Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Terrible real estate agent photographs

terriblerealestateagentphotos.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 346 posts

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#231

Post by wombat-man »

kleiba wrote: post #59

In my opinion, if anything, what makes these pictures less than ideal is the property itself which has nothing to do with the real estate agent. It's actually a net positive for potential buyers seeing all aspect of the object - what else should the agent do, hide unfortunate corners? Right, like anyone who actually cares to go and look at the property before buying it (so almost everyone) would not see these things…

Yeah, or they just reuse the photos from a listing in the early 2000s, which is the lowest res camera phone picture. Seriously? just go to the property and snap a few pics with your phone.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#232

Post by xyzelement »

hospitalJail wrote: post #7

About 10 years ago, me and my wife took LSD on a vacation, and the sheer uselessness of a real estate agent appeared to us. What does a real estate agent do? They unlock doors. Who are real estate agents? We can all think of a few real estate agents, none of them are top performers. They are usually on their ~4th career before the age of 30. They are the type of person to wear a suit in public to pretend that it make…

If your wife and you took LSD and it "appeared" to you that all doctors do is run around in stupid white coats, would that reveal more about the field of medicine or the two of you?

"It requires professional help to facilitate emotionally charged, million+ dollar transactions" would be the more useful insight.

Very few people chose to forego aan agent when dealing in RE, there's a reason for that. I am a finance dude quite capable of negotiating etc and I still found out agent super valuable and would use her again.

It's possible you know crappy agents who deal in low-end transactions but again that may reveal more about you than the field.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#233

Post by avalys »

junon wrote: post #9
mtmail wrote: post #2

Interview with the author https://www.digitalesbild.gwi.uni-muenchen.de/inexplicably-b... "KP: Is it important for you that the photos actually originate from real estate marketplaces? If so, how do you verify their origin? AD: Yes, that’s actually really important, otherwise the blog is just unverifiable user-generated content. If an image is submitted without a link, or no agent’s logo on the image, or I can’t find…

This is incredible given some of the listings. The fact one of the pictures is the house on literal fire, coupled with this context, goes to show that some people really don't belong anywhere in marketing or sales.

Nah, whoever chose that photo knew exactly what they were doing - they chose a photo that will appeal to their target market, which is people looking to get deal on buying a house that they will repair and flip for a profit.

The picture simultaneously shows that it is a nice, stately house, and also that it suffered significant damage which it needs to be repaired. It's the perfect choice.

There is zero chance that anyone in the market for a house in general would choose to buy this one, so there's no point in choosing a pretty picture which hides the damage. You'd just be wasting your time and that of your potential customers.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#234

Post by convalescindrey »

jahsome wrote: post #110
stronglikedan wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have expected his job have guardrails in place to prevent this sort of mishap, like a full audit log and chain of custody of all evidence gathered during these investigations, as well as SOPs on the handling and storage of such evidence.

Physical evidence is perhaps handled with a greater regard, but from what I understand, background info gathered during surveillance isn't always intended for use in court and often really only serves to further the investigation itself. Usually a stakeout is gathering enough probable cause to effectively justify requesting search warrants, which is when the "real" investigation kicks off. My shared connection to the…

> It seems like the higher up the chain you look, the more indifference or incompetence you find.

Well, let's say, you have a really competent investigator. Is that the person you want to be promoted into a position where they are not doing any investigating anymore? In that light it's good to have the incompetent higher up so that the people doing the real work are those that are competent. :)

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#235

Post by stef25 »

brandall10 wrote: post #46
junon wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is incredible given some of the listings. The fact one of the pictures is the house on literal fire, coupled with this context, goes to show that some people really don't belong anywhere in marketing or sales.

RE: the fire, problem properties are actually a hot market... flippers love those. In reality that's a fantastic photo for marketing purposes.

Isn't the damage from the fire trucks' water worse than the fire damage ? It's like the whole house going through a very long car wash. Wood, electricity must be wrecked.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#236

Post by dna_polymerase »

anonzzzies wrote: post #157
arkitaip wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, just hand the keys to someone's home to a complete stranger, what could possibly go wrong.

Here you have to sign a contract (so competitors or the owner don't sell it cheaper to you) and they take a copy of your passport and proof of residency. So not exactly strangers. And in this cases where I asked for the keys, they were local realestate agents I went to school with. Not that anybody locks their door over here; it's just often not clear what the location is to prevent personal negotiations.

> it's just often not clear what the location is to prevent personal negotiations.

Oh no, we had a bug once when our software uploaded the property to the web with the address unlocked. The place got swarmed by people who would just enter the property at any time, not giving a damn about the owner's privacy. They were ringing the doorbell, asking about the price and if they could see the place right then and there. Agents are the first line of defense against shitty people.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#237

Post by PawgerZ »

alistairSH wrote: post #144
Solvency wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If their inspector sucks that's on your friend. We searched and vetted and found our own inspector. On Yelp of all places, one of the least trustworthy websites. It took us less than a day to find someone good. And he found absolutely every single imaginable problem even down to the most hysterically unimportant detail. Like the tension on one of the kitchen/garage door hinges being slightly higher than the bottom do…

The problem isn't whether they find a problem. Even the best inspector will miss things occasionally. The problem is they have zero legal liability for that miss. The buyer is making the biggest purchase of their life on a report that cost ~$1000 and has no legal backing (beyond maybe recovering the ~$1000 inspection fee). And then you have home insurance which isn't a whole lot better. They might fix the problem or…

When dealing with Home/Property insurance, always talk to a reputable public adjuster or general contractor. I worked at a general contractor construction company in a state where contractors can also act as public adjusters. We routinely caught insurance adjusters overlooking damage, lying, or straight up committing fraud.

The laws for insurance are very complex, and all of the material standards are locked behind paywalls. For an average person (me before I worked there) insurance is basically a black box; you can't argue against any of their points because they hide the criteria.

>but even if they do fix it, it'll be the lowest bidder installing the cheapest parts possible.

This is true, but illegal. You are owed for "Like Kind And Quality" according to the law. This means that the insurance company can't downgrade your materials, and they have to repair the property to AT LEAST pre-storm conditions. Additionally, it is your legal right to choose a construction crew or contractor of your choice, and the insurance company can't veto your decision. After the work is complete, make sure that you, the construction company, and the insurance company have copies of the specifications of your materials and what work was done. This way it will be much harder for insurance to fuck you over on your next claim.

Most contractors in my area are genuinely trying to help the clients. There are some contractors who take advantage of the innocent and gullible population, though. I hate them just as much as insurance companies.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#238

Post by stef25 »

parkersweb wrote: post #140
mtmail wrote: post #2

Interview with the author https://www.digitalesbild.gwi.uni-muenchen.de/inexplicably-b... "KP: Is it important for you that the photos actually originate from real estate marketplaces? If so, how do you verify their origin? AD: Yes, that’s actually really important, otherwise the blog is just unverifiable user-generated content. If an image is submitted without a link, or no agent’s logo on the image, or I can’t find…

And for that reason the horse photo is still one of my long standing favourites: https://terriblerealestateagentphotos.com/post/62824754189

With my parents we rented a house once in Italy. There were two ponies in the garden, they just walked all over the house whenever they wanted to. There was one in the kitchen most of the time. In the early-mid 80's people just accepted whatever (as my parents did, after driving 4000Km there and back with my dad chain smoking in the car and us kids in the back not wearing seat belts). The whole experience involved breaking at least half a dozen laws & regulations.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#239

Post by anotherman554 »

Solvency wrote: post #135
alistairSH wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally agree on the inspection. They're next to useless - a friend bought a home a few years ago, super-weird water heater/HVAC system (co-mingled, WTF), never mentioned by the inspector. When it broke a year later, it was a VERY expensive fix, and I think they might have recovered a few hundred $$ from the inspector (on a many thousands repair). An agent is only getting 5-6% of the home value (assuming no split wit…

If their inspector sucks that's on your friend. We searched and vetted and found our own inspector. On Yelp of all places, one of the least trustworthy websites. It took us less than a day to find someone good. And he found absolutely every single imaginable problem even down to the most hysterically unimportant detail. Like the tension on one of the kitchen/garage door hinges being slightly higher than the bottom do…

"And he found absolutely every single imaginable problem even down to the most hysterically unimportant detail."

The fact an inspection document is impressive to read doesn't mean it is accurate. If he blew you away with his ability to name 100 minor things, but missed a structural issue, you'd be screwed, and would have no way to know this until the structure starting cracking.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#240

Post by koheripbal »

stronglikedan wrote: post #94
convalescindrey wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He surely should have lost his job or worse.

I would have expected his job have guardrails in place to prevent this sort of mishap, like a full audit log and chain of custody of all evidence gathered during these investigations, as well as SOPs on the handling and storage of such evidence.

Nope. Usually all the court needs is his attestation that he always had sole custody of the evidence
Post reply on HN