What Zillow doesn't want you to know about its listing gap • Hacker News Board

Re: What Zillow doesn't want you to know about its listing gap

#91

Post by toomuchtodo » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 8:37 PM UTC

encoderer wrote: post #90

toomuchtodo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just listed all the reasons Redfin ( https://www.redfin.com ) is killing it. Their value proposition is that their agents aren't paid on commission, they're paid on your satisfaction. Their website is also very data-intensive compared to MLS sites (which create information asymmetry between buyers, sellers, and brokers due to how they're setup).

Otoh, are the very best agents going to work for rf and make less money? Redfin looks like modern KW to me. Most great agents don't want to undersell their own industry. And while there are many markets where a mediocre agent will do, I wouldn't take that chance in sf, la, Nyc, Miami, etc

Would I use them to sell? Maybe. Would I use them to buy? Most definitely. As mentioned further down in this thread, buyer's agents have every incentive for the buyer to pay as high a price as possible (due to RE commission structure). I want someone earning a fee on my transaction because they got me the best price (as either buyer or seller).

Price of a service can be a form of signaling, but paying more for something does in no way mean you're getting better served.

Re: What Zillow doesn't want you to know about its listing gap

#92

Post by rgbrgb » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 8:38 PM UTC

debacle wrote: post #50

rgbrgb wrote: post #6

One point that this analysis misses is that there's often a significant delay between the time a property hits the market (lists on MLS) and the time it hits aggregators like Zillow [0]. If you're looking at week old listings in hot markets like LA and SF, then you're looking at a batch of inventory that has already been picked through by savvier buyers. For this reason, we always recommend that our buyers use a brok…

Truth be told, if you're looking at day old listings on the MLS you're looking at a batch of inventory that has already been picked through by savvier buyers.

Sure, but typically offers have 3 day expirations so you'll still have a window to go see the home and get an offer in if you like it. That said, the advice stands even if you're checking more than once a day -- only look at the new stuff (sort by listing date), and don't stress :).

Re: What Zillow doesn't want you to know about its listing gap

#93

Post by zo1 » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 8:39 PM UTC

jpmattia wrote: post #85

Simulacra wrote: post #18

When I was searching for a house I used 5 or so apps to do so. I found that Zillow had many, many listings that were very old, but were placed up top and the dates changed to make it look like it was just listed. However, checking the actual data for that listing shows that it was not pulled from the market and relisted, it was just Zillow constantly boosting really crappy houses that had been on the site for a long…

> In short, trust none of them To amplify: I don't think it's any accident that the 2005 housing fiasco happened in this industry. Terrible pricing information (gaps + timeliness), as well as terrible conflicts of interest (buyers brokers are incentivitized to make the buyer pay as much as possible) make me wonder how much longer these dinosaurs are going to continue to operate the same way.

>"make me wonder how much longer these dinosaurs are going to continue to operate the same way."

As long as the regulations are in place that protect them from market competition and innovation.

Re: What Zillow doesn't want you to know about its listing gap

#94

Post by w4 » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 8:42 PM UTC

jpmattia wrote: post #81

w4 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is all a great idea - but state laws wouldn't permit it (I work in the industry). Most of the features you described, and the fee structure associated with them, would be in violation of real estate licensing laws. Hence why no one has provided a modern, competitive alternative to real estate brokers: you simply can't under the current regulatory regime. Otherwise, what you've described would almost certainly al…

> This is all a great idea - but state laws wouldn't permit it (I work in the industry). Uber, AirBnB redux. Provide a service that people want more than one built on cronyism-type relations between entrenched industry and gov't, and the change happens even with the existing law base. It's not like it's some secret as to how the laws got there in the first place.

> Uber, AirBnB redux. Provide a service that people want more than one built on cronyism-type relations between entrenched industry and gov't

Not trying to be a debby-downer here (I'd love to see innovation in the industry), but this would almost certainly get stomped on before it could ever reach critical mass. Uber and Airbnb were able to exploit loopholes in existing regulations, and move quicker than the disconnected, regionally focused incumbents. By the time the incumbents (taxi companies, hotels) caught on, they were left flat footed.

The real estate industry in the United States is a very different situation. The incumbent interests are tightly organized and politically active on a national level. The National Association of Realtors was the third largest spender on lobbying in the USA last year. The only groups that outspent them were the US Chamber of Commerce, and the American Medical Association: https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000062

As a result, the regulatory framework in most states highly restrictive and robust. There are few, if any, loopholes to exploit, since the NAR lobbies heavily on a state-by-state basis for uniform, restrictive regulations: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB112381069428011613

Re: What Zillow doesn't want you to know about its listing gap

#95

Post by ThomPete » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 8:43 PM UTC

encoderer wrote: post #90

toomuchtodo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just listed all the reasons Redfin ( https://www.redfin.com ) is killing it. Their value proposition is that their agents aren't paid on commission, they're paid on your satisfaction. Their website is also very data-intensive compared to MLS sites (which create information asymmetry between buyers, sellers, and brokers due to how they're setup).

Otoh, are the very best agents going to work for rf and make less money? Redfin looks like modern KW to me. Most great agents don't want to undersell their own industry. And while there are many markets where a mediocre agent will do, I wouldn't take that chance in sf, la, Nyc, Miami, etc

Can you define what you mean with best agents? My experience from NY is that they are all mostly using Street Easy and getting a fee for something I have already found myself.

And I don't live cheap.

Re: What Zillow doesn't want you to know about its listing gap

#96

Post by encoderer » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 8:46 PM UTC

staunch wrote: post #25

I lost all faith in Zillow when I realized their estimate was just a number based on their guess at a price per square foot times the square footage... A properties historical "Zestimate" changes if you update the current square footage. Whatajoke!

It's most certainly not that simple. Valuation models have been around a long time and none are that simple. Perhaps it considers updates to be corrections to incorrect data. In which case recalculating the history seems reasonable to me

Re: What Zillow doesn't want you to know about its listing gap

#97

Post by declan » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 8:46 PM UTC

patja wrote: post #22

Looking at the C&D letter, it seems that Zillow is saying any use of their site for commercial use is prohibited. Wouldn't that cover traditional print journalists doing a similar story, or any story that made use of information gleaned from Zillow? Why didn't Bloomberg receive a C&D for this story which says "Bloomberg used data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Zillow Group Inc. and Bankrate.com to quantify how much mor…

[a] Journalists using Zillow's site would likely be viewed as personal or editorial use, not commercial use.

[b] Bloomberg probably worked with Zillow.

[c] I'm not sure EFF would be interested in this. It's pretty standard TOS language, and when EFF did get involved in the Craigslist/Padmapper case, it was (correctly) interested in stomping on idiotic CFAA theories of liability and the exclusive license point. If Zillow tried to strongarm journalists, that would be a different story, but they have not done so as far as I know.

Background: I was a journalist before founding https://recent.io/ and would often get approached by companies like Zillow to write about what their data showed.

Re: What Zillow doesn't want you to know about its listing gap

#98

Post by w4 » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 8:49 PM UTC

rgbrgb wrote: post #87

w4 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is all a great idea - but state laws wouldn't permit it (I work in the industry). Most of the features you described, and the fee structure associated with them, would be in violation of real estate licensing laws. Hence why no one has provided a modern, competitive alternative to real estate brokers: you simply can't under the current regulatory regime. Otherwise, what you've described would almost certainly al…

In most places there's no real estate licensing law against the fee structure in question as long as they registered as a brokerage [0]. As an agent you can discount your fee as much as you want. At Open Listings we're actually operating a very similar deep discount model in California -- you find the home, make an offer on our site [1], then we have a digitally-enhanced agent team for advice, negotiation, and managi…

Of course - you can totally offer discounts. Hence Redfin's existence. The key, however, is that you have to operate within the existing licensing law. You can't just act as a low-cost intermediary. This makes any innovation surprisingly difficult, since you incur substantial costs associated with regulatory compliance.

For example, the vast majority of your staff that interfaces with your customers would need real estate licenses in each state you operate in (along with the tens or hundreds of hours of state mandated education to get those licenses). This is in addition to a company brokerage license for each state.

EDIT: Just saw your edits, and that you guys are doing exactly this - good luck! The industry needs more innovation. :)

Re: What Zillow doesn't want you to know about its listing gap

#99

Post by uxp » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 8:51 PM UTC

smackfu wrote: post #84

meritt wrote: post #55

Zillow has substantially mitigated the loss of Move.com/Realtor.com by forging direct relationships with numerous MLSs since the cutoff in April. > Since January, more than 300 MLSs have signed agreements to send listings directly to Zillow and Trulia, providing their members access to the largest audience of home shoppers on mobile and Web 1. http://investors.zillowgroup.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID... The sampli…

The problem is that if the MLS that covers your area didn't make a deal with Zillow, the overall stats don't really matter. Zillow will be useless for house shopping.

I bought a house in Salt Lake City in June. Zillow (and Trulia, etc.) have piss-poor integration in this market, which left our house marked available for weeks after our closing date. I had to chase someone away who was snooping around my back yard 6 weeks after moving in because they thought the home was unoccupied (we hadn't moved in because I was remodeling parts of the basement).

They may provide a better UI than the abysmal MLS sites your agent recommends, but they don't do much more in (as the article suggests) the +60% of markets they don't have listing contracts with.

Re: What Zillow doesn't want you to know about its listing gap

#100

Post by w4 » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 8:51 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #82

w4 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is all a great idea - but state laws wouldn't permit it (I work in the industry). Most of the features you described, and the fee structure associated with them, would be in violation of real estate licensing laws. Hence why no one has provided a modern, competitive alternative to real estate brokers: you simply can't under the current regulatory regime. Otherwise, what you've described would almost certainly al…

Depends on the local regulations, but yes, real estate has gone through quite a bit of regulatory capture. Might be possible to do an end-run via the same mechanisms that allow "for sale by owner".

> Might be possible to do an end-run via the same mechanisms that allow "for sale by owner".

I can't speak universally for every state (there's 50 different sets of regulations, after all), but no. The carve out for FSBO is predicated on selling your own home. If you're facilitating the sale or rental of someone else's home, it triggers the licensing requirements.