BloodhoundBlog

There’s always something to howl about.

Category: Real Estate (page 229 of 266)

November 22, 2006

Trevor Responds and shows he is a nice guy

by

Mega-Producing Realtor

Author website

Anonymous Coward… Thank you for at least acknowledging that you are one. I have never seen the experience you are referring to take place here at JLSPCR. (I guess I am not even really clear what you are saying, in the first place though.)

Russell Shaw – 1.)Your point about making the MLS public is a great one. I will contemplate that, and rethink my philosophy.2.)I just plain think your wrong about Redfin, and I can’t imagine that we will be coming to a meeting of the minds anytime soon. My thought is this though… I don’t think Paul Allen’s Venture Capitalist Company, Vulcan Capital, would be investing in a company that is criminal or that will be shutting their doors anytime soon. I am taking a risk by applying Redfin… the same kind of risk as people who applied at Google did in 1998.

3.) Thank you for your objectivity regarding discount brokers. I think you are right about Help-U-Sell

Phil –
The reason my business model struggles in a traditional brokerage is because many traditional brokers are ripping agents off, becoming rich of their agents backs. The whole real estate industry needs a shake up, starting with the brokers. You can read my thoughts on this here: http://bluecollaragents.com/wordpress/?p=13

Phew… I think I answered most of the challenges. I think I want to take a break from blogging for a while and eat Turkey. Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

1. I totally agree with Trevor with regard to his comments to Anonymous Coward – I always have far more respect for opinions when they are connected to a real name.

2. I HAVE to point out that although I fully understand Trevor’s view’s regarding Paul Allen (because I once thought exactly the same way – if it was backed by Paul Allen I didn’t need to worry) the facts are that Mr. Allen has a track record of wasting HUGE amounts of money by investing in companies that wind up closing their doors once he stops feeding them. His post-Microsoft successes have all come from companies that were already quite prosperous and also had existing competent management teams, Read more

November 22, 2006

Growth news: A big shoe drops in Goodyear . . .

by

Suburban Phoenix Real Estate Broker

Author website

Growth news abounds in today’s Arizona Republic. A new shopping center along the northern frontier of Phoenix. Accelerated improvements along the route of the SR-303 freeway in Surprise. And, in Goodyear, plans for a massive expansion of the city, along with a big told-ya-so for Greg.

The map at the right illustrates Goodyear’s plan. (If you click it it will open as a PDF.)

The yellow region is the current City of Goodyear.

The purple border is the Goodyear Planning Area — the regions Goodyear currently has plans to annex.

The region within the solid black border is the proposed planning area discussed in the newspaper article, 95 square miles of new Goodyear.

The region within the dashed black border is future expansion, the Goodyear of good years yet to come.

The red dashed line is a proposed route for the SR-303 freeway running south from the I-10 to the I-8. I have known for years that this would happen, but this is the first time this shoe has dropped in an official document.

You might look at that meandering freeway route and think, “Are they drunk? Did sage Euclid live and die in vain?” But remember that the purpose of that freeway is not to move traffic but to enrich the current and future owners of the land.

The ideal freeway route is through the Federally-owned desert preserve to the west. But the freeway isn’t being built to solve a traffic problem but to create one. No one lives there now. There is no need for a freeway. But all of that privately-owned land will become developable because of the proposed freeway route — and that is what the freeway is intended to do.

That’s as may be. It’s corrupt and demented, but it’s the way things are done here — and pretty much everywhere, in one sleazy way or another. What’s interesting to me is that the West Valley map I made last week is already dated. And: It would seem that the Phoenix real estate market is quite a bit healthier than some people are willing to allow…

Technorati Tags: , , , , Read more

November 22, 2006

Will real estate sell for higher prices in the company of a stunningly beautiful super model? And: What should you do about the drool . . . ?

by

Realtor, Staging Consultant

Author website

Our dear friend and marketing guru, Richard Riccelli, shared this marketing idea. Brilliant.

The brokerage knows its target market, and my mom wouldn’t be in it. But Paramount Group wouldn’t want to sell her a home… and she couldn’t afford the houses they represent anyway.

I don’t think we have enough super models in Phoenix for anyone here to steal the idea. Wonder if Phoenix prospects would settle for our own stunningly beautiful supermodel, Odysseus…

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

November 21, 2006

A pre-Thanksgiving thought-feast: Blogtalk, techtalk, Zillowtalk — and the mysterious allure of ephemeral catastrophe . . .

by

Suburban Phoenix Real Estate Broker

Author website

Jeff Brown has come out from Behind the Curtain. His new weblog (blogrolled, of course) is BawldGuy Talking.

The Hamptons Real Estate Blog (blogrolled) has also moved to a new WordPress platform. One less Blogger weblog out there. The speed at which people can abandon software platforms should give every Google investor pause.

On that subject, The Phoenix Real Estate Guy has news about a new Point 2 Agent weblogging platform.

The Landlord Blog has started a Carnival of Real Estate Investing. I like the specialization. There are some very smart people in that corner of the RE.net.

Kevin Boer at Three Oceans Realty has maps! I am ambivalent about whether map searching actually does anything to sell houses, but it’s slicker than whale snot anyway. Kevin also has a real estate office in two boxes.

RSS Pieces has a great article on choosing the right domain name.

Rent or buy? Ask Todd Tarson at MOCO Real Estate News. I’m on the bubble on this question, and, not to bust any bubblehead bubbles, but I’m selling more houses than I expected to at this time of year.

Greg Tracy at BlueRoof.com Blog argues that Zillow is relevant, accuracy be damned. I agree from a different direction. Zillow is the elephant in the room right now. Its relevance is a given. As the BalwdGuy says, Zillow might be Pong, ultimately just a blip on technology’s radar. Okayfine. But: Pong was big news for its time.

Send a prayer out, if you can, for Jonathan Dalton’s father. Pneumonia, the worst of house guests — shows up unexpectedly and takes forever to clear out. Take good care of your own selves, too, as the weather cools. Pneumonia is what you get when you tell yourself you can ignore a chest cold.

Hey! Where is Kris Berg? I hope some San Diego newspaper is paying her big bucks for her sprightly sense of humor. If not that, I hope her absence is explained by a big stack of new contracts.

Finally, it might be nice if everyone would chip in to buy Keith at Housing Panic some lubricant. The poor sod has been Masturbating to Read more

November 21, 2006

Dual Agency Smack-Down: The RE.net smacks back . . .

by

Suburban Phoenix Real Estate Broker

Author website

Here are some weblogs addressing the Dual Agency Smack-Down from their own points of view:

Whenever we talk about Dual Agency, the most fascinating remarks to me come from Christine Forgione at NY Houses 4 Sale. Because they’re still working from sub-agency, we look like aliens to each other.

More from New York from Douglas Heddings at True Gotham.

Daniel Rothamel at The Real Estate Zebra explains the industry’s ambivalence about Dual Agency with a sports metaphor.

And Ardell weighs in with two posts. I like to see her picking up Dustin’s link-a-bration slack…

Technorati Tags: , ,

November 21, 2006

The Zillow.com shake-down: Deconstructing the NCRC complaint . . .

by

Suburban Phoenix Real Estate Broker

Author website

The NCRC complaint against Zillow.com was filed 26 days ago. Today we have the first detailing in the public prints of the bogus nature of the charges (subscription required):

Absent specific instances of harm, the complaint looks more like a scheme to grab some of Zillow’s publicity than a legitimate beef. The fact that the coalition didn’t contact the company about its concerns before it filed the complaint also looks suspiciously like grandstanding or a fishing expedition.

Worse yet, the Center for Responsible Appraisals and Valuations, an offshoot of the coalition, reportedly has hired a third party to offer an automated valuation model and site-visited appraisal services through one of the coalition’s own Web sites. That makes Zillow a competitor of the coalition.

The complaint also fails to explain why Zillow would be at fault if its inaccurate estimates were used to mislead low-income or minority buyers as the coalition contends. That’s important because it isn’t bad data, but rather, bad actors who should be held responsible for harm to the public. And thus it’s not Zillow, but rather, unethical realty and mortgage brokers who should be prosecuted when fraud or other crimes occur. And that’s true regardless of whether or not the victim happens to be of a low-income or minority group.

Moreover, where is the evidence that any other estimates of home values are more accurate than Zillow’s? After all, homes are sold every day for substantially more or less than the asking price due to multiple offers, price reductions and negotiation between buyers and sellers after homes are put on the market. Are sellers’ asking prices harmful to the public because they don’t necessarily present an accurate representation of a home’s value? Any estimate of value is by definition an opinion.

In the best of all possible worlds, inaccurate data wouldn’t exist or be tolerated. And yes, Zillow would be a better service if its estimates were more reliable. Yet, no one is obligated to use Zillow for any purpose whatsoever, and if the service offers little or no real benefit, so what? Until the coalition comes forward with specific instances of actual Read more

November 20, 2006

Dual Agency Smack-Down – Russell Answers Up

by

Mega-Producing Realtor

Author website

Trevor Smith writes:

First, I want to say that you are incredibly articulate and a great writer. You know what you believe, you’ve researched it, and you stand by it. So, as far as that goes I respect you.

Second, I am with John L Scott, where I charge 4% commission for a full service listing package. I love John L Scott, and my Broker has been very supportive of my business model.Third, I recently interviewed with Redfin. This is not because I don’t like John L Scott, but becasue I believe in Redfin’s model. I believe that the REALTORs who will succeed in the next 30 years will likely adapt to a model similar to Redfin’s (ie lower commissions)

I would point out that since John L. Scott is a proven company and Redfin isn’t – your odds of success are far greater at your present home. If your present company – I believe it is the largest and most successful real estate brokerage firm in the entire northwest – is willing to support you in your desired business model, wouldn’t it make more sense to stay there? Check around and find out what the most successful John L. Scott agents earn and compare that to what the most successful Redfin agents earn.

If Redfin were not a public company (one supported by raising cash from investors) they wouldn’t even have their doors open now. It isn’t a sustainable business model. You are free to ignore my comments and to believe that I am “biased” against them because they are a discounter, but you would be wrong in that assumption. Many companies are “discounters” and do quite well and I have no quarrel with them either.

Fourth, by interviewing at Redfin, I learned EXACTLY how Redfin operates their business, and so when you say that Redfin is not procuring cause… respectfully you’re the monkey… because you’re wrong. Redfin, does show houses to their buyers, does do the paperwork, and does take it to closing. That is procuring cause.

There may be circumstances and transactions where they aren’t guilty of violating procuring cause, nevertheless, that business model Read more

November 20, 2006

Dual Agency Smack-Down: A chicken in every pot and a sword for every Gordian Knot . . .

by

Suburban Phoenix Real Estate Broker

Author website

I solved this problem today. It wasn’t even that tough, once I started looking at it the right way.

As I pointed out earlier today, the issue is this language in the AAR Consent to Limited Dual Representation form:

neither Broker nor Broker’s Licensee(s) can represent the interests of one party to the exclusion or detriment of the other party [emphasis added]

What that language says, in my opinion, is that no Arizona brokerage that has undertaken Disclosed Dual Agency using that form has done so in a way that would withstand the questioning of a plaintiff’s attorney.

I believe it is impossible for any brokered real estate transaction to close according to the strict terms of that language. Instead, every Arizona brokerage that has undertaken Disclosed Dual Agency using that form has routinely, repeatedly and serially acted in ways detrimental to both buyers and sellers, each in their turn, throughout every one of those transactions.

This was not malicious. To the contrary. The Disclosed Dual Agent was acting in the best interests of each client, each in their turn, and each of those clients had an absolute veto power over everything that was done at each step of the process. The problem is simply that a brokered real estate transaction is too complicated to be effected without expert advice. In tendering that advice, in all good will, the Disclosed Dual Agent will have acted to the detriment of the other party every time he gave good, solid, useful advice to the party before him.

(I will concede for the benefit of quibblers that someone could try to deliver the type of completely prostrate, advice-free “service” required by that language, provided that the quibblers will concede that both buyer and seller fired their prostrate agent as soon as they apprehended the type of “service” they were to receive. In other words, the conduct required by the form is theoretically possible, but it has never, ever happened.)

Here’s the cute part, though: The actual problem is the form itself.

The statute law of Disclosed Dual Agency (A.R.S. ? 32-2153(A)(2) (“Acted for more than one party in a transaction without the Read more

November 20, 2006

Dual Agency Smack-Down: Collective truth? Fifty million Frenchmen can be as wrong as one . . .

by

Realtor, Staging Consultant

Author website

I doubt that even Jeff realizes this, but I am the provocateur of the Titans’ duel over the pros and cons of dual agency. It started when Greg and I met Russell Shaw. The man is a font of knowledge, and he’s very very generous with sharing the “secrets” to his success. Already we have been enriched by his friendship. As we discussed the different aspects of our industry last Tuesday night, conversation led to our stand on dual agency, which I am largely responsible for.

Dual agency has not even been an opportunity for me yet… so far I haven’t had a buying client who would have been interested in any of my listings. But I’ve seen Greg serve as a disclosed dual agent, and as promised by Russell and Jeff the successfully closed transactions were probably more successful for his clients because Greg handled both sides. In all but one of the cases I can think of, the buyers and sellers were investors. The exception was with an extreme pet lover who needed an agent to find her a buyer without using the MLS (someday Greg will have to write this Realty Reality story). But then we had the dear friend failure and when we evaluated the philosophy of dual agency, we established our No Dual Agency policy.

This policy has not been easy on us. It certainly hasn’t given us a market advantage, because the typical home buyer or seller doesn’t pay that much attention to the philosophy of our industry. In fact, we end up shedding prospects who come to us through avenues that other brokerages use to drum up new clients. When I hold open houses in areas where open houses actually bring in potential buyers, I always try to find an agent from a different brokerage to sit the open house with me, so that agent can try to turn visitors into clients. When we get sign calls, we’ll show the house, but when the prospect starts making buying signs, we’ll suggest that they get an agent to represent them or offer to refer them (and we Read more

November 20, 2006

Dual Agency Smack-Down: Interlineal chatter . . .

by

Suburban Phoenix Real Estate Broker

Author website

This is from the AAR Consent to Limited Dual Representation form:

The Broker now represents both Buyer and Seller and both parties understand that neither Broker nor Broker’s Licensee(s) can represent the interests of one party to the exclusion or detriment of the other party.

The important word is “detriment”. I think the argument I posted yesterday eats that language entirely. The implication is that any dual agency that makes it before a judge will lose. There is absolutely no way to comply with that language. The only method even conceivable is to leave both parties flailing stupidly like FSBOs and BUBBAs.

But: We do end up with an excellent argument against FSBOs and BUBBAs: There is absolutely no way non-professionals can achieve professional-quality results in a real estate negotiation. They simply don’t know what to do, and they don’t even know that they don’t know it.

I’ll summarize later, but I think my own position is quite a bit stronger than it was on Friday. I do have ideas for alternatives, and I’ll go through those as well.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

November 20, 2006

Dual Agency Smack-Down, how about sub-agency?

by

Mega-Producing Realtor

Author website

It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. – Sir Winston Churchill

Thank you to Jeff for responding SO well to Greg’s points and issues. I do understand Greg’s points and in a perfect world – almost everything he has to say is just fine. We don’t live in a perfect world and I don’t expect to anytime soon. All of the various arguments about single agency seem analogous to a single agent describing how his service is better than mine because he – and he alone – is going to be the only person to respond to his buyer or seller. When they deal with me it is set up more like an assembly line – with different individuals taking care of each of the different aspects of taking care of the client.

Who is right?

Well if the single agent has only the one customer or client and is willing to devote all of his time to that client, then he is right. I’ll not spend a lot of time pointing out how this is not a viable business model.

If that same agent has just one additional client or customer he now can “have a conflict” concerning his two clients. Say client # 1’s house just got a sign call and there is a buyer who wants to see it right now – and client # 2’s property just had an offer written on it and the other agent wants to present that offer right away. The single agent is only offering single agency to both of those sellers so he does not need to worry about agency conflicts.

Just add one new customer into the mix and there is the potential for conflict. So, why do I bring up SUB AGENCY? Isn’t it the most awful thing to ever have happened in the history of the world? Not really. And you might be surprised at what actually killed the beast – it wasn’t the “single agency issue”. I am blessed to live in Phoenix (for a vast number of reasons) Read more

November 19, 2006

Dual Agency Smack-Down: Fear Of Perception Breeds False Logic

by

Real Estate Investments Broker

Author website

First of all Greg, my wife’s cat now officially hates you. Today it was hazelnut. Reintroducing yourself to Russell was perfection. 🙂

But on to persuading the unpersuadable. Galileo faced down the most powerful institution outside of government that insisted the earth was the center of the universe. The church was terrified of the perception that what Galileo said seemed to contradict the Bible, which of course it did not. The church just recently apologized for its actions – and only centuries after schools first began teaching fourth graders that Galileo was 100% correct.

Principle – Perception may be ‘reality’ to a thirsty man in the desert, but the water still isn’t there.
Principle – False logic will always eventually be proven as such. Thirsty man discovers this by way of a mouth full of sand.
Principle – When the universe in which you operate disagrees with you – it’s possible you might be mistaken.

Gravity, when applied, works every time. However, much like dual agency, the consequences of applied gravity are not always desired. If I jump from a two foot ledge I’ll probably survive. If I fall or am pushed from the balcony of a 10th floor office window I probably won’t. Gravity is ruthlessly consistent. The consequences of its use are universally predictable. The apple, no matter how many times it falls from the tree, will never fall up.

The ‘angelic’ school of dual agency has its foundation in a false premise. The man who either accidently fell, or was pushed from that window either accidentally caused his own death, or was murdered. Gravity, like dual agency, has no will of its own. There are infinite examples available illustrating this. I’ll use just one.

You may use a gun for target practice. Or to acquire food through hunting. Or to avoid your wife getting half of your net worth. The gun didn’t do any of those things. The person shooting the gun did them. That’s a principle, and the gun doesn’t have an opinion. Even when my wife kills me accidentally while cleaning her gun, am I not just as dead as the murder victim?

Greg Read more

November 19, 2006

Dual Agency Smack-Down: If being a big brokerage is an inherent agency violation, it’s not the client’s fault . . .

by

Suburban Phoenix Real Estate Broker

Author website

Please. Recognize that everything I say or write is true and do not argue with me. Thanks!

Hi! Welcome to BloodhoundBlog. My name is Greg Swann. I question everything. 😉

From my point of view, we’re still not getting any traction.

But single agency is not a viable business model.  Period.  A viable business model is one that would allow for unfettered growth (as long as it was filling a need to the consumer) and single agency is not possible if a company grows.

Without intending to quibble, agency is not about the vendor, his business model or its potential for growth. Agency is about the interests of the client, which are paramount to all others. If a particular business model violates agency, then, as Russell argues very cogently with respect to Redfin.com, it is criminal in se in states where agency is a fiduciary obligation.

There are about 925 agents with John Hall & Associates.  It would be quite stupid to preclude them from showing a listing so the seller (and buyer) gets the “benefit” of single agency.

This is not an argument against dual agency. It is an argument for getting rid of the broker/salesperson licensing laws. If we did that, then every listing agent would be alike unto a self-employed broker now. Dual Agency would still be possible, but it would be much easier to manage, since it could only occur when the agent represented buyers to his own listings. Major brokerages like John Hall could easily transition to affiliations or companies, instead — same cost structure, but no liability. We would still have to police for other forms of collusion or shady dealing, but Dual Agency would be all but eliminated.

In any case, arguing that refraining from Dual Agency would be impractical is not a persuasively-valid reason to uphold or reject it. As before: Sub-Agency was much more practical than Buyer Brokerage, but we got rid of it anyway.

The idea that the agent somehow controls what a buyer will pay and what a seller will accept only indicates a disconnect from reality.

I think this is a very weak argument. I want to deal Read more

November 19, 2006

Reagor-mortis? On-the-spot real estate news coverage only a few weeks late . . .

by

Suburban Phoenix Real Estate Broker

Author website

October 26th: NCRC files specious complaint against Zillow.com.

November 19th: Crack Arizona Republic real estate reporter Catherine Reagor yawns, burps, goes back to sleep:

The popular Web site zillow.com gets a lot of hits as people frequently check the values of their homes and their neighbors’ in the fast-changing housing market.

But not everyone agrees with Zillow’s figures. I have received several calls and e-mails from people questioning its data. The National Community Reinvestment Coalition agrees. The Washington, D.C.-based non-profit has filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission saying Zillow’s home-valuation tool is inaccurate.

Further deponent sayeth not.

Reagor was in love with Zillow when it was brand new, but this was because she hadn’t bothered to test it. The idea of reporters actually checking things seems to have died with Hildy Johnson…

Technorati Tags: , ,

« Older posts Newer posts »

Inventing Real Estate 2.0

Welcome to BloodhoundBlog, the national real estate industry marketing and technology weblog written by, for and about real estate professionals. Better yet, welcome to the wired world of real estate. We are busily inventing Real Estate 2.0 – technology, marketing, service and salesmanship. Like all Bloodhounds, we are smart, frisky and fiercely independent. We've built a spot on the earth – beloved over all – where each one of us can be who we are, no matter who that might be. We are committed to an idea of excellence that will flush the bums, the con-men and the crybabies out of the real estate industry. If you yearn to have your failures excused, your moral lapses absolved or your boo-boos kissed, seek elsewhere. But if you are sick to death of mediocrity – welcome home. Read all about us, subscribe to our feed and steel yourself for the hunt. We work hard, we play hard, we learn everything we can – and we bow to no one.

Media Contacts