Realtors who pay Zillow receive leads that are profitable. If Zillow leads do not increase their business, my guess is that the realtors sooner or later stop buying ads on Zillow.
It's a transactional relationship that exists only as long as it benefits both parties, and there's no moral aspect to it.
It's my feeling they're pissed off because they cannot artificially inflate markets by telling their clients that they have to bid 18% over asking for a house.
It isn't just realtors that Zillow hurts. Their zestimate is nothing but the roughest of guidelines. It is little better than a general market trend in a geographical area. I am not a realtor, but a homeowner who learned, from experience (buying and re-financing my own home) that Zillow is useless.
I can understand if it causes homeowners to set unrealistic expectations regarding the value of their property, because, lets face it, there are a lot of "unsophisticated" home owners / buyers out there. Some of these homeowners / buyers make life decisions based upon bad information. Yes, they should know better, but many don't.
A home buyer / owner is looking for trusted authority for their property value. The only legitimate authority to make that determination is an appraiser. Zillow puts themselves forward as a trusted authority, which they definitely are not. The unsophisticated buyer / owner sees them as a way to avoid paying for an independent appraisal. But mistake.
I am not sure how anyone is hurt. If you don't like Zillow Instant Offers, don't use Zillow Instant Offers. If you don't like Zestimate, don't use Zestimate. If a seller has relied on a Zestimate and priced their home way out there, let it stay on the market with zero bids for a few months, and maybe they will get the message.
being a realtor is a sales job. the good ones know this - they don't care where the listings and the numbers come from, they do the footwork and hit the phones hard, to sellers, to agents, to bankers, to government agencies, to lawyers, to engineers, to appraisers, to everyone involved, which can sometimes be wasted time, in order to get their clients into successful deals first, meaning FAST.
when i was buying my place my realtor was sending me links from zillow, redfin, his MLS, his agency's private listings, even fucking craigslist, everything. he would send me stuff on weekends, after hours, even midnight. i culled the list down and he spent time setting up a viewing on every single one i asked for. the more listings the better, in his eyes. i referred him to 2 of my friends, both of whom bought places through him also.
I have a friend who does real estate in DC who pays Zillow thousands per month to be on the forefront of all the incoming leads. It reminds me a ton of Yelp.
Seems to me like the realtors are probably right, zillow is throwing their weight around to make more money, but realtors are very incentivized to fight back against zillow.
Its not zillow that is buying your house but zillow is acting as a broker to connect you to investors who are making offers. So i'm not sure how the accuracy of zestimates comes into play here.
Yes. I sold my house without a broker in Oct 2016. The zestimate for the house was 640k at the time I listed on MLS. This was a stupid estimate based on comparable properties on the same block.
I sold my house for 750k. Today, months after the sale was recorded, the zestimate shows 657k.
I think buyers in competitive markets who rely on zillow will lose several times before they learn the market. I think sellers in competitive markets can just ignore it.
That said, I have never had good experiences with real estate agents. I didn't use one to sell 2 properties, and I havent used one when buying either (instead, asking to split 3% commission).
It varies a lot in quality. In the case of my own home, which is an urban home on a block with different housing types, it varies 6-7% from one month to another, over relies on tax assessment data, and doesn't understand neighborhoods. Even a cheap paid tool will generate a better value estimate.
It's pretty good in subdivisions. Then again, anyone can figure that out.
"Instant offers" is the online equivalent of those "we buy houses" signs that you see in some areas. It's a borderline predatory practice and makes you question the real reasoning behind doing it. They probably built it for some real estate state investment pool that bought up distressed property during the recession.
I didn't see what the package was, but when I recently refinanced, the bank used software that understood neighborhood overlays and could find comps on similar properties. It also listed similar but excluded comps and the reason why. (Ie bigger/smaller yard, garage, dead end, proximity to 4+ family, etc) The only input required was a questionnaire from a drive-by condition evaluation.
That appraisal was within a $5k error bar compared to informal assessments that I had done independently with 3 real estate people.
I don't have a lot of confidence in the skills of a real estate agent over whatever it is that Zillow does to determine the price of homes. From what I've seen real estate agents barely have the skills required to take photos and fill in descriptive fields.
Because photos sell properties. My wife went and took about 30 shots of a $500K property that had been on the market for over a year. Within 3 weeks they had it under contract for $495K. The buyers said they had skimmed over the property a time or two in the past but when it popped up on their latest search they actually thought it was a different property because the picture were so much better. Shots from the realtors iPhone just doesn't cut it anymore... You want it sold, you hire someone to take the photos.
That's like asking why computer programmers need to know how to use a keyboard to input text.
The most basic element of a sale is "what am I buying?". If a realtor cannot sufficiently answer that question through photographs and detailed descriptions, then said realtor has failed on a most basic level.
At the very least, a realtor who lacks the ability to take a good photograph ought to hire the services of someone who does (a.k.a. a photographer).
Just because Zillow facilitates a connection between the buyer/seller doesn't mean the seller isn't going to have an attorney. Heck, in NY even the lending bank has an attorney (which the buyer pays for).
As someone who worked in the real estate industry and was actually a licensed realtor (but never an actual sales agent) I can understand why. Zillow is terrible. Most realtors are equally terrible sometimes probably worse. But I can understand the frustration for actually qualified agents losing a listing because "the internet said otherwise"
TLDR: Zillow is garbage, Realtors(tm) are generally bad at their jobs.
How about Zillow goes even further and cuts the realtor out entirely? How is a realtor anything more than a middle man? Why should they get large percentage of a sale when everyone finds their own homes online nowadays? All this does is add cost to homes.
Shouldn't buying and selling a home today be a flat rate of $500 or $1000?
"Everyone" does not find their own homes online. There still many, many buyers and sellers who are not online or, if they are, may not utilize or minimally utilize real estate sites like Zillow.
Furthermore, while many buyers may enjoy sites like Zillow, Redfin, Trulia, and so forth, if you are buying in a new town/city or area you are unfamiliar with, relying on a local experienced agent can help a buyer avoid costly mistakes, or worse, end up over- (or under-) valuing property and missing a good deal or an opportunity they likely should have taken.
Buyers also may wish to avoid paperwork and other hassles that an agent will take care of for them. Is an agent still a pretty penny in terms of costs? Absolutely but people still do it, every day.
For a more sophisticated buyer with some time to devote to the process, they may not wish to use an agent in fact may not.
Is there no way to buy/sell a house without a realtor in the US? Here in Canada we have a couple of companies that charge a flat fee (from a couple hundred to a couple thousands depending on what you choose) in exchange of professional photographic service, listing and DIY documents to facilitate the selling. There's no commission to pay at the end so prices are usually a bit lower than houses sold with a realtor. Of course a lot of people are still using realtors, some of them because of a lack of time and others for the sense of security it brings.
About 15 percent of residential sales in the US are managed without a realtor. A homeowner is perfectly free to sell a house without one (such listings are generally referred to as FSBO, for sale by owner). A FSBO doesn't get access to MLS listings or any other promotional effort a realtor might provide, but also they don't pay any commission.
So Zillow is free to act as an intermediary on whatever terms are acceptable to the parties involved. On the other hand, Zillow's ability to act as an intermediary is greatly enhanced by access to MLS data. So if the NAR pulled Zillow's access to the MLS, a buyer would have a much harder time searching for houses to buy without a realtor.
There is no one MLS, it isn't a cohesive database, it is made up of a ton of tiny independent services with fairly obnoxious policies and inconsistent data formats.
Zillow gets their data generally from the various MLS around the country and aggregate data with public records
> in exchange of professional photographic service, listing and DIY documents to facilitate the selling.
You are pretty much describing what a realtor does in the US. Whether it's a person whose beautiful smile adorns every local paper, a discount broker prmising to "SELL YOUR HOUSE FOR 2% FLAT FEE, GUARANTEED" or an online broker like Redfin, they're all bundled under realtor umbrella.
But to answer your question, Craigslist FSBO, yard signs offering FSBO or even Zillow "Make Me Move" self-generated listings are all doable, they just don't bring in as many leads.
In New York I used a lawyer who represented me and the seller had no agent. Price was lower than 'market' and I think everyone was happy. No Agents involved. (2016 purchase date)
In short, right now only two investment firms are allowed to purchase homes using the instant feature. So basically a giant corporation buying up homes for cheap. Sux
You're out of line criticizing Realtors. Don't presume until you stand in their shoes. Most work their butt off 7 days a week and care deeply about their clients. You want to criticize someone, pick me. I paid 100% for the StopZillow website and movement because Zillow used Realtor listings to build a brand and now stabs those Realtors in the back. Greg Hague, The Real Estate Maverick
There is no single MLS, so basically they have to get data from the various services located in any given market.
They typically paid for that access though I do know they were cut out of the Milwaukee one a while back.
I think they were scraping data at one point (but I could be entirely off-base there) At the end of the day, they are combing through public records, past sales from MLS and in many cases retyped/copied and pasted by the real estate agent.
Most people care deeply about their family members and close friends. Caring about doing a good job is normal, but caring deeply about your clients is weird... Either way, what kind of research have you done to know about most realtors?
Working 7 days a week just means you're doing something wrong. It's also bad for your health, your social life, and frankly your productivity. Please stop saying this
You're wrong about Realtors. Most work 7 days a week and care deeply about their clients. Want to pick on someone, make it me. I paid 100% for the StopZillow website because Zillow built its brand on the back of Realtors' listings and now stabs them in the back. I'm a little guy compared to Zillow, but just watch me shove it in their face. Greg Hague, The Real Estate Maverick
51 comments
[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 127 ms ] threadIf someone is willing to sell their home at a given price, what's the problem?
It's a transactional relationship that exists only as long as it benefits both parties, and there's no moral aspect to it.
"Realtors will lose millions in commission" is point #2. As if anyone other than Realtors would see that as a bad thing
I can understand if it causes homeowners to set unrealistic expectations regarding the value of their property, because, lets face it, there are a lot of "unsophisticated" home owners / buyers out there. Some of these homeowners / buyers make life decisions based upon bad information. Yes, they should know better, but many don't.
A home buyer / owner is looking for trusted authority for their property value. The only legitimate authority to make that determination is an appraiser. Zillow puts themselves forward as a trusted authority, which they definitely are not. The unsophisticated buyer / owner sees them as a way to avoid paying for an independent appraisal. But mistake.
when i was buying my place my realtor was sending me links from zillow, redfin, his MLS, his agency's private listings, even fucking craigslist, everything. he would send me stuff on weekends, after hours, even midnight. i culled the list down and he spent time setting up a viewing on every single one i asked for. the more listings the better, in his eyes. i referred him to 2 of my friends, both of whom bought places through him also.
Seems to me like the realtors are probably right, zillow is throwing their weight around to make more money, but realtors are very incentivized to fight back against zillow.
Edit: I ask because the populist-y invective on this site raises red flags for me, but I also don't know anything about this industry.
I sold my house for 750k. Today, months after the sale was recorded, the zestimate shows 657k.
I think buyers in competitive markets who rely on zillow will lose several times before they learn the market. I think sellers in competitive markets can just ignore it.
That said, I have never had good experiences with real estate agents. I didn't use one to sell 2 properties, and I havent used one when buying either (instead, asking to split 3% commission).
It's pretty good in subdivisions. Then again, anyone can figure that out.
"Instant offers" is the online equivalent of those "we buy houses" signs that you see in some areas. It's a borderline predatory practice and makes you question the real reasoning behind doing it. They probably built it for some real estate state investment pool that bought up distressed property during the recession.
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_valuation_model
I didn't see what the package was, but when I recently refinanced, the bank used software that understood neighborhood overlays and could find comps on similar properties. It also listed similar but excluded comps and the reason why. (Ie bigger/smaller yard, garage, dead end, proximity to 4+ family, etc) The only input required was a questionnaire from a drive-by condition evaluation.
That appraisal was within a $5k error bar compared to informal assessments that I had done independently with 3 real estate people.
Coincidentally, they're the most expensive agency and one of the most successful.
The most basic element of a sale is "what am I buying?". If a realtor cannot sufficiently answer that question through photographs and detailed descriptions, then said realtor has failed on a most basic level.
At the very least, a realtor who lacks the ability to take a good photograph ought to hire the services of someone who does (a.k.a. a photographer).
TLDR: Zillow is garbage, Realtors(tm) are generally bad at their jobs.
Shouldn't buying and selling a home today be a flat rate of $500 or $1000?
Furthermore, while many buyers may enjoy sites like Zillow, Redfin, Trulia, and so forth, if you are buying in a new town/city or area you are unfamiliar with, relying on a local experienced agent can help a buyer avoid costly mistakes, or worse, end up over- (or under-) valuing property and missing a good deal or an opportunity they likely should have taken.
Buyers also may wish to avoid paperwork and other hassles that an agent will take care of for them. Is an agent still a pretty penny in terms of costs? Absolutely but people still do it, every day.
For a more sophisticated buyer with some time to devote to the process, they may not wish to use an agent in fact may not.
I seen no valid reason a flat rate of $500 to $1000 per sale is not reasonable.
So Zillow is free to act as an intermediary on whatever terms are acceptable to the parties involved. On the other hand, Zillow's ability to act as an intermediary is greatly enhanced by access to MLS data. So if the NAR pulled Zillow's access to the MLS, a buyer would have a much harder time searching for houses to buy without a realtor.
Zillow gets their data generally from the various MLS around the country and aggregate data with public records
You are pretty much describing what a realtor does in the US. Whether it's a person whose beautiful smile adorns every local paper, a discount broker prmising to "SELL YOUR HOUSE FOR 2% FLAT FEE, GUARANTEED" or an online broker like Redfin, they're all bundled under realtor umbrella.
But to answer your question, Craigslist FSBO, yard signs offering FSBO or even Zillow "Make Me Move" self-generated listings are all doable, they just don't bring in as many leads.
In short, right now only two investment firms are allowed to purchase homes using the instant feature. So basically a giant corporation buying up homes for cheap. Sux
[1] https://www.inman.com/2017/05/26/everything-you-need-to-know...
Is this the MLS? Or is Zillow scraping realtor sites?
They typically paid for that access though I do know they were cut out of the Milwaukee one a while back.
I think they were scraping data at one point (but I could be entirely off-base there) At the end of the day, they are combing through public records, past sales from MLS and in many cases retyped/copied and pasted by the real estate agent.
... but how many hours in a day, I wonder