Is Real Estate 2.0 a Thing of the Past?
photo by other war
Yawn.
Don’t get me wrong. I think a Zillow Ad Network makes some sense.
And unlike Valleywag, who calls it a “desperate ploy to make sales numbers,” I do see some value in publishers aggregating their advertising inventory for potential real estate advertisers.
I’ll go on the record, I don’t think this is a Hail Mary pass for the Seattle-based search site.
…But it has been done before. Trulia launched a similar deal earlier this year. And, as Valleywag points out, vertical ad networks are a dime-a-dozen these days.
More worrying to me is that it feels like Zillow has lost its edge.
The take-no-prisoners approach Zillow had when it launched now feels anachronistic. The whole thing now feels mainstream. The fire is gone.
Honestly – I had not been to the site for a while. But I went to Zillow.com today and when I got there I was surprised. Is it just me, or is the whole thing looking slightly more subdued now?
Scrolling mortgage rates, a big search box (and hey, where’d the Zestimates go?)… yawn.
What makes me sad is what Zillow represented when it launched was a big inspiration for me to starting this blog.
It was about thinking big and challenging well-entrenched assumptions. It was a big, ballsy play and ultimately, it was aspirational, however controversial it may have been. It was technology unsaddled by expectations. It was the future of real estate marketing.
So it saddens me to see one of the Real Estate 2.0 leaders tack to the center and become generic. But maybe it’s the current business cycle that is forcing Zillow’s hand.
More deeply however, I guess what I’m really sad about is the whole site now just feels… well, kind of boring.
Yawn.
I, for one, hope they can find that fire again.
Jim Whatley | Sep 9, 2008 | Reply
I think it just goes to show you that all Real Estate is local.
That is where it should be. When shopping for a house I do not need 3 million listings. I need focus and local information. There needs to be a push to make the mls better or the broker needs to handle the IDX information better.
Mark | Sep 10, 2008 | Reply
Yeah..sanity is back! Give me an info box in the front lawn over a trillion listings on my web site anyday!
Mike Pintar | Sep 10, 2008 | Reply
Buyers are in control. Agents are scrambling to figure out how to embrace 2.0 technology. Some do, most don’t. At the end of the day, it’s a people business and deals get done with a phone call and a face-to-face meeting. Agent branding and marketing can’t be relegated to just online tactics or posts to a site that is best at information mgmt.
James Bridges | Sep 10, 2008 | Reply
I would agree that they have lost some of their fire. I think they have also not done a great job of rolling out tools to get the real estate agent to buy in. Exposing their API is great, but most real estate professionals don’t have the time to code against their API. Getting agents more involved (kind of like Trulia Voices) could give them a spark at the ground level.
Drew Meyers from Zillow | Sep 10, 2008 | Reply
James-
Have you seen our new web tools section? We’ll be adding additional tools for both larger partners who require more flexibility (APIs) and for real estate agents (widgets) over the coming months.
Dave Toledo | Sep 10, 2008 | Reply
Congratulations Zillow! Boring means you’ve crossed the chasm from early market success to mainstream market leader!
Dustin Dennard | Sep 10, 2008 | Reply
There is not one single profitable Real Estate 2.0 company. There are not even any that seem to be close to profitability. Because of the lack of success of these companies, VC money has completely dried up.
All of this means; The Dead Pool is coming for Real Estate 2.0
I think some of these companies will be able to downsize and tweak their business models and survive, but I don?t know if any of them will make it on their current business model. Even if some of them are able to become profitable, I don?t think they will ever make enough money to give their investors a decent return.
The only profitable publicly traded online real estate company that I am aware of is Loopnet. They are able to make money because they dominate their market. When a market is as fragmented as online residential real estate, it will be very hard for any company to become profitable with such small market share. The way things are going, I see everyone?s market share becoming diluted, not any one player really gaining market share. The few companies that have gained a little market share over the last few years have done it via VC money. When that money dries up, I think they will start to lose market share.
It has been a fun ride to watch.
Side Note
Dustin Dennard is by far my favorite actor
Jessie B | Sep 11, 2008 | Reply
I agree, seems like Z lost its focus. It was branded as the goto site for home values, yet the search box says… “Find Homes”? The results send a mixed message of homes for sale and values. I think Z should focus on values again (especially during these times) and incorporate active listings as secondary information to complement home value calculations. This is especially important since many buyers are looking for validation of values of the properties they are interested in.
This would make much more sense… there is about 60 million homeowners, who are curious about their properties values yet maybe a few million home buyers at any point in time… seems like a much smaller pie that they are going after that is not congruent with their branding.
@Jim – I agree to a certain extent but an IDX is not the solution since a good broker site with MLS will still only display 70-75% of homes for sale in the area, since FSBO inventory is left out. That may not seem like alot but consider if your local area have 40 homes for sale… a buyer searching an IDX site would miss out on seening 10 of the 40 homes. Also, many agents dismiss FSBO’s but the reality is one of the biggest arguments for hiring an agent is because FSBO home sellers underprice their homes… if that is the case, they a buyers agent would WANT to show those “under priced” properties to his prospective clients. The other issue is most people don’t know how to search to find all of the local real estate listing sites.
J. | Sep 12, 2008 | Reply
I think the mistake is not with Zillow, but with your boredom level. While I enjoy your blog, there’s nothing wrong with Zillow, it’s getting better.
1. The one-box address window is a great update, as now you can copy and paste addresses much more easily.
2. Pricing info is still the #1 attraction at Zillow, and it’s VERY useful. I find Zillow to be getting better every time I use it (except when they made it difficult for a period to see home values on the map– maybe they’re still doing that?)
Zillow is a great site, and we’ll see more to come. I don’t work for Zillow nor have anything to do with them. (disclaimer).
Joel Burslem | Sep 12, 2008 | Reply
@J.
Don’t get me wrong. I like Zillow a lot and I was definitely being overly dramatic to make a point.
When I started this blog – Zillow was out making waves, challenging this industry to think big/think different.
Feels like that’s changed now. Zillow (and the others too) have all become mainstream and by extension, boring.
It’s too bad. All I was getting at was I want some of that excitement back. I miss it.
Marc | Sep 13, 2008 | Reply
Zillow isn’t boring. It’s just becoming more like a real estate’s WalMart offering a less than stellar everything assortment of services. But in way, a sad but truthful way, it’s become a mirror of the entire industry – not boring – just a reflection of everything underwhelming about the business.
Joel Burslem | Sep 15, 2008 | Reply
@Marc – Your Walmart analogy is bang on. When I shop in Walmart it’s not because it’s exciting, it’s because I can get cheap laundry detergent.
When I shop at Whole Foods or Zupan’s, it’s an adventure – it’s exciting. I never know what I’m going to get. Perhaps that’s why I’m there 2-3 times a week and I go to Walmart only once a month when the toilet paper runs out.
So the big question is where is real estate’s Zupan’s? (www.zupans.com) I don’t see it anywhere.
Hawaii real estate guy | Sep 15, 2008 | Reply
The current real estate market has pushed many real estate start ups in a new direction. I think this is a poor decision. Stay the course, build market share in a downtime, and be ready to rock-n-roll when it picks up again.
Unfortunately, that costs money which is something that a lot of start ups don’t have. I’m surprised at Zillow, though. I would have thought they had more staying power.
Pat Kitano | Sep 15, 2008 | Reply
2.0 has hit a plateau due to the sluggish market that isn’t showing signs of life yet. Agents experimented with 2.0 because they believed it was an updated solution for real estate marketing, and the market didn’t respond… mainly because it’s a bad market. Blogging is a challenge that only a few could figure out, and there’s net fatigue in keeping up with the latest in the social media.
Yet, there are new social media constructs beyond blogging that will make marketing to a local constituency more simple and resource effective. I’ll explain later this week at Transparent Real Estate.
RE 2.1 | Sep 16, 2008 | Reply
I like Zillow as well but feel like most R.E. sites have been scuffling lately. The tanking market may have something to do with it.
Overland Park Real Estate | Sep 18, 2008 | Reply
Has the novelty worn thin with Z and T? Does that mean we will see a rebirth of R?
DennisSC | Sep 18, 2008 | Reply
I’m tempted to make some sort of analogy about lipstick and pigs, but perhaps it’s best I don’t!
Louis Cammarosano | Sep 21, 2008 | Reply
Joel
Perhaps we should revisit the Failed Promise of Real Estate 2.0
http://blog.homegain.com/failed-promise-Real-Estate-2-0
Selling ads around realtor content (listings)is a losing proposition.
Since when are ads inspiring? Isn’t the public’s aversion to ads the reason for the rise of TIVO?
Given that a web site with “just” five million visitors can’t generate significant revenue, is it any surprise that we see the rush to form “ad networks”?
Newsflash – we already have doubleclick, valueclick,tribal fusion and counteless others much more developed ad networks. And don’t forget the ad networks of Google Yahoo and MSN.
Do we need more?
Louis Cammarosano | Sep 21, 2008 | Reply
Joel
You don’t find dueling digs inspiring?
Hawaii Relocation | Sep 25, 2008 | Reply
I like Zillow, much better then R but with the market tanking.
Most people use local search anyways.
Michael Sosnowski | Nov 10, 2008 | Reply
I have never liked Zillow or Trulia or any 2.0 RE website that trys to take my space in search engines – and then trys to sell me advertising space. I have never, never understood why agents would provide these sites with their listing – and them allow these sites to charge them for weak services.