Exodus at Zillow?
by Iguana Jo
News that Vast.com has launched a new real estate search engine (see Inman’s Search platform launches with 2.4 million homes) isn’t nearly as interesting as who’s launching it.
Ben Clark is leading the company’s real estate business unit and its foray into this industry. And if that name sounds familiar, it should. From Inman News:
Clark previously served as director of partner relations and vice president of the Eastern U.S. for Zillow.com and as chief operations officer for eRealty.com until that company sold to Prudential in January 2004.
Clark’s departure from Zillow comes hot on the heels of another high profile loss, when Vanessa Fox (see A look at Zillow’s Future) abruptly quit to take a job at Ignition Partners. Fox’s leaving was itself even pre-dated by the loss of three of Zillow’s engineers (see John Cook’s Fox quits Zillow for Ignition Partners).
Now it’s fairly normal for any startup to have churn and it’s a pretty competitive market out there right now, so it comes as no surprise that Zillow is having a hard time retaining talent.
Besides, this is nowhere near as bad as the giant clusterf**k that’s happening at Point2 (see Jay Thompson’s Is Something Shaking at Point2 Agent?).
(Apologies for the f-bomb, but I honestly couldn’t think of any other way to describe it)
But that said, can anyone shed some light on what’s going on up in Seattle? Anyone care to go on the record (or off the record for that matter)?
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
David G from Zillow.com | Dec 12, 2007 | Reply
Hi Joel, it’s David from Zillow,
It’s business as usual in Seattle; in fact we’re incredibly busy for this time of year.
Ben Clark is still consulting to Zillow and is still a broker of record for Zillow. Ben continues to manage Zillow’s broker network. I’ll let Ben weigh in on his new role at Vast but I wish him all of the best; this sounds like a great opportunity.
Michael Price | Dec 12, 2007 | Reply
I wouldn’t characterize 2 people leaving as an exodus. On the other hand, what has happened at Point 2 is nothing short of disaster. I guess the real facts will eventually come out.
Agent Scoreboard | Dec 12, 2007 | Reply
its pretty normal for hi profile people to bounce in this industry. Real estate is not a resume maker at this point and wont be for the next 3-5 years. If you’re working in the RE tech space… its pretty slow right now and the flak from disagreating brokers and agents is pretty harsh. I’m not sure what value Vanessa was at Zillow… she did a good job with Google Webmaster, but I don’t know how that translates to what Zillow is doing.
Either way Zillow is here to stay… I know lots of folks out there would like to see a big fat missle land on it… but it aint going to happen..
viable business = positive net income | Dec 12, 2007 | Reply
business as usual at zillow is probably the problem
maybe….the multi-million dollar PR cash bonfire has fizzled out, traffic has been nose diving since they launched and is now at mediocre levels. With the buzz wearing off and the hangover setting in, all the “talented” busienss people are recalling what they learned at the schools that made them “talented”. A business is not a business for long with a red bottom line. What is Zillow now, three years old and still bleeding cash?
Remember oh talented and creative young zen zillowites. someone is footing the bill for your paycheck and the whole operation around you. If that was you, how long would you continue to dump your money into the fire before you pulled the plug?
David G from Zillow.com | Dec 13, 2007 | Reply
viable -
Zillow’s 22 months old. Ad revenues are coming in nicely. Traffic is up YoY despite the sector taking a real knock this year. Employees are owners - we hold vested stock options (often in lieu of market salaries) - and every single employee knows where the company stands financially.
We are investing heavily in our products and will continue to do do. It’s still day 1 for online real estate and there’s a lot we plan to do for advertisers, real estate pro’s, buyers and sellers.
Zillow’s raised 3 successive rounds at impressive valuations from seasoned investors. As an employee, that raise is definitely a bit intimidating but mostly, its an inspiring vote of confidence in the company’s performance and potential.
retrove | Dec 13, 2007 | Reply
Probably more so a general exodus from real estate…
jdfreestan | Dec 13, 2007 | Reply
Uh, Day 1 in real estate was when 0% of people were using the web to search for houses. Day 1 is not when 80% of people search for houses online. Move.com does almost $300 million in revenues and is valued at less than $400 million by the stock market. MOVE also has $185 million in cash on their balance sheet. Valuation is no indication of value or long-term prospects. Everyone knows that from 2000. And seasoned investors sometimes know, but they misjudge also. One of your investors is Legg Mason, they are 20% owners of HouseValues. I am sure they expected more from SOLD and bought in at a higher valuation. I understand you are not HouseValues, but do remember HouseValues does over $70 million in revenues with their anti-consumer model. What are Zillow’s revenues?
viable business = positive net income | Dec 13, 2007 | Reply
david…your reply tells me nothing. Actually it does tell me you either have not the past experience to know any different or that you’ve just had too many cups of the kool aid. I’ve been in your shoes during…uh..I guess, hour 1 of online real estate. I mean if it’s day 1 now, what was it in 1999? Your blind allegiance is admirable. Raising three successive rounds is not impressive, it’s scary. There typically are never fourth rounds. What does that tell you? Based on your traffic and being a niche portal, ad revenues are not going to pay the bills. What exactly are the products that you are investing in?
David G from Zillow.com | Dec 14, 2007 | Reply
viable -
I joined Amazon.com (my 3rd startup) when armchair pundits had concluded it’s burn would kill it … and I cashed in quite quite nicely when I left the company in ‘04 after seeing it turn to massive profitability. Remember that I have perfect visibility to Zillow’s financial performance. You do not.
jd -
Totally agreed; there is massive risk in every startup and investment does not necessarily equate to success. That risk is a big part of the motivation for those of us who are addicted to starting companies that make history.
Louis Cammarosano | Dec 14, 2007 | Reply
Hi David
Louis from HomeGain here.
I agree that people leave companies for a variety of reasons, often not having any thing to do with the prospects of the company.
The advantage to being a public company is you report your financials quarterly and can refute the naysayers.
Being a private company that doesn’t release financial can be a good thing as it allows you to focus on your business with out worrying about meeting investors’ quarterly expectations.
Being private, however, is also a disadvantage when people speculate that you are not doing well and you don’t release any financial information to counter their suspicions.
What is interesting in Zillow’s case is unlike your experience at Amazon, when all the arm chair pundits were predicting its demise, all the pundits for the past two years have preordained Zillow’s success!
Good luck!
Kevin Tomlinson | Dec 14, 2007 | Reply
Point 2? F-bomb? Now that’s a surprise!
No wonder why there is problems over at Point 2. After coming back from Inman in San Fran., I was all charged up about using Point 2 to syndicate my listings. Telling people about it in my office and the works.
I could sell the listing before I had enough time to upload to that site. It couldn’t be anymore user-unfriendly. Nothing short of frustrating. I hear “Point 2″ and my heart starts to race……sorry
jdfreestan | Dec 15, 2007 | Reply
David G - My reference to Realtor.com wasn’t to quantify start-up risk. It’s to try to understand the point of differentiation between Realtor.com and Zillow. Not in the tech way based on features or nuance, but on financials. On listings, they have more. In cash, they have more. In RE search share, they dominate. In revenues, they do $300m. Unless Zillow is building an alternative MLS combined with a transaction component (such as Expedia), I don’t see where Zillow’s valuation can be higher. If you are building an alternative MLS and a transaction component, a much higher valuation for Zillow IS warranted. As an investor, I would have ironically valued Zillow much higher a year ago when your ambitions were a bit more opaque, but if Zillow is an ad-supported business based on listing feeds, wouldn’t MOVE be the benchmark valuation? David G - if you answer the following question, I think everyone will find your posts regarding Zillow’s future much more valid. Will Zillow’s 2007 revenues exceed $15 million? I think people will take a non-answer to be no. I personally believe it does not.
jf.sellsius | Dec 15, 2007 | Reply
@David G
“Remember that I have perfect visibility to Zillow’s financial performance. You do not.”
Ben Clark may be closer to the wall to see the writing.
Andy Kaufman | Dec 15, 2007 | Reply
Kevin- I couldn’t agree more with you about Point2 and I know of a lot of other people that feel the same way.
Kansas City Realtor | Dec 16, 2007 | Reply
Sorry to disagree with you about entering listings on Point2 Agent — I have been using it for a couple of years and have no problem with it. As for all the instability with the leadership, that is a concern.