operate in a niche like rural properties, million$ homes, etc.
* Review and try all the innovative technology available to buyers and sellers. Don’t fear change, embrace it, and use it to your advantage.

“Dear Dave,

We are absolutely and incredibly in love with our new home. It is very possible or probable that we wouldn’t be here if not for your tireless and thorough work on our behalf. Come see our new pad with us in it! You are an awesome Realtor and a dear, dear friend.

Love,
Amedee Smith”
–Head Chef, Ambrosia Restaurant, Eugene Oregon

See their “About Us” page for a reality check. Really great marketing here – they know their audience, they differentiate, they don’t publish an agency’s canned template for a website (more differentiation), and they’re just being themselves. Easy to make a connection with this group. Well done.

What’s interesting to me is how spotrunner focuses exclusively on TV. Don’t they know people are watching most short commercials and videos on their computers, while surfing? Or that Google and other networks are offering video ad buys? Or maybe spotrunner is designed specifically to take advantage of the commoditization of TV ads in the face of internet competition?

I agree with Joel’s assessment of TV advertising – Tivo has changed everything. If an ad isn’t original or create buzz, people don’t “see” it. That’s how agencies get people not to skip past them via Tivo, or to email them to their friends when they show up on a website. The creative agencies win out in this world. From what I can see of spotrunner, the service commoditizes ads to allow smaller agencies and companies into the space. On the creative side, with spotrunner it seems there’s nothing left to chance.

As for agents using this service, IMO most buyers are interested in seeing the “real” agent..which could be done via videoblog or some other media message that doesn’t relay on a template. I’m sure there a million creative ways a savvy agent could take this – think rocketboom!

Here’s why Redfin is a good idea for Oregon:

• An online service like this will drive more transactions.
• It makes good brokers better at what they do, and weeds out the brokers that don’t like competition. A good businessman knows that competition makes you more effective.
• Redfin would drive more brokers online – resulting in more information for buyers and better access.
• Eugene home buyers need a service somewhere in between that of a traditional broker and the “for sale by owner” companies. A hybrid listings service.
• Some enterprising agents/brokers working for agencies that offer little support for their agents have an opportunity here to escape and work for a newcomer that’s reshaping the real estate landscape.

Regardless of my complaints, this could be useful in helping people determine who has the most experience, or at least who has the most friends to click on their ratings! What would be more helpful would be a way for people to post moderated comments. I get far more out of the first 2-3 most popular comments in Amazon than I do the total rating. And for services, qualifying the experience for others is even more important.