Pathetic fact number one: Jay Thompson is crowing that his company is in the top 5% of Phoenix-area real estate brokerages.
Pathetic fact number two: Thompson’s Realty has 104 closed residential transactions in ARMLS, year-to-date, spread across 21 licensees. Yeah, that’s fewer than five closings per head. Still worse, Shar Rundio accounts for 24 of those closings. That gets the other 20 mirror-foggers down to four deals each, on average. Jay and Francie have six closings between them. For reference, Cathleen and I have closed 27 properties, total, so far this year — and we’re broke!
Pathetic fact number three: Jay Thompson is the poster-boy for the TwitBook model of selling real estate. Like so many other dipwads in the TwitBook world, he’s set up an on-line academy so you, too, can learn how to close a deal every other month or so.
Your clients won’t believe bullshit. Too bad so many Realtors and lenders will.
Keith says:
Ouch. Your MLS gives stats like that out? Wish you were both girls, sounds like a cat fight is about to erupt!
November 1, 2010 — 10:10 am
Greg Swann says:
> Wish you were both girls, sounds like a cat fight is about to erupt!
Not on my end. I care to this extent: Jay Thompson and other big names in the online real estate world have turned themselves into self-annointed Judas Goats leading scads of dumb-but-decent people to their financial slaughter. This will be good for me, in the long run, I suppose. I’m building a business, not a “following.” But if you’re going to use bullshit as your basis for bragging, be sure to work from bullshit no one can check. Still better: Tell the truth.
November 1, 2010 — 10:17 am
James Malanowski says:
Funny how things change in 3 years.
November 1, 2010 — 10:53 am
Greg Swann says:
The link’s empty. If the point is to call me a hypocrite, you can come right out and say so. It’s certainly true that I have lent my credibility — more than once — to people I now see in a less-than-favorable light. I’ve never been shy about admitting it when I’m wrong. Perfectly fair to call me on it.
November 1, 2010 — 11:07 am
James Malanowski says:
I was linking to this https://www.bloodhoundrealty.com/BloodhoundBlog/?p=2252 which is a “related post” generated below your article welcoming Jay to BHB. It just seemed a bit ironic to me that your site would pull that link for this post.
Not pointing out any hypocrisy here, my point was exactly as written … It’s amazing how things change in a short time.
November 1, 2010 — 11:16 am
Greg Swann says:
> It just seemed a bit ironic to me that your site would pull that link for this post.
Indeed. An efficient mirror.
November 1, 2010 — 11:30 am
Dean Ouellette says:
Still a class act Great aren’t you. If you knew what the heck you were talking about you would know that Jay and Francy dont really practice real estate anymore, they run the brokerage. There is a reason Jay’s brokerage is growing and yours isnt, no one would want to work with an arrogant pr*ck like you
November 1, 2010 — 12:42 pm
Greg Swann says:
> Still a class act Great aren’t you. If you knew what the heck you were talking about you would know that Jay and Francy dont really practice real estate anymore, they run the brokerage. There is a reason Jay’s brokerage is growing and yours isnt, no one would want to work with an arrogant pr*ck like you
Lose control much? What a treat it must be to work with you.
> Still a class act Great aren’t you.
We have no history, none whatever. To my knowledge, I have never met you, and I don’t know that I’ve ever even exchanged email with you, except to tell you, once, that you were being splogged.
> If you knew what the heck you were talking about you would know that Jay and Francy dont really practice real estate anymore, they run the brokerage.
Urf. Run what? Ten sales a month can’t take much effort.
> There is a reason Jay’s brokerage is growing and yours isnt, no one would want to work with an arrogant pr*ck like you
Interesting. I had assumed it was because we don’t recruit agents. Never have, and it’s always plausible to me that we never will.
Here are two items of interest to me:
1. Your broker posted a big fat lie about how well his brokerage is doing, and you choose to attack me.
2. I know more about using the internet to market real estate than anyone you are ever likely to meet, and yet you’ve never made any sort of effort to cultivate my acquaintance.
November 1, 2010 — 5:19 pm
May says:
I don’t know any of you, but absolutely enjoy following your posts Mr Swann. I find more “meat & potatoes” in what you say than anything else I’ve read lately. Keep talking I wish to hear more truths.
November 1, 2010 — 12:45 pm
John Kalinowski says:
Greg – I am still perplexed by the way you approach people. I know you don’t care what anyone thinks about you, and have your own way of looking at the world, but your vicious comments and attacks at others just don’t make sense to me. You’re a very smart guy with brilliant ideas, one of which I adapted, with your help, into my own custom sign idea. It’s just too bad that you don’t seem to care about other people’s feelings, or the fact that there’s a real person behind those you so easily call dipwads and mirror-foggers. It may be why nearly all the contributors whose photos appear in your sidebar never write even a sentence on this blog. Might be they just don’t feel comfortable sharing the page with your occasional mean-spirited diatribe. Again, I know you don’t care to listen to others and will surely brush off my reply, but your company could be much more than it is already with a little less nastiness.
I don’t know Jay beyond what I’ve learned from reading his blog and viewing his videos, but he seems like a sharp, stand-up kinda guy. Someone any agent would enjoy working with, and a client would be pleased to hire. Why you would attack him so viciously in public just because you don’t like his strategies is just plain weird.
November 1, 2010 — 1:09 pm
Greg Swann says:
> It’s just too bad that you don’t seem to care about other people’s feelings, or the fact that there’s a real person behind those you so easily call dipwads and mirror-foggers.
Mirror-foggers is funny, John. Moreover, if you’re selling four houses a year, it’s well past time that someone told you your actual status in the universe.
> It may be why nearly all the contributors whose photos appear in your sidebar never write even a sentence on this blog. Might be they just don’t feel comfortable sharing the page with your occasional mean-spirited diatribe.
My assumption is that they’re busy. I often go for significant lengths of time without writing, either. If anyone wants off the bus, all they gotta do is pull the cord. Adding people is work, but it’s a quick edit in two PHP files to subtract someone.
This is the bottom line: Jay Thompson is boasting about results that are, in fact, pathetic, bankruptcy-making. That much is his business, and I could not care less. But when he represents himself as an expert on real estate marketing, encouraging other agents to duplicate his errors, that’s precisely the sort of behavior you can expect me to object to.
I like you, John, what I know of you, and I respect the work you’re doing a great deal. But I don’t live by your standards, and I don’t expect you to live by mine. Here’s something immensely valuable you can learn from me: Other people get to be who they are. I don’t know this for certain, but I would hope that the people in the sidebar are there because they know this is the one place in the world of real estate where they can always tell the truth, damn the consequences. That’s why I’m here, in any case.
November 1, 2010 — 5:06 pm
Teresa boardman says:
Greg – I know you don’t think much of the NAR and I don’t think much of Arizona, which is why I don’t live there but that isn’t my point. I think you have crossed a line with this post. It may qualify as an ethics violation. If I were Jay I would file a complaint. My guess is Jay couldn’t be bothered. Honestly I think you should quit paying your dues. You are a smart man. You don’t need to belong to the NAR to make money.
November 1, 2010 — 1:11 pm
Greg Swann says:
> It may qualify as an ethics violation.
Oh, good grief. Bring it on.
> Honestly I think you should quit paying your dues. You are a smart man. You don’t need to belong to the NAR to make money.
No MLS membership in Phoenix without belonging to branches of the NAR at the local, state and national level. If I could quit the NAR and still work, I’d be gone in a heartbeat. When I have more money, I will consider bringing a right-to-work suit against what is, in fact, a criminal cartel.
November 1, 2010 — 4:53 pm
Teresa boardman says:
Interesting. You will work with an organization that you know to be criminal if that is what it takes to make a buck. I have to say there are limits to what I will do to earn a living. If it involves criminal activity of any kind I walk.
November 1, 2010 — 5:00 pm
Greg Swann says:
> If it involves criminal activity of any kind I walk.
Why haven’t you walked? Every facet of the residential real estate business depends on crime. A very simple example: The GSEs can only underwrite mortgages by stealing money from every honest, hard-working person in America. Had I understood the NAR when I got my real estate license, I might not have done it. But now that I’m committed, I am far and away the person most likely to rid our industry of crime — not alone by pointing out to other practitioners what is going on. What are you doing to rid the real estate business of criminal behavior?
November 1, 2010 — 5:28 pm
Teresa boardman says:
I am not understanding. I thought you were saying that NAR is criminal. I have seen criminal activity but never organized or through the NAR just greedy individuals trying to make a buck or two. I don’t see them as being any different than someone who is a card carrying dues paying member of an organization that he knows to be criminal. You are all the same. You will do what ever it takes to make a buck and then take the high moral road when you have enough money to pay for it.
>”When I have more money, I will consider bringing a right-to-work suit against what is, in fact, a criminal cartel.”
November 1, 2010 — 5:53 pm
Greg Swann says:
What is your argument? We are all us of complicit in a cannibalistic frenzy. You absolve yourself of nothing by denying this.
November 1, 2010 — 6:16 pm
Dean Ouellette says:
>Urf. Run what? Ten sales a month can’t take much effort.
like you would have any have any idea what type of effort it took. My partner and I, who are both new to his brokerage have 6x as many listings as you do Mr big shot marketing pro.
>Here are two items of interest to me:
>1. Your broker posted a big fat lie about how well his brokerage is doing, and you choose to attack me.
Funny I read the stats he posted… his numbers were factual truth no lies.
>2. I know more about using the internet to market real estate than anyone you are ever likely to meet, and yet you’ve never made any sort of effort to cultivate my acquaintance.
Because I would never want to get to know someone with your personal skills. I have seen how you attack people over and over on this site. Why would I ever want to get to know anyone like that? Id rather hang out with people who are pleasant to be around.
November 1, 2010 — 6:32 pm
Greg Swann says:
> My partner and I, who are both new to his brokerage have 6x as many listings as you do Mr big shot marketing pro.
And you’ve sold none of them. It looks to me like you’ve pulled down about $35,000 in GCI at Thompson Realty. I wonder how much of that money you left in your broker’s pocket.
I’m carrying zero listings right now. Cathleen has one. For the most part, we’re only taking listings we can’t get away from. The reason is obvious from your own results: As hard it is to work on the buyer’s side of the transaction right now, the yields are still quite a bit better than they are on the seller’s side.
> Funny I read the stats he posted… his numbers were factual truth no lies.
The purpose of deception is to mislead — especially to lead people into making incorrect decisions. This was the purpose of Jay’s post.
> Id rather hang out with people who are pleasant to be around.
As I pointed out, you’ve never been anywhere near me. You’ve cured me of any curiosity I might have had about you, for what that’s worth.
November 1, 2010 — 7:07 pm
Teresa boardman says:
I thought we were talking about the NAR the organization that you are a dues paying member of even though you believe that it is criminal and you believe that you are a highly moral person. I can’t follow the logic of it and if we are arguing I need to stop now. I don’t know anything about cannibals. We don’t have them here in Minnesota. Have a nice evening and thanks for allowing my comments so graciously.
November 1, 2010 — 6:33 pm
Tom Johnson says:
The numbers on the 1099’s are what counts in this business.
And that’s all I have to say about that.
November 1, 2010 — 7:30 pm
Greg Swann says:
> And that’s all I have to say about that.
Chickenshit. 😉
November 1, 2010 — 8:10 pm
Dean Ouellette says:
And in the time we (my partner and I) have been together you and your wife have sold one more transaction than we have and you have 1 active listing we have 12. I will take our position any day as these short sales start closing starting with the first one in 10 days.
Congrats Greg, you can belittle my “sold none” because we have short sale listings and have only been together a few months. But it looks like this agent who has been around in the business for a whopping 2 years is pretty much kicking your butt. And i will take my total closed transactions in the last 20 months against your numbers any day.
>You’ve cured me of any curiosity I might have had about you, for what that’s worth.
Thank god, now i dont have to avoid you and your miserable attitude, you can just stay away from me. Works for me!
You are miserable to everyone you talk to and about on this blog. Its no wonder that Jay is kicking your arse. Try being nice to people, it helps when you are in the sales field.
With that I am done… keep up the good work champ!
November 1, 2010 — 7:41 pm
Greg Swann says:
Good on ya, dude. I wish you nothing but success. Feel free to go off and stew in your own juice.
November 1, 2010 — 8:08 pm
Jim Klein says:
>>>I thought we were talking about the NAR the organization that you are a dues paying member of even though you believe that it is criminal and you believe that you are a highly moral person. I can’t follow the logic
Then allow me to explain the logic since I’m a businessman in precisely the same position, as are nearly all businesspeople in this country.
“Criminal” can mean “morally criminal,” in which case a kleptocracy is prima facie criminal. But more relevantly here, “criminal” means “in violation of statute,” which itself means a mechanism by which statutes must be developed in accordance with strict hierarchical rules. When a person is not allowed to earn a living by whatever peaceful means he chooses, with the willing consent of his customers, then whatever is stopping him from doing that, is criminal. At least in the USA, it is.
Things such as closed shops, required club or trade membership, and technically even micro-regulation, high licensing bars and confiscatory taxation…are all illegal in the USA, owing to various clauses in the Constitution, not to mention other founding documents. The presence of statutes or rulings declaring these actions “legal” doesn’t change the fact of the matter—they are illegal and hence criminal.
However, due to their /enforcement/ they are required to be followed, their criminality notwithstanding. So while it’s true that one theoretically has the option to leave, it’s still the case that if one decides to live here where he was born, he is obligated (here meaning “forced to”) follow various rules even though those rules are criminal.
Hope that helps. Meanwhile I believe that I’ve been known as a “smug, arrogant prick” more publicly and for longer than Greg, and it took a fair amount of work to get there. So I don’t think that merely quintupling the production of some other agents, not to mention wanting to prevent those with thinking minds from falling into erroneous traps, really qualifies Greg for the charge. Maybe with a little more work, he can better earn it!
November 1, 2010 — 8:24 pm
Jim Klein says:
Oops, sorry…I guess that “quintupling” should’ve been “tripling” since the 27 was for two. Even less basis for the charge of arrogance…looks downright humble to me!
November 1, 2010 — 8:33 pm
Greg Swann says:
> I guess that “quintupling” should’ve been “tripling” since the 27 was for two.
Just to be clear: None of the performance numbers discussed in this thread amount to a fart in a gale of wind. We’ll finish the year at around 36 closed sales, give or take. That’s good for us, over the past five years, but it’s not actually good by any stretch of the imagination.
I look at Jeff’s six-figure target and just smile. Six figures is not a hard target to hit — but our monthly nut is $10K. Our first profitable dollar comes at $120,000 — a target we probably will not hit this year.
The numbers for Thompson Realty are pathetic, spread across that many bodies. A middling REO team will be doing a lot better than that, in terms of closed transactions.
My strategy since early 2006 has basically been “avoid entangling alliances.” We have not always been successful at this, but, as much as we can, we try to avoid getting involved with business propositions that lose us money. We don’t have to work to make no money. To work, we have to spend money, and if we work with too many people who end up not closing a transaction, we bleed to death in a frenzy of activity.
I visit a lot of homes with two or three abandoned lock-boxes on the hose bib or the gas meter. Those boxes belong to former real estate agents who were convinced to the very last minute they were making money.
November 1, 2010 — 8:58 pm
Greg Swann says:
> The numbers for Thompson Realty are pathetic, spread across that many bodies. A middling REO team will be doing a lot better than that, in terms of closed transactions.
I just ran a test of this proposition, for my own curiosity. I looked up an REO team I closed a deal with last week. Four agents, total, 223 closed transactions so far this year. Figure around $660,000 in gross commission income, before all expenses. Very big numbers, and a very efficient operation. The obvious conclusion to be drawn is that everyone promoting on-line real estate marketing, myself included, is a hopeless dipwad.
November 1, 2010 — 11:38 pm
Dawn Maloney says:
And today I saw that Greg Swann is on the Inman voting list of influential people in real estate? Ick. Who put him on there? Did they read this mess? WOW. Greg, glad you are outing yourself. This is absolutely great for your competition.
November 1, 2010 — 8:50 pm
Greg Swann says:
Hi, Dawn. It’s awfully gracious of you to show up on my property just to spit on the carpet. There is no better way to teach people about bad manners than a practical example. Very impressive.
November 1, 2010 — 9:04 pm
Kristin LaVanway says:
Wow…there is a lot of anger in this post. Just shows the frustration level out here in the real estate profession. These are not easy times, and to be honest, that is what I took away from Jay’s post. I don’t think he was bragging about Thompsons, rather, he was pointing out how many agents/brokerages are really struggling right now. I don’t know about you, Greg, but I know a lot of really great agents who are having some of the toughest years they have ever seen. Seems like a really bad time to start throwing each other under the bus.
For the record, I am one of the mirror-fogging agents at Thompson’s. I don’t know you and I don’t normally read your blog, but for the life of me, I could not figure out how anyone could be so nasty to Jay. Jay and Francy are some of the nicest folks around and treat the agents in their brokerage like family. They offer us a lot of opportunities – some agents are beter able to capitalize on them than others – that’s just they way it is in real estate.
Now, Jay puts himself out there so maybe that makes him an easy target, but the same cannot be said of Francy or me or any of the other agents whose stories you don’t know. It’s really unprofessional, Greg, really, it is.
I probably won’t be checking back anytime soon, but I sure do wish you the best of luck. Try to lighten up, OK?
November 1, 2010 — 9:50 pm
Greg Swann says:
> Wow…there is a lot of anger in this post.
Nonsense.
For the rest, you seem like a sweet kid, and I don’t feel like wrestling with you.
For all of the surrogates who have come streaming in here today, no one has done any damage at all to the original argument: Jay Thompson is presenting a pathetic level of failure as being a sign of great success, thus misleading thoughtless agents into thinking his marketing strategy is successful. It isn’t, and the entire TwitBook phenomenon, not the state of the real estate market, is the worst financial enemy working Realtors face.
November 1, 2010 — 10:03 pm
Patrick Healy says:
I have to be honest, you are pretty brutal Greg. I can’t judge it one way or the other though. I have seen you write things that I have thought, “what a jerk” but in hindsight have been right on the money.
I worked for a company a while back that released a product that, at the time, we thought had great legs (and I think it really could have if we managed it right). You shredded it and I was pretty pissed. You were moderating comments at the time so my comments didn’t even get published so that just made me more angry. HOWEVER, the product was a pretty big failure later that year and we had to do a lot of damage control on it. Now I look back and realize you were right – even if there was no way you could have known it.
I know Jay Thompson personally and I think he’s a pretty good guy. I can’t speak to how much real estate he moves or if he is or isn’t the top brokerage in AZ. Hell, ‘top’ is a relative term these days depending on what you are measuring.
It does seem to be clear to me that you like a good fight and aren’t afraid to pick one. I hope I am not on the receiving end of it one day. Perhaps you can get your point across without being SO harsh. I don’t think there is much disagreement with most of what you say – it’s just the way it comes out. My 2¢
-PH
November 1, 2010 — 10:07 pm
Brian Brady says:
“My assumption is that they’re busy”
Fair assumption. If I shared what’s worked for me in 2010, I’d be burned at the stake for blogsphemy.
November 1, 2010 — 10:13 pm
Greg Swann says:
> If I shared what’s worked for me in 2010, I’d be burned at the stake for blogsphemy.
That’s funny. I don’t know if you’ve been watching, but I’ve been gloating lately about all my new spamming toys. I hate spam no less than always, but I think it’s a wonderful way to highlight the absurdity of the average Realtor’s productive uses of social media — all this while always taking account that, most of the time, Realtors are just wasting time on social media sites.
November 1, 2010 — 10:20 pm
Brian Brady says:
“I don’t know if you’ve been watching, but I’ve been gloating lately about all my new spamming toys”
I watch EVERYTHING you try, just like I consume Dan Kennedy newsletters.
I chuckled when I saw you start Spamtter, secretly thinking your stats would beat the “best business practices of Twitter” (as taught by the experts); you didn’t disappoint. I chuckled because I know you find Twitter useless but know, from talking to other marketers, that Spammter is more effective than what is being taught. It’s link or content bait.
You might hate that as a consumer but what you’d miss is that tweets show up in SERPS. If someone is searching for the exact thing one of your spweets blasted, they’re going to click through. Any negative publicity you foment from spamming is outweighed by the clicks you’re getting. Better yet, you automated it so it’s no skin off your ass. I see no downside to your strategy.
The real gem has been watching you calendar and track activity. I still have tic sheets, with points assigned to tasks, and a daily and weekly “point contest”; I’ve used them for 15 of the past 22 years. Tracking activity is the single best thing we can do because it.
Social media are as crowded as I expected they would get when I told an audience “We gotta get busy”, in NYC.
November 1, 2010 — 11:06 pm
Greg Swann says:
You’re right straight down the line about spamming Twitter. I started doing just because it was easy and I thought it was funny. But retweets have juice, and some people splog my tweets, for even more enduring juice. I know people search into Twitter, which leads to clickthroughs. My objectives are limited: I’m closing on FreePhoenixMLSSearch.com, that’s all. Nothing sells houses like houses, so I just want to get people to where the houses are. But here’s more, code I wrote over the weekend:
Are you interested in Golf Course homes in Litchfield Park, AZ? Someone else is, too. See for yourself: http://bit.ly/bgDMax
That bit.ly link will take you to a pre-populated form of the actual search. I have users creating clickthroughable content for me, but they’re also, in the long run, teaching each other how to run more complicated searches. I have no idea if this will turn into money, but, as above, it’s easy and it’s essentially free, going forward. I have other plans for that content, but everything, ultimately, is just about fishing with more and more lines in the water.
Okay: Your turn: Tell us about your acts of blogsphemy.
November 1, 2010 — 11:24 pm
Brian Brady says:
“Tell us about your acts of blogsphemy.”
That’s a full on post but I’ll preview it with this: shake hands and ask for business. Looking at Facebook friends’ streams (for events) and Meetup schedules are the best sources for real life opportunities to meet people in person. See someone on your list you want to meet? Call and ask about the networking mixer they’re attending. Better yet, just show up.
People like being the center of attention. When you show up, and say “I really wanted to meet you” (and you have to really want to meet them), they want to help you get business. I’m oversimplifying it but, if you’re meeting people, you get business.
November 1, 2010 — 11:37 pm
Greg Swann says:
> if you’re meeting people, you get business.
Who knew? 😉
November 1, 2010 — 11:40 pm
Brian Brady says:
The tweeted question with the MLS close perfect internet marketing. If I click on that link, you give me a pre-populated form. That’s EXACTLY what I want. I don’t know any downside to this strategy.
November 1, 2010 — 11:43 pm
Greg Swann says:
> I don’t know any downside to this strategy.
The PhoenixBargains Twitter account is around 500 Tweets a day of various sorts. It doesn’t have to produce much to give us more work than we can handle.
Here’s more. I have five of those sites, target marketing for the folks I want to attract. They all Tweet, too.
And: Sometime soon I have to get back to the project that ate the last Splendorquest.com file server. That one, I think, can take net.possession of every house I might be interested in. None of this stuff will survive contact with the competition, long term, but as long as I can keep coming up with new ideas, I can find the space I need to work.
November 1, 2010 — 11:53 pm
Brian Brady says:
I have a whole 4-square vs, Yelp geolocation strategy I tested this year and Yelp wins hands down. It’s the single best way to have “civilians” recognize your face; the modern day bus bench ad (and it’s free). Think “pissing on trees”
November 1, 2010 — 11:46 pm
Greg Swann says:
I see your Yelp stuff on Facebook.
> Think “pissing on trees”
Check. And because it’s all pull, no push, even despite the spamminess it’s not a problem. The Do Not Call list turned the whole world upside down. Amazing…
November 1, 2010 — 11:59 pm
Russell Shaw says:
Jay Thompson did not deserve to be attacked. Period.
The main reasons Jay is so well liked and highly regarded are because he is such a smart, honest and nice person.
There isn’t a single individual who read this post or will ever read this post who will somehow be “saved” from wasting their time on social media.
November 2, 2010 — 1:00 am
Greg Swann says:
> Jay Thompson did not deserve to be attacked. Period.
Telling the truth about bad behavior is an attack only if your war is with the truth.
> The main reasons Jay is so well liked and highly regarded are because he is such a smart, honest and nice person.
I’ll bet Craig Proctor is a good-timin’ fishin’ buddy, too.
> There isn’t a single individual who read this post or will ever read this post who will somehow be “saved” from wasting their time on social media.
You came to me, originally, because you wanted to help working agents avoid adopting erroneous and self-destructive strategies being peddled by snake-oil salesmen. I still hew to that position. I don’t make exceptions for especially-personable snake-oil salesmen.
As I told you in February of 2008, people don’t run in mobs because they know they’re right. They do it because they know they’re wrong.
What benefit is there to you to being wrong in public, Russell?
What benefit should all of those starving agents out there — each one of them avidly mimicking the bad habits Jay Thompson and other big-names-on-paper promote on TwitBook — expect to realize from your endorsement of error?
November 2, 2010 — 6:24 am
Jim Klein says:
>>>There isn’t a single individual who read this post or will ever read this post who will somehow be “saved” from wasting their time on social media.
You know how this translates, Russell? It says, “There isn’t a single individual capable of integrating the facts you present and acting rationally pursuant to those facts.”
You even give the reason you imagine this…emotional tripe about attacks and someone being nice. That’s lovely, but this is supposed to be about business. Greg rants endlessly about the “Twitbook” style of production, and he’s right. Offering factual support in support of the assertion is not some wild injustice. Inability to see the facts because of some imaginary offense of some imaginary “attack” on Greg’s part, is not a great compliment on the intellectual acuity of the RE people who read this blog.
OTOH, I have little doubt that you’re wrong about that as well.
November 2, 2010 — 6:12 am
Jim Klein says:
>>>What benefit should all of those starving agents out there — each one of them avidly mimicking the bad habits Jay Thompson and other big-names-on-paper promote on TwitBook — expect to realize from your endorsement of error?
As I said, you’re nowhere even close to a smug, arrogant prick. You can keep working on it, though!
November 2, 2010 — 8:28 am
Greg Swann says:
> As I said, you’re nowhere even close to a smug, arrogant prick. You can keep working on it, though!
I’m told that the Facebook frenzy among the I’m-a-monkey-just-like-you club is a thing to behold. I have hopes that the deeply-offended parties will take their pique home to the dinner table. Starving spouses can do math — with alacrity. A testy time of it tonight, perhaps, but it’s possible, in consequence, that tomorrow can be a new beginning.
Grumbling inlookers: Just so you know, complaining about self-evident facts to other Realtors will not produce income for your family, no matter how self-righteous it makes you feel.
November 2, 2010 — 8:38 am
Teri Lussier says:
>>>>There isn’t a single individual who read this post or will ever read this post who will somehow be “saved” from wasting their time on social media.
Probably not. What’s more probable is that those among us who are most likely to be found wasting time on social media- of which I was once the poster child and have the measly income to prove it- this is a brutal ass-kicking to stay the course and put our minds to more productive work. When the truth shows up in a raw, unflinching, unadulterated form, it’s even more powerful and eye-opening. Painful, though. Very painful.
November 2, 2010 — 10:11 am
Chris Smith says:
I just find this amusing
“Leave a civil reply. (Flame comments and all keyword spam will be deleted.)”
November 2, 2010 — 12:08 pm
J Philip Faranda says:
All 104 deals were Jay’s because he’s the broker. Your fallacy is that you judge a broker by his personal production instead of those he presides over. If you closed 27 and no others from any team you have docked with you, Jay is 77 deals ahead of you, and is apparently wiping the floor with you in the recruiting department.
I don’t know your stats but you are comparing apples and oranges. The related posts below your piece indicates an entirely different (and ironically so) message from the post.
November 2, 2010 — 3:43 pm
Greg Swann says:
104/21 is not greater than 27/2 no matter how much you want it to be. As I pointed out last night, the only impressive number that have appeared in this thread are 223/4. But you’re right on the other point: I have been 100% lousy at recruiting Realtors who can’t sell real estate.
November 2, 2010 — 5:51 pm
Greg Swann says:
I want to amend my own reply, as a matter of principle. We have never sought to recruit agents. I don’t know that we ever will, but, if we do, we will never be in the agent-milking business – the business most real estate brokers are in. I find that aspect of real estate brokerage sickening, and I will never be a part of it. This thread has been a melancholy experience to me, because it illustrates too completely how few working Realtors have understood the Unchained idea. Matters nothing. I’m a broker because I will not be a slave, and I don’t recruit pseudo-independent agents because I will not be a slave-owner.
November 2, 2010 — 6:07 pm
Kevin Tomlinson says:
OMG These are really the times I miss Laurie Manny.
Greg, I have had a problem, which I have voiced many times about NAR holding up certain people as success stories that are “in the group.”
Fact is, I have one of those social media gurus/rockstars in my market place. He/she could sell his/her way out of a plastic bag. But he/she is a speaker at all the seminars like he/she is a star.
Makes me want to gag!
I will scan my 1099’s and put them here at the end of the year.
It’s laughable when I look at the speaker roster for NAR. I know most of those people are not agents (or successful agents, for that matter) but wanna-be social media rockstars. They’ve given up on trying to be a ‘real’ real estate star (achieved by selling lots of real estate.).
I can pull the numbers (I’m a broker now) for my local SM guru. Oy. My post would be MORE dreadful than this one.
I think anyone who puts anyone on a panel and implies that these people are ‘successful’ in their careers—should have to go thru a vetting process.
Let the snake oil flow from the social media cottage industry.
November 2, 2010 — 6:16 pm
J Philip Faranda says:
Greg- I am a 34/1 thus far. But not everyone who sells real estate does that, and I have about 10 dormant license hangers and another 8 who have divided another 16 deals among them. If that makes them slaves and me a slave owner you have a pretty severe view of things. They are going to dock somewhere, and they want to be with me. It is good for the company bottom line. And regardless of the ratios, the bottom line is what counts. Jay has collected on 100+ deals this year, and that is 77 more than you and 54 more than me.
Ratios don’t pay the bills, volume pays them. If you can’t save for retirement or college, no rationalization of sales per person will solve that. REO stats are kind of meaningless, because that gravy train won’t last forever and it is a kind of specialized niche.
I really don’t get your beef with Jay, frankly. At one time you must have been friendly, because he was on the platform here. If I am not mistaken, you are also both Redfin partner agents, as I am. Why the ad hominem criticism.
November 2, 2010 — 6:47 pm
Greg Swann says:
Your claims are absurd. Only in real estate would anyone say things like this. Steve Jobs doesn’t make all those iPods, but if he “managed” people who produced wealth at 10% or less of their ideal efficiency, he’d be wearing a green apron and brewing espresso for a living.
> They are going to dock somewhere
Because they are required to, by law. If they were free to choose what to do about their careers, traditional brokers would be wiped out overnight. That’s why there’s a law, to enshrine mediocrity and to ossify slavery — all at the expense of the consumer.
> you have a pretty severe view of things.
I don’t gloss over facts. The truth is, I am the most rigorously thoughtful Realtor you are ever likely to meet. My experience of you so far suggests that you will waste your opportunity to learn from me.
> Why the ad hominem criticism.
You don’t understand the fallacy ad hominem. There is no ad hominem argument here — except in the comments from the folks who showed up here yesterday. I made a fact based argument, and the facts are uncontested.
I’m delighted with this much of our progress — and may all the gods bless you, Kevin Tomlinson. Despite all the noisome distractions, I think we’ve put a new coat of paint on the main point:
Dicking around all day on TwitBook, schmoozing with Realtors, lenders and jovial vendorsluts, is career suicide for working real estate practitioners.
November 2, 2010 — 7:16 pm
Kevin Tomlinson says:
It will be very interesting to see if Jay “agrees” with your numbers Greg.
I know how those reports work. I mean come on all this social media is a bunch of back-slapping dbags who hope and pray that this social media crap will work.
It’s like Jonestown all over again. I would like to drop a link in here, please delete if it is not appropriate. I laughed my a** off when I read it.
I would like to do a post on Social Media entitled:
“What if?”
http://www.hubspot.com/webinars/social-media-is-bs/?source=email-20101101b-2
What will they rally around next?
It seems like it may be a sinking ship…and I’m enjoying watching “them” scramble to proclaim that it really DOES work, “just look at me!”
The ‘Me too’s’ –A group of Social Media Enthusiasts sing the hits.
November 2, 2010 — 7:11 pm
Kevin Tomlinson says:
Greg,
I know what you say is true:
1. I sell real estate for a living. I don’t manage twitbook.
2. Your honesty about your financial position is relevant to the post and refreshingly honest. It is something I would do.
3. There is NOTHING WRONG with being broke. I know many good, honest, hard-working people that are up ‘shits creek,’ financially.
4. Playing the ‘role’ of being ‘fabulous’ does NOT equal PRICELESS.
November 2, 2010 — 7:23 pm
Kevin Tomlinson says:
OMg,
I just realized that Inman didn’t recognize me as being somebody.
Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit. Next year I’m retweeting all of the Social Media elite’s tweets THREE TIMES.
November 2, 2010 — 7:51 pm
Greg Swann says:
> I just realized that Inman didn’t recognize me as being somebody.
Last night someone said I’m on another one of their lists. I think they include me because I hate them so much. I read that as affirmative evidence of a deeply internalized self-loathing. 😉
Here’s my vow to you: If we do another live Unchained event, I want you to come and speak.
November 2, 2010 — 7:56 pm
Kevin Tomlinson says:
Do you know what you are getting yourself into?
November 2, 2010 — 7:58 pm
Greg Swann says:
> Do you know what you are getting yourself into?
I’m eager to find out. I’m sorry we didn’t prevail upon you when we were in Orlando.
November 2, 2010 — 8:02 pm
J Philip Faranda says:
What claims did I make that were absurd? Calling someone pathetic isn’t a fact, it is an opinion, which you seem to have in vast abundance. The problem is you are so invested in your assertions, and you can’t factually prove 27 is better than 104, so you decry the system. They have drugs for that, and people you can talk to.
> My experience of you so far suggests that you will waste your opportunity to learn from me.
Um, Greg, I outsell you. And I do so in a market that is brutally competitive. When I want to learn how to cut down my sales, carry no listings and have no agents I’ll ask you for lessons. I have 4 kids to provide for however so don’t hold your breath.
You once said something on Active Rain I agreed with, so I started following you here. The sidebar had some heavy hitters, so I read occasionally. But don’t tear a ligament patting yourself on the back. If you are broke and carry no listings, you are the same as all the others who produce low output and blog a lot.
November 2, 2010 — 8:27 pm
Greg Swann says:
> Um, Greg, I outsell you.
That’s the fallacy non sequitur. I said “thoughtful.” You said “rich.” Does not follow.
> don’t tear a ligament patting yourself on the back
That is the fallacy ad hominem: “I scorn you, therefore you’re wrong.”
Not only is there no tactic you can come up with to dominate me, there is no ploy you can come up with that I have not already seen dozens of times.
>> My experience of you so far suggests that you will waste your opportunity to learn from me.
Ahem.
November 2, 2010 — 9:01 pm
Mary McKnight says:
I rarely step into the real estate space anymore mostly because rockstars and mobile tech are a hell of a lot more fun but, Greg, you got my attention. And, while I imagine the people who pointed me back here expected something other than this, here goes:
I salute you for calling it as you see it. If this is how you feel and you are comfortable enough to say it sans any political mincing of words, power to you. I, personally like both you and Jay, but I don’t work in the AZ real estate space. I love how so many are so eager to dismiss this as classless and tacky when Gregis probably saying in public, openly and honestly, what so many of you have said behind the backs of your competitors. Greg is a lot of things, irreverent, possessed of a singular vernacular and, at times, condescending – but you know what he isn’t? a back stabber. At least Jay knows the score. The laundry is aired and I applaud Greg for being what most aren’t, REAL. Personally, Greg, I like that I know what the score is with you at all times. It’s refreshing!
November 2, 2010 — 8:51 pm
Kevin Tomlinson says:
J. Philip Faranda,
I have no interest in anything but the truth. Here’s the truth. I outsell the shit out of you. Big deal.
Why is what Greg said ok? Because he wasn’t professing to be this or that.
I’m in a market where I have a “guru” who doesn’t sell shit.
1. It’s annoying
2. People (agents) are drinking the swill that he/she is selling as “proven effective” when it is in FACT not.
If you want to be on a pedestal be DAMN sure that all your ducks are in a row.
Period.
If I was smarter like Mary, I would have said something ‘deep’and intelligent like she did. But I’m not, so I can only speak like the dumba** that I am.
But I sell a hell of a lot of real estate. But in Social Mediaville actually selling real estate isn’t a prerequisite for super-stardom.
November 2, 2010 — 9:00 pm
Kevin Tomlinson says:
BTW, I have zero desire to be worshipped, followed OR FOLLOW.
#JUSTSAYIN
November 2, 2010 — 9:02 pm
J Philip Faranda says:
104 > 27
Selective cut and paste doesn’t change that. Neither does throwing around a few Latin terms.
There is no scorn in observing mathematical fact. You didn’t say thoughtful, you said pathetic.
Kevin: I don’t disagree with Greg’s point about social media. Never did. But I do have an issue with attacking others.
November 3, 2010 — 3:32 am
Greg Swann says:
> You didn’t say thoughtful, you said pathetic.
Faranda: you have a pretty severe view of things.
Swann: I don’t gloss over facts. The truth is, I am the most rigorously thoughtful Realtor you are ever likely to meet. My experience of you so far suggests that you will waste your opportunity to learn from me.
Faranda: Um, Greg, I outsell you.
Swann: That’s the fallacy non sequitur. I said “thoughtful.” You said “rich.” Does not follow.
Faranda: You didn’t say thoughtful, you said pathetic.
I love this medium.
> Neither does throwing around a few Latin terms.
You know nothing of the art of rhetoric, which is not at all uncommon in the modern epoch. I could engage you further, but, from my point of view, you come across like a baby in a boxing ring. In any case, you are never going to dominate me, no matter how hard you sneer. You should quit while you’re behind.
November 3, 2010 — 6:36 am
J Philip Faranda says:
By the way, Mary McKnight’s link is to malware.
November 3, 2010 — 3:33 am
Kevin Tomlinson says:
J Philip
Actually, to be quite frank, if you have a problem with Greg’s style, don’t come here.
The way I see it it that, though he may be harsh:
1. it’s his house
2. if the facts in his post are correct (I have a feeling….well)… There is a need for Greg and his style. Otherwise people (other people I know) will go on and on about how fabulous they are and the truth doesn’t mesh with their message. For that I am thankful Greg has the balls that he has.
The social media “aren’t we all great, let’s backslap each other all day and like each others posts, ad nauseum, and retweet the social media elite’s most inane of tweets” is just sickening.
I, for one, see this as the pendulum. As system of checks and balances.
I am not afraid of Greg. I’ve been on the other side of his wrath. I’ ve been bannned from here…and I’m sure I will again.
But he’s NOT namby-pamby! THANK GOD! There is too much namby-pamby.
Get some balls, all.
November 3, 2010 — 6:58 am
Teri Lussier says:
>> They are going to dock somewhere
Because they are required to, by law. If they were free to choose what to do about their careers, traditional brokers would be wiped out overnight. That’s why there’s a law, to enshrine mediocrity and to ossify slavery — all at the expense of the consumer.
I would agree with that.
>But I don’t live by your standards, and I don’t expect you to live by mine. Here’s something immensely valuable you can learn from me: Other people get to be who they are. I don’t know this for certain, but I would hope that the people in the sidebar are there because they know this is the one place in the world of real estate where they can always tell the truth, damn the consequences. That’s why I’m here, in any case.
I would agree with that, too. Thank you for that.
But, to anyone left reading this thread, if Greg Swann is telling lies about Jay Thompson, or anyone else now or ever, then dammit someone needs to pull a Gary Cooper, cowboy up and prove him wrong. And then you better believe I WILL pull the cord and get off this bus so fast it’ll give y’all whiplash.
Have a nice day.
November 3, 2010 — 8:19 am
Jim Klein says:
Core principles can be found everywhere, even in the heat of girlish cat-fights. Teri wrapped up the thread in her last comment (in classic Midwestern style!), so that’s that. There’s little doubt that if Greg were to lie about anything, he’d find himself a lonely man and this would be a lonely blog. After all, this is hardly a dim-witted crowd here.
J. Phillip graced us with two major insights IMO, and those are the focus of my present comment.
>>>You once said something on Active Rain I agreed with, so I started following you here. The sidebar had some heavy hitters, so I read occasionally.
Yes, this is the modern American way. And every rotten sneak and con man knows that this is true. If you can portray an appealing image, or even just once say something true, then you’ve snagged the other guy in your net, quite possibly forever.
Take a look at the political scene–this is exactly how it came to be. These guys are “heavy hitters” and mere working stiffs couldn’t possibly figure out the grand plans that they do. Mention a truth–“The country needs defending” or, “It’s sad when people are sick”–and it’s off to the races, building the wildest of evils, all upon single truths.
The only things left out of it–in both J. Phillips’ comment as well as the craziness we see all around us–are the facts of the matter at hand.
It’s like a reverse ad hominem…”I respect the guy, so what he says must be true.” To which I offer the smug, arrogant reply…”Feh. Speak for yourself. Me, I care only about the facts.”
>>>But don’t tear a ligament patting yourself on the back.
I don’t ever presume to speak for another person, least of all Greg, because I’m quite busy enough speaking for myself. But I understand the principle involved, and Greg happens to be the first person to succinctly identify it. This is just yet another fact, a fact of our nature, a fact about how one goes about and develops that ultimate value and goal that we all share…whether you call it “happiness” or “success” or even so dry a phrase as “life as a human.” Greg calls it “Splendor,” and many people call it “Glory.” I don’t care what you call it, because I know what it is.
What it is, is this—“ego-adoration.” That is the consequential state of doing everything which causes it to be. You can go through Greg’s corpus to see it laid out in every action of our existence, or you can just figure it out for yourself, like me. When we act in accordance with what we identify as the highest standard, then there is perfection. That is, there is nothing left to improve. We know that we engage each act with all of the knowledge at our avail, and we know we do it in a consistent manner. We know what we want and we figure out how to attain it.
This is what business, and hence capitalism, is all about. It’s about the freedom to do just that—whatever it is that you choose to maximize your comfort or happiness or ataraxia or whatever. It’s about the freedom to do as you choose so that you may accomplish whatever it is that you choose.
When you’ve done that–and being an ongoing action, when you continue to do it–then you love yourself. You are no longer a “mere mortal” but a fully conscious person, able to bask in the splendor of your own life, however it may manifest. This state is properly captured with the concept “ego-adoration.”
So the point, J. Phillip, is that a person who derives his cognitive state from others (as addressed above) is a person who will never know what it feels like to genuinely “pat yourself on the back,” and will indeed resent those who do. This is a sort of life, I suppose, but it’s not the sort natural to a self-motivated, conceptualizing being.
That sort is the one Greg and Teri, and most of the other writers here, write about. It’s a full recognition of the facts both internal and external to themselves, in order to achieve the goals they seek for themselves.
This is not about money or status or fame. It’s about being what you are, which means being who you are. If you don’t pat yourself on the back, and do that which causes you to believe that you deserve it, then you are laying to waste every moment on Earth that you have. That is living no more than as a fruitfly, zipping about for several decades. You are here as a person and so the goal is to live as a person and create and acquire every bit of glory and splendor that you can. This goes to the evil of altruism, for altruism is the pretension that to consciously do all this, is wrong or bad. As a matter of FACT, it is all the good consists of, and ever will. You may convince yourself of whatever you wish, but you will never FEEL good unless you ARE good, and BEING good means acting in a manner that you believe deserves your own love. And if you’re smart enough to do it among other rational people, then they’ll probably love you too!
This is the good side of religion, for it says, “I can see a perfect standard and I can try to live up to that standard.” The effective translation of “God loves me” is, “I am worthy of God’s love.” And yes, that is all that matters. Call it what you will, ego-adoration is the state that occurs when you are so worthy.
November 3, 2010 — 1:52 pm
Kevin Tomlinson says:
I agree w/ Teri.
If you don’t like Greg’s facts get a set of balls and rumble.
Quit hiding behind “oh we should all be nice” crap.
I can understand that some peeps may not like his style.
Heck he said something some time ago (about a friend) that I still find reprehensible.
Play nice is not going to write a wrong. Actually, there is a MUCH better debate happening via email between a bunch of folks that is much more on point with reality.
Telling Greg that he should play nice and “be nicer” is such a waste of my blog reading time.
I think Frances Flynn Thorsen’s comments (via email) are spot on. But it is her choice as to whether to put them out publicly, or not.
I wish she would, tho.
November 3, 2010 — 3:58 pm
Teri Lussier says:
>This is not about money or status or fame. It’s about being what you are, which means being who you are. If you don’t pat yourself on the back, and do that which causes you to believe that you deserve it, then you are laying to waste every moment on Earth that you have. That is living no more than as a fruitfly, zipping about for several decades. You are here as a person and so the goal is to live as a person and create and acquire every bit of glory and splendor that you can. This goes to the evil of altruism, for altruism is the pretension that to consciously do all this, is wrong or bad. As a matter of FACT, it is all the good consists of, and ever will. You may convince yourself of whatever you wish, but you will never FEEL good unless you ARE good, and BEING good means acting in a manner that you believe deserves your own love. And if you’re smart enough to do it among other rational people, then they’ll probably love you too!
That’s really lovely, Jim. Brought me to tears.
November 3, 2010 — 6:31 pm
Abraham Walker says:
Great post Greg! I’m glad you shed some light on Mr. Thompson’s production.
Tech Savvy Agent recently aired a interview with Jay Thompson called “The Godfather of Real Estate Blogging”. Before you check it out I would like to warn you that it’s just sigh of 40 minutes.
We need more fact checkers in our industry. To us young and impressionable agents, Jay’s business model seemed like a profitable endeavor. After you break down the numbers, things just don’t add up. The time investment you would have to commit to developing a SM strategy doesn’t make sense when you think about the Farm market you could dominate with an effective old school door knocking campaign.
November 7, 2010 — 5:29 pm
Michael Cook says:
Sad this great thread turned to personal attacks. In these tough times, I think its admirable to direct realtors to money making activities, i.e. the point of the post.
The attacks seemed more on the point of the technique than the person, but of course people took it personally. Lets hope the message doesnt get skewed. I would disagree with Russell Shaw, I think realtors should take notice and some will.
I miss writing here, but I am up to my ears in foreclosed real estate commercial loans and time simply doesnt permit. At a time when its so hard to make money in real estate, you would think people would take notice of better ways to spend their time.
Perhaps its good that realtors dont actually. The world would be better if there were half as many. Actually, it would be better if there were none at all, but I suppose one or two add some value.
Thanks for the interesting thread. People really need to lighten up. I dont think you insulted Jay at all actually, just his assertions, which he should be open to discuss and perhaps prove you wrong. Short of that, it only proves you right. This didnt need 77 comments.
November 8, 2010 — 4:32 pm