2010 Person of the Year: Jon Stewart

The New "Most Trusted Man in America??"

Yeah, yeah, I know who Julian Assange is, and about WikiLeaks.

And I'm aware that Time magazine chose Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg as its "Person of the Year" -- if not a "jump the shark" moment, then awfully close.

But my candidate for "Person of the Year" is Jon Stewart, of The Daily Show fame, and now an increasingly assertive political voice.

People such as myself have been decrying that this generation has no one comparable to Walter Cronkite: someone of unimpeachable credibility and stature (dareI say "transcendant"?), who both serves as society's conscience, and whose sentiments on a subject, when they weigh in, are decisive.

Cronkite played such a role vis a vis the war in Vietnam.

Stewart just played a similar role in getting Congress to fund health care for 9/11 responders:

“Jon Stewart so pithily articulated the argument that once it was made, it was really hard to do anything else."

--Robert Thompson, professor of television at Syracuse University; "In ‘Daily Show’ Role on 9/11 Bill, Echoes of Murrow" (The New York Times, 12/26/2010)

Junior "Senior Statesman"

Oddly, the person who Stewart reminds me most of is Ronald ("we begin bombing in five minutes") Reagan, circa late 1970's.

A two-term California governor and a fixture on the political right for decades, Reagan had yet to be embraced by the mainstream.

Instead, he was derided as a washed-up actor of dubious intelligence, who may or may not also be a trigger-happy cowboy.

Posthumously, Reagan is warmly remembered as The Great Communicator, a man with a genuinely sunny disposition and bedrock principles who guided the country into and through a period of national prosperity -- and not incidentally, a successful resolution of the Cold War.

(Sorry, lefties, he did.)

Stewart's Ascent

It's a bit hard to see Stewart's new-found stature, both because Stewart is a contemporary, and because his credentials -- in this case, as a wise-cracking satirist and media personality -- can also be easily dismissed by the opposite end of the political spectrum (ask now-U.S. Senator Al Franken whether his comedian background helped his candidacy).

But as evidenced by this month's 9/11 legislation, Stewart's growing influence -- culturally, politically, etc. -- is for real.

Amongst all our other problems, perhaps lack of leadership is the most acute.

If we can cultivate a couple more "senior statesmen-types" like Jon Stewart in the next few years, there's cause for optimism.

P.S.: Maybe it was the "avuncular" thing, or that "Walter" sounds so, well, senior citizen-like.

Or perhaps it was just because I happened to be 8 years old at the time.

But it sure seemed like Cronkite was older than 52 when he pronounced Vietnam a lost cause in 1968 -- barely older than Stewart's now 48 years old.

Realtors & Technology

"First Adopters" --
or "First Ruiners?"

Nobody goes there anymore -- it's too crowded.

--Yogi Berra, about a Miami Beach restaurant near the Yankees' Spring training camp.

Are social networks like Facebook becoming like Yogi Berra's restaurant?

In other words, as latecomers and "tourists" fill up the place, is the original, "in" crowd decamping for less noisy environs?

The "Spam Factor"

Perhaps.

If so, Realtors will bear much of the blame (or credit, if you think that social networking is a gigantic time sink).

In technology circles, the joke is that Realtors aren't the "First Adopters" they fancy themselves to be, but instead are "First Ruiners."

That's because, whatever the technology, Realtors invariably seize upon it to do one thing: hawk their listings.

P.S.: Hat tip to Nobu Hata for the "First Ruiners" quote.

"Know Your Customer" Rule -- Real Estate Version

Googling (Facebooking? Zillow-ing?)

Your Buyer/Seller

Financial institutions are subject to something called the "Know Your Customer" rule, to prevent identity theft fraud, money laundering and terrorist financing.

I'm starting to think that real estate has something equivalent, called the "Know Your Buyer (or Seller)" rule.

By that, I mean that I'm increasingly seeing clients "Google" -- not to mention "Facebook" (is that a verb yet?) -- their transaction counterparts to glean important, personal tidbits.

Like, what kind of job do they have?

Where are they from?

Where do they currently live -- and what's it worth?

I haven't encountered the following yet, but I'm sure it's just a matter of time: "They're only offering $X for my house!?! But he/she just made partner!!"

Misgivings -- and Misinformation

The trend is clearly accelerating, so it hardly matters that I have misgivings about it.

But I do -- two, in particular.

One. It feels voyeuristic and intrusive.

OK, it is voyeuristic and intrusive.

But I suppose that's precisely what's driving the exponential growth in social networking sites generally.

If you don't want your personal information out there, don't participate -- or, take steps to safeguard it.

Two. Publicly available information yields only a partial -- if not misleading -- picture of someone's finances.

As I've blogged before ("Taking Trulia for a Spin", "Automated Valuations on CyberHomes, Zillow, etc.), third party Web sites are notoriously unreliable when it comes to appraising homes.

They rely on stale tax data; don't know the interior of a home (floor plan, aesthetics, etc.); and are clueless about things like updates (or not), additions (or not), and local price trends.

Even if they were spot on, they still don't tell you what someone owes on their home -- or what they have in their bank account.

Plenty of people who look flush are actually maxed out, living on their credit cards; conversely, others without big jobs, homes, and cars have perfect credit scores and can borrow whatever they want. Or can pay cash.

Which is why, ultimately, all the personal info in the world matters much less than what a lender, vetting an actual Buyer, has to say.

For now, at least to a Realtor, the rest is just (occasionally titillating) noise.

B.Y.O.H. ("Bring Your Own . . . House!")

"Now THAT'S a Roadblock!"

Clients of mine posted this picture on Facebook this morning.

Apparently, they have a new neighbor: a new (old) house, moved by truck from another location -- complete but for the foundation. It was deposited in the middle of the street, around 1 a.m. last night.

As another acquaintance posted, "Now that's a roadblock!"

Twitter Converts --- and Skeptics

To Twitter or Not to Twitter (that is the question)

Non-Realtors wouldn't necessarily know it, but there's a huge debate going on within the Realtor community at the moment about the need to get up to speed with -- "re-tool" for, if you will -- so-called social media such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc.

Here's a quick summary of the points each camp is making:

Twitter converts: everyone's using social media. "Be there or be square."

Twitter skeptics: actually, it seems like the most avid Twitter demographic is . . . teenagers. And not many teenagers buy homes.

Twitter converts: Not true (about the demographics). The common denominator is technological sophistication: people whose jobs require it (marketing, high tech, computer-related generally) are embracing social media, too.

Twitter skeptics: Yeah, those folks are so busy checking out sites like Zillow and Trulia they think they don't need a Realtor. And tell me again, how does someone who has time to Twitter all day hold down the kind of job that pays a big mortgage?

And so and so on.

Count me firmly in the . . . undecided camp.

I remember having a spirited conversation with someone, way back before anyone had even heard of Netscape, about why the Internet wasn't merely "CB radio's with typing" (I was right, they were wrong).

And yet, I have to confess, even I have doubts that Twitter represents a seminal, culture-changing shift: somehow, I just don't see my target market tweeting (or posting on Facebook), "I wish I hadn't just eaten that second hot and spicy burrito at lunch."

My best guess is that two considerations will prove paramount for Realtors weighing the "to Twitter -- or not?" question: 1) no one wants to be labeled a "Luddite," "behind the curve," etc.; and 2) you become proficient in whatever medium or mode of communication your client(s) prefer.

"Technology Losers" . . . and Ostriches

Technology Adapters: Early, Late . . & Never

If you've yet to "Facebook," "Twitter," "Link In" (yes, they're all verbs) or otherwise seriously partake of the orgy of social media apparently going on out there, I'm sure you'll relate to the following:

If Caroline Cua’s iPhone looked anything like her closet, where she keeps her dozens of pairs of shoes, she would have screen after screen of applications. But instead her iPhone is nearly empty.

And that’s just fine with her, until she finds herself among friends whose iPhones are studded with icons. When a fellow iPhone owner asked recently to see her apps, she grew self-conscious. “I said to him, ‘O.K., now I’m officially feeling like a loser,’ ” she recalled.

--"Skirting the Glut of iPhone App's: When Phones Are Just Too Smart"; The New York Times (1/2/2010)

Actually, there's an even more antediluvian state than the self-described "technology loser" (above): "technology ostrich."

That would be anyone putting off buying an iPhone because they don't want to be one of the technology losers walking around with only 5 app's installed on their smart phone.

Like me!

In my defense, I know lots of other seasoned Realtors walking around with not-so-smart phones because . . . they still work!

In my case, they also open up Realtor lockboxes (because my Treo has an infrared beam, I don't need to carry around a separate "fob"); and synch, reliably, with my calendar and contact list.

If it ain't broke . . .

Edina Realty's Crystal Ball

On Tap for 2010: Social Media, and
(More) Foreclosures and Short Sales

No, I don't predict the direction of home prices.

But housing trends are another matter.

Fortunately, if you're an Edina Realty agent, corporate does that for you (or at least helps).

Each year, senior management highlights at the annual meeting -- and reinforces during the year -- the themes and issues it expects to drive the marketplace over the coming twelve months.

From experience, their track record is pretty good.

So what is management emphasizing now?

Training on how to get up to speed on two things: 1) So-called "social media" like FaceBook, LinkedIn, Twitter, etc.; and 2) handling foreclosures and short sales.

If there is an honorable mention, it would be becoming proficient with alternative financing (contract for deeds, assumable mortgages, and various other "seller-facilitated" financing).

Facebook Nation?

Facebook More Populous than . . . Europe!

Once upon a time, to convey exactly how big California's economy is, experts would point out that, if California were a country, its economy would rank 7th or 8th in the world.

By that same yardstick, Facebook's growth is even more impressive.

If its users were a country . . . it would be the world's fourth largest.

(Got that tidbit from Edina's Annual Meeting yesterday.)

P.S.: Hey, Readers: any interest in more Ben Stein jokes??

"Your Money's No Good"

Boycotts, Social Media & Goldman Sachs

If artists doodle, and musicians play little ditties in their head, what do bloggers "noodle around" with in their free time?

At least in my case, provocative phrases with multiple meanings.

Like, "your money's no good."

So far, I'm already up to four, alternative definitions:

One. "I won't accept your money because I hold you in high esteem" (in other words, it's free).

What the bartender says to a longtime friend, star athlete, war hero, etc.

Two. "I won't accept your money because I hold you in low esteem" (in other words, the price is infinite).

What fashionable, upper East Side restaurants now say to Ruth Madoff, or gated communities in LA presumably used to say to OJ Simpson after he was acquitted of murder, but before he was (finally) sent to prison for armed robbery last year.

Three. Your money, specifically, is no good: your credit cards have been revoked, your bank account is overdrawn, etc.

Four. Your money's no good -- and neither is anyone else's -- because the currency has been debased (as they say, this one's "ripped from today's headlines").

Ostracism, 21st Century-Style

Of the four possible meanings, the one I find the most tantalizing is #2.

Combine the latest social networking technology; some old-fashioned notions about boycotts, shunning, and ostracism; and a feckless, co-opted political system -- and suddenly you've got a way to deal with a corporate miscreant like Goldman Sachs.

Namely, society could collectively refuse to do business with Goldman Sachs and its greedy, economy-wrecking executives.

Boycott, the term for such collective action, is usually thought of as a refusal to buy from someone. In fact, the term comes from the local Irish community's refusal to sell to Charles Boycott, after Boycott took the landowners' side in a labor dispute in 1880.

And to think, they had to organize their boycott without the benefit of email, smart phones, instant messaging, or Facebook!

P.S.: One of the funniest stand-up comedy bits I ever heard was (a then unknown) Rob Schneider cataloguing the various usages of the word "Dude."

As in . . . Approval ("Dude!"); Disapproval ("d-u-d-e"); "Is that a stranger in my bedroom closet?": ('d-u-u-u-de??'). And so in that vein (I think Schneider topped out at 12 meanings).

Taking -- Or Leaving -- VOW's

VOW's, "Me Media" & the Housing Market

Did you know that there are now real estate Web sites where you can rate homes you've seen, leave comments -- and see what others are saying, too?

So-called Virtual Office Websites ("VOW's") such as ZipRealty.com combine much of the interactivity of social media like Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter with a veritable ocean of housing data available on the local Multiple Listing Service ("MLS"). (My preferred name for social media is "me media").

Just to up the ante, they also promise to rebate 20% of the commission they receive to buyers.

So, is there any "there there?"

I just checked out ZipRealty.com, and was underwhelmed (to say the least).

Results of Test Drive

For starters, you have to register, and accept the standard, "black box" user agreement with tons of microscopic fine print.

It's been 20 minutes since I clicked "yes, I accept," and I've yet to receive any spam or have anyone knock on my door to claim my first-born . . . but I'm not holding my breath.

To test drive the site, I then ran a search on homes for sale in St. Louis Park, and got more than 300 hits.

So far, so good.

However, when I clicked on several individual listings and checked "client ratings," I found . . . nothing.

More accurately, I was presented with a screen that cheerily invited me to "Be the first to write a review."

The categories include "Overall Rating," "Curb Appeal," "Interior Appeal," and "Neighborhood"; reviewers can assign anywhere from one (lowest) to five (highest) "houses," or stars.

The rankings are followed by fields for "Pros," "Cons," and "Review," where users can add their comments.

Waiting for Critical Mass?

Sites such as ZipRealty.com would seem to face two hurdles.

One. "Chicken & Egg" problem.

It's hard to see prospective home Buyers flocking to VOW's before they have any real, user-provided content, yet home Buyers aren't going to input their comments on VOW's until they attract more traffic.

In computer parlance, this is known as a "network effect": the more people use something, the more valuable it becomes -- and the more valuable it becomes, the more people use it. Think, the iPhone and its 100,000 app's, or -- once upon a time -- Microsoft Windows.

Two. Push-back from home Sellers.

As one might imagine, Sellers are not particularly keen to have strangers trash their home in a public forum.

So, brokers such as Edina Realty are incorporating default, "opt-out" language into their listing agreements. Here is the relevant excerpt from Edina's:

I understand that I have the additional option of allowing comments about my property to appear on VOWs, including negative comments, made by persons other than the broker operating the VOW. At this time, however, I decline . . . understanding that I may change these selections at any time.

Personally, it's hard to imagine many home Sellers rejecting this clause and instead "opting in."

"Just the Facts (Fax?), Ma'am"

Presenting Offers

Old-time Realtors -- my definition is anyone in the business before there were faxes -- may not know how to twitter or blog, but there is one skill that they excel at relative to newer Realtors: presenting offers.

Once upon a time, Buyer's agents would actually meet the Seller and their agent to personally present the offer (imagine!).

Then, if the Buyer was available nearby, all the parties could convene and hash out any differences.

Weaker Glue

Now, of course, Facebook has supplanted face-to-face. Offers are electronically submitted with the click of a button or keystroke.

The result?

Often times, deals with less give-and-take, that come together slower and break apart more easily.

Zillow & Social Networking

Is Zillow Getting Smarter?

I've discussed third-party real estate sites such as Zillow and Trulia previously on this blog ("Trulia Hits -- and Mostly Misses"; "Zestimates Wildly Off-Target").

The verdict?

In most cases, you'd be better off throwing darts to establish your home's value.

That's because publicly available housing statistics -- and dated ones at that -- don't convey a home's condition, look and feel, updates, etc.

Not to mention key boundaries that are easy to miss on a map, such as a border between a good and bad school district -- or a a major highway. (That's also why a knowledgeable Realtor's pricing is typically better than an appraiser's).

However, at least anecdotally, I'm hearing that social networking sites (think, Facebook and My Space) are filling in Trulia and Zillow's blind spots.

The result -- at least in the biggest markets where social networking is most active -- is that the real estate sites are benefiting from a positive feedback loop that's making them more accurate.

In other words, they're getting smarter.

Will this trend travel to smaller markets such as the Twin Cities?

Stay tuned . .

Has the Internet Peaked?

Old-Fashioned Technology
Makes Real Estate Comeback

"Nobody goes to that restaurant anymore. It's too crowded."
--Yogi Berra

Yogi Berra could easily say the same things about the Internet today, especially with respect to real estate. Consider:

--Online photos are now routinely so overly-flattering, you literally don't recognize the home when you're standing in it.

--Facebook and MySpace are crawling with Realtors, job seekers, and people selling . .. something.

--Sites like Zillow -- never very accurate at pricing homes -- are actually getting worse (their business model isn't to displace Realtors, but to attract eyeballs and advertising dollars).

--Interest rates quoted online are virtually meaningless because they don't take into account the borrowers' unique circumstances. Or, they're loss leaders that 1% of the borrowing public qualifies for (in retail, this is called "bait and switch").

Given all the clutter, distortion, and sheer noise on the Internet today, it seems fair to ask, "Has the Internet's utility peaked?"

For many people, the answer is "yes." That's true even as an estimated 80% percentage of all prospective home Buyers now begin their home search online.

Underwhelming -- and Overwhelming

Unfortunately, once they get there, they're likely to be both underwhelmed -- and overwhelmed.

Overwhelmed by the sheer number of real estate sites and information out there. Underwhelmed by how little of it is actually useful, if not outright misleading.

What's taking the Internet's place? "Low tech," and in some cases, "no tech" (John Naisbitt anticipated this phenomenon years ago with a 1999 book titled, "High Tech, High Touch"):

--Old-fashioned shoe leather and tire-kicking: if you really want to know what a property's like, go look.
--For Realtors marketing a home: personal networking, word-of-mouth, and an especially low tech tool: the phone.
--For prospective Buyers looking for a Realtor: referrals and personal interviews. Plenty of newbie Realtors are great at technology, including Facebook, but don't have a clue about selling real estate (how would they? They've never done it).
--For borrowers looking for a loan: one-on-one contact with a lender.

So is the Internet going away?

Hardly. Once I'm working with a client, the Internet's various productivity tools (email, online forms, government Web sites) greatly expedite communication, work flow, and access to information.

However, purely as a marketing medium, the Internet's value arguably has peaked.

Just like junk mail, the more ubiquitous it becomes, the less it seems to register with people (this blog notwithstanding, of course!).