Identifying with Felix Hernandez

2010 Year in Review -- Realtor's Version

Looking back over 2010, a lot of Realtors had years like Felix Hernandez -- minus the accolades.

Felix who?

Felix Hernandez is the Seattle Mariners' pitcher who just won the AL Cy Young award, despite only having a measly 13 wins (he also had 232 strikeouts and a league-leading 2.27 ERA).

Stellar Performance in a Tough Market

What made those statistics award-winning is that Hernandez compiled them for a last-place team, the 61-101 Mariners.

Similarly, many Realtors have done stellar, tireless work this year marketing and showing homes, educating their clients about the process, writing offers, etc.

However, due to a slow housing market and still-recovering economy, they have few decisions (closed deals) to show for it.

(Real estate really should -- but doesn't -- have something analogous to baseball's ERA, or earned run average.)

"You Mean They Can STILL Screw Their Clients??"

"Cruel Kindness" -- and Vice Versa

Cruel to be kind in the right measure
Cruel to be kind it's a very good sign
Cruel to be kind means that I love you
Baby, got to be cruel, you got to be cruel to be kind

--Nick Lowe; lyrics, "Cruel to Be Kind"

Which of the following professionals have a legal duty to put their customers' interests ahead of their own?

A. Stock Broker
B. Insurance Agent
C. Realtor
D. Investment Banker

Answer: C

That's right: only Realtors owe their clients what is called a fiduciary duty.

That duty further subdivides into a duty of care, and a duty of loyalty: in plain English, don't be a screw-up, and don't screw your client, respectively.

The issue of fiduciary duty is a hot one these days because stock brokers don't currently owe their clients a fiduciary duty -- and don't want the details of the new financial reform legislation, now being drafted, to impose one ("Dear SEC: Please Make Brokers Accountable to Customers"; The NYT, 11/19/2010).

Instead, stock brokers prefer the current standard, which merely requires that they weigh the "suitability" of particular investments for their clients.

Incredibly, the industry is arguing against a higher fiduciary duty on the grounds that it will raise costs, which will hurt clients.

So, there you have it: allowing brokers to screw their clients is actually good for them, and preventing that is bad.

"Phil Dunphy," (TV) Realtor

"Modern Family" & the Housing Market -- or,
"Why is Ty Burrell wearing my blue button-down shirt?"

You can't get back on the horse until you fall off.

--"Phil Dunphy," Modern Family

In the closing weeks of 2010 -- 4+ years into the worst downturn since the '30's -- a prime-time TV show has finally alluded, humorously, to the punk housing market as seen through the eyes of a Realtor and his family (or at least, Hollywood's take on a Realtor and his family).

In this week's episode of "Modern Family," ten-year old(?) Luke Dunphy asks if he and his siblings will have to get jobs because his Dad's real estate business is down.

Later in the episode, holding a toy electronic organ, he asks his parents, Phil and Claire, for directions to the "black market" so he can sell it and use the proceeds to help the family make ends meet.

They then have to explain that that's not exactly what "selling organs on the black market" is all about.

Slack Business

And while it's not a major plot line, at least twice in the episode, Phil Dunphy is shown fielding phone calls from clients who are cancelling their afternoon of showing appointments.

Phil professes to be happy for the free time, which allows him to be home with his sick wife and daughter (and to hunt for the source of the chirping smoke alarm).

The cancellations also afford him an opportunity to show his resolve and positive attitude.

"What do I always say?," he quizzes Luke.

"You can't get back on the horse until you fall off," Luke dutifully answers.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Dunphy's don't appear to be in any real financial jeopardy; near the end of the episode, stay-at-home Mom Claire gives Phil a supportive hug -- and everything appears to be all right again.

Out here in the real world . . . it helps to have a spouse or Significant Other with a steady, full-time job -- preferably one with health care benefits.

P.S.: So, exactly how do you depict a slow housing market in a compelling narrative format?

Unfortunately, many of the attributes -- listings that don't get showings, negotiations that start miles apart and seem to span years, etc. -- don't translate very well.

Hump Day? Not for Realtors

Think of a Realtor's work week as the "opposite George" of careers: pretty much the antithesis of a typical, 9-5 desk job.

So, Wednesday isn't the peak of the work week -- it's the sag in between weekends (and when more than a few Realtors take their days off).

Of course, the opposite of being at your desk at 8 a.m. sharp weekdays . . . is meeting clients at your office at 8 p.m. to write an offer.

"Insider Buying" & the Housing Market

The Housing Market's
Flashing Green "Buy" Signal

In the stock market, open market purchases of company stock by senior management ("insiders") is considered to be bullish.

After all, executives may sell stock for many reasons -- to diversify, to raise money for things like real estate purchases, college tuition, etc.

Presumably, however, there's only one reason insiders buy: they think their company's stock is going to go up.

Is there anything analogous in the housing market?

Housing Market "Insiders"

There is, kind of: Realtors.

Of course, unlike senior executives who now receive much of their compensation in stock, Realtors do not get paid in houses.

However, Realtors are still the closest thing the housing market has to corporate insiders.

After all, they're the ones who are in the trenches every day, representing Buyers and Sellers, noting which way prices are going, prospecting for new listings, potential Buyers, etc.

And presumably, knowing when something's a deal.

Contrarian Indicator

So, is it a "buy" signal when Realtors start buying homes as investments?

On the contrary, such activity is more typically associated with a market top.

That's because to buy, Realtors need not only the requisite incentive, but the wherewithal.

When are Realtors are flushest?

When prices are appreciating strongly and there are lots of transactions.

Conversely, when the housing market is slow, and prices are soft (or declining), Realtors' income collectively takes a big hit.

In a tough housing market, just paying the bills becomes a challenge -- forget about socking away money for retirement (or buying that languishing bungalow at a fire sale price, fixing it up, and flipping it).

Guess which environment we're in now??

P.S.: moderating the foregoing cycles a bit: the number of practicing Realtors.

In boom times, the number expands, meaning the total commission pie is divvied up more ways. Too, more homes sellers are tempted to sell homes without using a realtor (called "For Sale by Owner," or "FSBO").

In lean times, FSBO's disappear and Realtor ranks decline, making it (relatively) easier to eke out a living.

Tina Fey as a Realtor

"Date Night" Realtor Vignette

In "Realtors in Modern Culture," I noted the paucity of Realtors depicted in movies and on TV.

Well, add one more: Tina Fey's character, Claire Foster, in "Date Night" (I just saw it on DVD).

The highlight of the movie (at least to this Realtor) was a blink-and-you-missed-it scene near the beginning of the movie in which she's showing an upper bracket home to a Yuppie couple.

Fey: this home used to be $1.8 million; now it's $300,000.
Couple: We're going to wait for it to get cheaper.
Fey (rolling her eyes): Good plan, I think that makes a lot of sense.

No, I didn't make up those (movie) numbers.

And yes, lots of real-life Realtors are showing real-life homes marked down almost as much . . . and hearing Buyers same the same thing.

The Fastest Way Into a Realtor's . . . Speed Dial

Of Repo Men & Realtors

[Editor's Note: Thanks to City Lakes Realtor Christopher Wasilensky for the following anecdote -- and no, it's not about him!]

Apparently, there's an obscure cable show called "Repo Men" that focuses on -- yup -- the exploits of a couple repo men as they go around repossessing various deadbeats' property.

In one episode, the target is a Realtor in arrears on their car payments.

After several futile attempts to track down the (especially evasive) Realtor, they finally figure it out:

They get a confederate to pass themselves off as a prospective home Buyer, and make an appointment to see one of the Realtor's listings!

Client Kudos on Angie's List

"Ross was Great to Work With"

One of the nicest things that can happen to a Realtor is a client who thinks you're the best.

What's even better?

An appreciative client who tells the world!

Here's what Emily, who relocated from Chicago to Minneapolis, wrote about me on Angie's List:

Ross did a great job communicating with us, even though we weren't in town. Emails, scanned documents, phone calls, etc. And every trip that we made to Minneapolis, he made time for us without any trouble.

The house we bought was a foreclosure, and with all the difficulties of this, Ross stepped up and made it all go off without a hitch. We've recommended Ross to anyone who's looking for a Realtor without hesitation. We had an amazing experience and couldn't have been happier. We've kept in touch with him and he's come by to see all the work we did on our house. Don't hesitate to get in touch with Ross if you're looking to buy or sell!

Hard to top that!

Thanks, Emily and Ian -- you were both great to work with, too!

Realtors & Unemployment Insurance

Working Without a Safety Net

If you work for an employer, and your company has to lay you off because business is down -- you qualify for unemployment benefits.

If you're a Realtor whose business dries up . . . you're SOL.

Just one more reason that Realtors -- and other independent contractors -- are entitled to every penny of compensation they earn when times are good.

Realtors, Barbers & "Haircuts"

Is it "Always a Good Time to Buy?"

Never ask a barber if you need a haircut.

--anonymous

Barber's corollary: never waste time on someone who isn't sure they need a haircut.

--Ross Kaplan

So, The New York Times ran a piece last week basically saying that -- surprise, surprise -- Realtors always think "now" is a great time to buy. See, "Great Time to Buy (Famous Last Words)."

No doubt there are some Realtors who do.

But for every Realtor who proffers such advice, there are probably at least three would-be Buyers who don't really know whether they want to buy something -- and are happy to eat up Realtors' valuable time while they decide.

In my experience, Buyers buy when they're ready -- not when their Realtors convince them to.

If it were otherwise, you wouldn't hear so many stories of Realtors spending months (or years) working with "clients" who decided they really didn't want to buy, after all -- or who "just couldn't find what they were looking for" after viewing dozens -- or hundreds -- of homes (effectively, the same thing as deciding not to buy).

Discerning Motivation

Which is why one of the most important things for a Realtor to do is determine Buyer motivation.

In my experience, here's how motivation shakes out:

Real: Job transfer to another city; change in family size (bigger, smaller); newly married (or divorced); change in financial circumstances (worse, better); health/mobility issues.

Not Real: curious about "how much house 'x' can buy"; will buy only if they can get 'y' for their current home; current home needs remodeling or updating that they've been putting off (this can be a real motivation, but just as often it's a red herring -- especially if they've been mulling it over for years).

Market Predictions

"Yeah, yeah," I can hear you say, but, "is it a good time to buy??"

If Warren Buffett, the world's greatest investor, can't forecast short-term stock market moves (he's explicitly said so, many times), I'm not about to forecast short-term moves in the housing market.

And anyone who says otherwise is full of it.

Instead, my standard comeback is, "you tell me what interest rates, GDP, unemployment and inflation are going to be . . . and I'll give you an educated guess about housing prices."

While I can't predict future housing prices, I can (and do) promise to help my Buyers find the best home for their budget and criteria.

Or, if they're Sellers, I promise to help them get the most money that current market conditions allow.

Realtors & Angie's List

"Loved Working with Clark . . . er, Joseph"

[Note to Readers: Who knew that Angie's List had a "Brand Enforcement Coordinator?" I didn't, at least until I got an email from her today asking me to remove the Realtor review I originally excerpted in my 8/13 post titled, "Realtors & Angie's List."

Apparently, that runs afoul of Angie's "brand enforcement," so at their -- ahem -- request, I'm removing it, and paraphrasing it instead. The "new-and-improved" post follows, below.]

As I've posted before, I use Angie's List personally, and increasingly recommend it to clients; it's a great way to get lots of info on literally thousands of local contractors.

However, its utility still varies by category.

For plumbers and electricians, by all means; for Realtors . . . maybe not just yet (the most popular contractors in the former categories can have hundreds of reviews; the latter, ten at the most).

Exhibit A would be a glowing report full of superlatives from the client about their Realtor, Clark ("We had a great experience with Clark" . . . "Clark worked very hard to get to know us and our needs" . . . "The trait that I liked most about Clark was his very quick response time," etc.)

The catch?

The name of the Realtor at the top of the report isn't Clark -- it's Joseph (got to love that personal touch!).

The World's Most Powerful Realtor

Realtors' Water Carrier in Chief

Who is the world's most powerful Realtor?

No, it's not the head of the National Association of Realtors, a local Board president, or the top-selling Realtor nationally.

Hint: he's actually the world's most powerful ex-Realtor.

I don't think I'd get much argument that it's Georgia Senator Johnny Isakson.

Isakson was instrumental in getting the $8,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers passed, and has been leading the effort to extend and even raise it.

Another couple dozen officials like him in high office, and Realtors might even start to approach the influence wielded by Goldman Sachs.

P.S.: leaving the merits of the $8,000 tax credit aside, it amounts to less than 10% of what was flushed down just one company, AIG. And the tax credit has had a HUGE effect on stabilizing the housing market, particularly at the bottom rungs.

New Magazine Idea?

Target Market: Former Realtors

If you're over 30 years old, and are a fan of Reese's peanut butter cups, you may be remember their classic ad campaign from the '70's and '80's.

The ads showed two people, one eating peanut butter and one eating chocolate, colliding. One person would say, "you got peanut butter in my chocolate," to which the other would reply, "you got chocolate in my peanut butter." Each person would then experience an epiphany: the two went great together!

What made me think of this was a purely serendipitous overlaying of two magazines in my (too messy) home office: Experience magazine, which my wife reads, and Realtor magazine, which I read. Realtor magazine overlaid the "perience" in Experience, creating the combination "Ex[Realtor]." Hmm . . . "Ex-Realtor??"

No, I'm not leaving the real estate business. But I know lots of Realtors who are -- and have. Nationally, the number no doubt is in the hundreds of thousands (at the peak, there were almost 1.3 million Realtors).

Free business opportunity for anyone who's looking . . .(maybe an ex-Realtor??).

Vanishing FSBO's

The Mysteriously Disappearing FSBO

One of the less-remarked developments in today's housing market is the relative absence of FSBO's ("for sale by owner" homes).

As recently as two years ago, more than 10% of all listings were; now, I'd guess that number is less than 5%. (Note: there are actually two kinds of FSBO's: the "pure," sign-in-the-yard, no commission-to-anyone kind; and the FSBO offering a "payout," i.e., a commission to the Buyer's Realtor, but bypassing the listing agent, and typically paying a flat fee to list on MLS).

What accounts for the shrinking number of FSBO's?

Maybe it's because if the pro's (professional Realtors) are having a hard time selling homes, the odds of an amateur succeeding are pretty low.

The fact is, selling a home involves dozens of judgement calls concerning marketing, pricing, negotiating, etc. A FSBO seller just needs to make one mistake to more than offset any money they may have saved on commission.

Realtor Tips

So what's an example of something that a Realtor knows that a "layman" wouldn't?

Yesterday, a client just about to put his house on the market wanted me to take photos while (the previous night's) fresh snow framed his home. His logic was that the snow made the home look more aesthetic -- especially compared to the brown grass underneath.

While he's undoubtedly right, the problem is that the Multiple Listing Service ("MLS") is cluttered with literally thousands of "stale" listings now -- homes that have been on for months (in some cases, years) without attracting a Buyer.

How can you tell? Amongst other things, they have out-of-season photos (many quite flattering, by the way).

I told my client to use the less flattering -- but seasonal -- photos to avoid the negative association, and not risk losing prospective Buyers.

"Pride of Renter-ship"??

Renting vs. Buying: How Interchangeable?

Carla Zeineh, 22, and her husband recently began shopping for a home in Irvine, Calif., and discovered that with a 5% mortgage rate, her monthly payment on a $350,000 two-bedroom home with 20% down could be less than the $1,800 month that they pay in rent on their two-bedroom condo.

Nick Timiraos, "Renters Lose Edge on Homeowners"; The Wall Street Journal (2/25/09)

Besides figuring out how to save the financial system, the other Holy Grail at the moment seems to be calling the bottom in the housing market.

In turn, that has unleashed a search for various "metric's" -- or valuation yardsticks -- that will accurately identify when housing is truly cheap, and therefore likely to stop falling.

So once again the cost of owning vs. renting is back in the limelight -- this time, with commentators noting that the pendulum has swung back towards owning. (In fact, owning has traditionally been more expensive than renting, but in a growing number of markets, the premium is now much smaller.)

It's certainly good news -- to prospective Buyers, if not prospective Sellers -- that housing is more affordable. However, underlying the owning-renting comparison is the flawed assumption that renting is a close, if not perfect substitute, for owning.

In economic-speak, rice and potatoes are close substitutes; apples and oranges are, well . . . apples and oranges.

I'd argue that renting a two bedroom apartment vs. owning a two bedroom home -- the example cited in the Journal article quoted above -- is more like comparing apples and oranges, for two reasons. (Note: for purposes of this post, "condo" means "owned, "apartment" means "rented" -- both are multi-family housing.)

Pride of Renter-ship??

One. Different housing stock.

I work with clients looking for small, single family homes, as well as clients looking for condo's. However, I seldom work with clients looking for both at the same time.

Single family homes have more privacy, no shared walls, and -- if they're located in the Midwest -- a yard and a garage. Because of zoning laws (everywhere except Houston), the single family house is located in a lower density neighborhood surrounded by other single family homes.

By contrast, the condo is likely on a busier street, clustered with other higher-density housing.

Cutting the other way are such factors as convenience and upkeep; condo's offer more of the former, and require less of the latter. It's also true that higher density locations offer better proximity to public transportation, stores, and restaurants.

Two. Different profiles.

Of course, the difference between owning and renting extends to more than just choice of housing stock.

Renters tend to be more short-term oriented, financially less well-established, and, especially today, more risk-averse.

It can also be the case, particularly in the Midwest, that owners -- at least until recently -- enjoy subtly higher social status than renters (they're certainly treated better by the tax code!). Just as it's said that no one ever washed a rental car, few renters invest the kind of TLC in their rental space that owners lavish on their homes.

For all these reasons, the decision to own vs. rent is a more qualitative one that goes beyond simple economics.

Which is not to say that economics are irrelevant.

In my (Realtor's) experience, whether renters decide to become Buyers likely depends much more on their individual economic prospects -- and their expectations of future housing prices -- than housing's cost relative to renting.

Short Sale Games

Don't Sell Your House to Your Realtor

Selling your house to your Realtor is a bad idea for about 48 different reasons, beginning and ending with conflict of interest.

That's especially true if the sale is a "short sale" -- that is, the home is worth less than the mortgage against it. In such cases, the bank has to agree to take less than the amount it is owed.

So who's negotiating with the bank(s) on the Seller's behalf, making the case that the home is worth less than the mortgage? The Seller's Realtor, called the listing agent.

When the listing agent is also the Buyer, he suddenly has a big self-interest in how much the bank knocks off the loan -- not to mention what the home subsequently sells for.

While reducing loan balance also benefits the homeowner, who (presumably, but not always) is relieved of repaying the mortgage shortfall, the problem is that these two self-interests -- agent's and home owner's -- can be conflicting.

Guess whose interest can take precedence?

Bad Behavior -- Case Study #1

Here's one scenario that apparently has been popping up:

A Realtor takes a short sale listing where the home has a $100,000 mortgage against it. He persuades the lender(s) to reduce the mortgage to $50,000. The Realtor then enters into a Purchase Agreement with his client, the owner/Seller, for $50,000. Then, the Realtor re-sells the home to a third party for $75,000.

The sale to the third party is accomplished by contractually assigning the Realtor's Purchase Agreement, and is timed to close the same time as the Realtor's purchase. Result: the Realtor pockets an instant $25,000 -- at their client's expense -- most often without the client even knowing.

This game and other shenanigans are discussed in these two videos:

Chris Galler, Chief Operating Officer and Brad Boyd, Esq., Thomsen & Nybeck on Short Sales, Part 1
Chris Galler, Chief Operating Officer and Brad Boyd, Esq., Thomsen & Nybeck on Short Sales, Part 2

Prevention > Cure

To anticipate (at least some of) the inevitable questions (and avoid incredulous email's and angry blog posts):

Yes, a Realtor who did this "broke the rules," and could be pursued by their client, the bank(s), and the Department of Commerce -- or all three! And yes, it's possible that the client could even recover some of their money, and get the Realtor sanctioned if not thrown out of the business.

But you can't count on it.

You can count on spending 6 months to two years of your life pursuing the above cause(s) of action, paying a lot to your attorney, and getting progressively more steamed (and poorer) as the process inevitably drags on. (Remember, I'm a former attorney.)

At the end of the process, the odds are also quite high that you'll be encouraged to accept an insultingly low settlement offer (if you're offered anything at all), and to think of it as a "small cost to pay for getting on with your life" (Yup, that's what they always say.)

My advice?

Just avoid the whole potential mess by not selling to your Realtor.

If they want to buy it, fine, but then get another Realtor to represent you.

There. Simple.

Playing Realtor Roulette

Will the 4th Time Be the Charm?

Where: 29xx Quentin, St. Louis Park
What: 4BR/3BA; 3,900 FSF; 1931 two-story home
How much: $264,900
Originally listed: $374,900 (11/2/2007)
Number of Realtors (so far): six
Number of Brokers (so far): four

Scanning today's newly listed -- and re-listed -- homes, I couldn't help but notice 29xx Quentin.

I recalled it being an especially active listing and, sure enough, when I did a little digging, I pulled up a very long listing history. (If this house were a felon, it would have a rap sheet a mile long).

Since coming on the market 16(!) months ago, the owner has dropped the price four times, changed the size of the house once (from 4,505 FSF to 3,902), and switched Realtors four times (they've actually had six Realtors working for them because two of the listings were handled by two-person teams).

Even George Steinbrenner -- famous for hiring and firing managers -- didn't make this many changes this fast.

The Ex-Files

So what's going on?

You don't really know for sure unless you personally know the principals and the home involved -- and I don't.

However, it wouldn't be the first time that the combination of a declining housing market and an unrealistic seller proved combustible.

One pattern I've increasingly seen is that the homeowner insists on an unrealistic price, then finds a Realtor who'll take the listing at that price (one always will). The owner is then positively shocked -- shocked -- when the house fails to sell.

Goodbye, Realtor #1, Hello Realtor #2.

It recalls the Seinfeld episode where Elaine thinks she sees her doctor write that she's "difficult" on her chart, and then tries to get Kramer to track down the chart and delete the note so she won't be ostracized by other doctors.

Real estate's equivalent of a medical chart is the listing archive.

When Realtors see a troubled archival history, they naturally think twice about taking the listing (or should).

Unless they can determine why the listing failed to sell -- and have a plan for correcting it that the Seller will go along with -- the likelihood is that they, too, will be eventually be added to the "ex-files."

P.S.: For Realtors, it's decidedly not better to "have listed and lost then never to have listed at all" (sorry, I couldn't resist)

Next: When to Fire Your Realtor

"57 Channels (And Nothin' On)"??

Three Reasons Why Deals
Are Tougher in a Recession

What amuses me about 99% of the articles written about the housing market -- and there's been an explosion lately -- is that they're not written by active, working Realtors.

Most are simply journalists whose "beat" (area of focus) is the housing market. On a scale of 1-10, their writing skills are a "10." But in terms of first-hand experience, they're . . not very high.

Obviously, brains and good sources can compensate immensely. But you still need to know which sources, and how to filter what they say. And even then, there's still slippage between direct and vicarious experience.

In that vein . . . here's a first-person, Realtor's take on the local housing market right now.

"Low-Low" Offers vs. "Lowball-Low"

Generally speaking, deals are fewer and harder to come by now -- foreclosures being the very big exception -- for three reasons.

One. Buyers and Sellers are starting farther apart.

Between the daily headlines blaring housing's woes, or seeing a neighborhood with one (or two) too many "For Sale" signs, Buyers seem to be overestimating how much leverage they have over Sellers.

As a result, Buyers' initial offers are often -- if not "lowball-low" -- just "low-low."

Needless to say, that doesn't get negotiations off to a rousing start. (Again, foreclosures being a notable exception. Banks don't get p-ssed off. They don't get . . . anything. They just say "no" -- and take their time doing it.)

While both sides may gradually yield ground, the operative word is "gradually" -- and the initial gap can be quite wide. As a consequence, the momentum that's needed to drive a deal through to conclusion is often lacking. (Bonus question: what deals have that quality today? Houses selling in multiple offers -- which is more common than you'd think right now).

Two. Money is tighter.

I've never really worked with clients who are cavalier about money -- people with that attitude tend to be quickly separated from theirs (just like fools). However, in flush economic times, Buyers and Sellers just seem to be more, well, "generous." And flexible.

Now, every dollar counts. Even little issues that are routinely disposed of in easier times can threaten to torpedo deals now.

Three. Inventory can feel surprisingly "thin."

It sounds odd to say in a market with 30,000-plus homes for sale, but I've heard more than one agent working with Buyers now say -- and have experienced it myself -- that it seems like there's a ton of inventory . . . until you have a client actually looking for something.

Then . . it's nowhere to be found (sort of the housing market's equivalent of Bruce Springsteen's song, "57 Channels (And Nothin' On)."

Realtors vs. "Laymen"

No doubt one reason for that is that discretionary Sellers -- people who can afford to wait -- are waiting, until perceived conditions improve (as I've written previously, those perceptions can be very wrong -- See, "Now You See it . . .Now You Don't").

But it's also true that once a home has been on the market for awhile, Buyers tend to look for flaws. (Note to Sellers: the pendulum swings from overlooking flaws to zeroing in on them as a direct function of time on the market.) And market time is appreciably higher in a soft, slow market.

So the same house that everyone would have "oohed and ahhed" over when it first hit the market around Labor Day is chopped liver in late Feb. (and now overpriced, given the drop in the market last Fall).

While Realtors are much less susceptible to this phenomenon than "laymen," they're still human.

YouTube & Real Estate Sales

Star Trib: 'YouTube is Coming Trend'

The most interesting thing to me about the lead story in today's Star Tribune business section, "Increasing Numbers of Metro Realtors Turn to YouTube," wasn't the content, but the byline: the reporter is identified as "a University of Minnesota student reporter on assignment for the Star Tribune."

Hmm . . I wonder if there's any connection between using student reporters and the Star Tribune's bankruptcy filing last month??

It reminds me a little bit of Calvin Griffith, the one-time Minnesota Twins owner, who was famous for his penny-pinching ways. To "leverage" his more expensive, marquee players, Griffith famously relied on Triple A players -- more than a few who appeared to have been prematurely "promoted."

In fact, the student reporter is a good writer, and found some knowledgeable sources for the story.

So is he right about YouTube's growing role in real estate sales?

Virtual Tour vs. Home-made Video

I can't speak for all Realtors, but I don't use video's on YouTube to market my listings -- and have yet to personally encounter one who does.

Instead, I use something called a "virtual tour," which uses streaming video to give prospective Buyers a 360 degree impression of the home for sale. While it lacks the narrative and "personal touch" that's possible with YouTube, it also avoids the vertigo-inducing feeling you can get watching video shot with a shaky, hand-held camera.

Which is exactly the feeling I got watching the video of the Woodbury home that's featured in the article.

Ultimately, the purpose of any online marketing isn't to sell the home -- it's to generate showings, that is, get people in to see it.

What sells homes isn't how appealing they look in online photos or in a YouTube video . . it's how impressive they are once you're inside.

Taking Trulia for a Spin

Trulia.com Hits -- and (Mostly) Misses

Like Zillow.com, Trulia.com promises to arm prospective home buyers with reams of data about homes for sale.

Buyers can search by property type, price, square footage, zip code, etc.; get information about schools and other community info; and even pose questions to the Trulia. com "community" that generate email notices as responses come in.

The site's pro's and con's are discussed in an article in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal, "A Go-To Web Site for Home Buyers: Trulia.com offers an Insider's View of Real Estate."

So does Trulia work as advertised? And make no mistake -- advertising, not great market data or insider real estate scoop -- is what Trulia is selling. Ditto for Zillow ("Zillow for ditto??").

To test it, I ran a search (early Wed. am, 2/18) on zip code 55410 (Southwest Minneapolis) for single family homes between $400,000 to $500,000 to see what would come up.

Not coincidentally, I have a very active listing in that price bracket and area -- a high profile and aggressively marketed listing, I might add. The home is just two blocks south of Minneapolis' Lake Calhoun, and has been generating tons of (non-Trulia) traffic (see, next).

(Still) Not Ready for Prime Time

I originally listed 3929 Washburn Ave. South in early December; my client just reduced the price Monday from $479,900 to $429,900. Here's what I found -- and didn't:

--My search query generated 11 hits on Trulia.com . . . but did not include 3929 Washburn!

--Included on the list: the closest comp ("comparable sold property") for my listing, 4155 Drew Ave. According to Trulia, this home was still for sale for $475,000. In fact, Drew dropped from $475,000 to $450,000 on Oct. 29, went off the market December 8 as a "Pending" sale, and closed January 16.

--The closest (Active) competitor to my listing, 4128 Beard, was identified as "Address Not Disclosed," with an accompanying picture. Curiously, though, clicking on "listing preview" generated a map showing the block where the home is located. Trulia did have the correct price and home stat's.

--Another home, 4404 Abbott for $475,000, is identified as a Coldwell Banker Burnet listing. Which may come as a surprise to the owners -- because it does not appear to be for sale. If it is, it's a non-MLS listed For Sale By Owner, which is quite rare these days.

--Notwithstanding my "single-family" search criterion, one of the eleven hits was a nearby condo.

That's probably a long enough list for most readers (and all the time I have to parse Trulia's "hits").

Conclusion: if you want to really know what's really going on in the market, you'd better talk to someone who's got access to the Multiple Listing Service, and knows the inventory on it.

That would be . . . an experienced, local Realtor (Preferably, me!).