[HN Gopher] Terrible real estate agent photographs ___________________________________________________________________ Terrible real estate agent photographs Author : thunderbong Score : 677 points Date : 2023-06-30 11:44 UTC (11 hours ago) (HTM) web link (terriblerealestateagentphotos.com) (TXT) w3m dump (terriblerealestateagentphotos.com) | globenetinfo wrote: | [dead] | tomlin wrote: | This is a reddit, not HN. | dehrmann wrote: | The refugees have to go somewhere. | systemvoltage wrote: | Generally, the use of wide angle lens is a big nuisance in real | estate photos. Everything looks 2x bigger than it really is. I | understand they want to show more of the house, but take a few | normal 35-50mm lens pics please. | TrackerFF wrote: | Man these aren't even half bad, compared to many of the local | facebook market listings I see almost daily. | interfixus wrote: | > _The actual toilet in which Friedrich Nietzsche realised God is | dead_ | | The actual caption which made me wonder if he was wrong. | mike_hock wrote: | It's one of those websites that have a shelf life of five | minutes. | | It's _hilarious!_ I can 't believe those are _real_ pictures | taken by _real_ realtors! It wears off pretty quickly. | | And as is typical for these websites, eventually they get under | pressure to keep producing new content even when they don't have | any actual bad realtor pics on hand, so they start reaching. | | What do you expect them to do if the property is still inhabited | by the current tenant/owner? The doors both say "Diana," so what? | mtmail wrote: | Friends run https://mappery.org/ which is just photos of "maps | in the wild". All user contributed. They have a backlog of | several months of photos. Once you have enough followers you | get a lot of submissions. | | https://plaintextoffenders.com/ stopped after 10 years and 5880 | posts which is more than one post per day, all user | submissions. | rsynnott wrote: | > eventually they get under pressure to keep producing new | content even when they don't have any actual bad realtor pics | on hand | | Ever looked at a property website? There's an infinite supply. | | Myself, I prefer bad estate agent written copy; much of it is | comically awful. | mhb wrote: | Relax. Just have a chuckle. No one's asking you to invest in | their IPO. | glonq wrote: | Certainly not until I see a business plan that includes NFT | and LLM. /s | walthamstow wrote: | So many of these pics are in Britain and for good reason too, we | have some of the dodgiest and shoddiest housing stock in the | developed world. | LandR wrote: | The one with the all the white / biege colour books, I'd actually | love to have all my books on my bookshelves with the same colour. | I like all my books, but I think it's quite ugly with how | different all the colours are. | | Obviously I'd still want to have the name of the book on the | spine though. Or to be able to have it colour coded by genre or | something, just something more aesthetically pleasing really. | generalizations wrote: | Just make dustcovers for them. Print the names on the spines. | Would take a minute to do, but totally doable. | | (Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/993/) | lreeves wrote: | I can't tell for certain but I'm pretty sure that's a book- | shelf wallpaper pattern. | dmbche wrote: | Take half if a sunday organising it however you like - it's | worth it! | xyst wrote: | i wouldn't be surprised if most of the photos are from FSBO (for | sale by owner) listings | rightbyte wrote: | Many of those photos are not really funny, but sad. The author of | the site does not care if he kicks downwards. Bad taste memes | without the innocence of being a teenager ... | aktuel wrote: | This is entertaining, however in most cases it's not the photos | that are terrible. | tgv wrote: | It's more the captions than the photos. E.g., the one that says | "this is where the magic fails to happen", under a drab bedroom | with a double bed, is a fairly accurate picture of the current | state of that room. It also has a pillow on the bed that says | "the best grandma in the world". Not exactly the most exciting | thing, making the caption a bit cringy. Unless grandma is a | failed witch. | astura wrote: | Did you miss the "art" on the walls? | [deleted] | dwater wrote: | https://terriblerealestateagentphotos.com/post/7091754064184. | .. | | There's also erotic wall art, which in my mind an agent that | gave a shit would have removed for the listing. | oneeyedpigeon wrote: | The title is ambiguous; you could read it as "photos taken by | terrible real estate agents". | tokai wrote: | The byline is "Inexplicably bad property photographs". So its | clearly the photographs that are supposed to be bad. But | almost all of the photographs are objectively not bad. They | are exposed and framed correctly. Showing some (mostly bad) | real estate. | oneeyedpigeon wrote: | I took it to mean "these are bad photographs because they | fulfil their purpose (selling houses) badly". That covers | poor photographs AND poor properties. I'd argue the agents | are also poor (in the not-good-at-the-job sense) | themselves, as a result. A photograph can be technically | perfect and still bad. | thih9 wrote: | This seems more of a "terrible real estates" than "terrible real | estate agent photographs". | | Sure, sometimes it's the latter and sometimes it's both, but in | most cases a photo just shows the property and its flaws. And in | this context I'd say that's a good photograph. | obblekk wrote: | "As the sun set on a sleepy evening, all across town the washing | machines waited to make their move." | | Loved this site. Gave me a really nostalgic feeling of the web | from 2010 era. Early social media. | al_be_back wrote: | That's how all photos should be - original, no editing, no | staging; If I want excitment, I can Prompt a Generative-AI | platform to create mind-bendingly-creative imagery. | | I've wasted so many days viewing flats/apartments because the | Photos looked amazing, and the actual property was utterly awful. | | issues: - narrow/steep Staircases - very old photos (now the | place a dump) - fish-eye lenses (or similar) enlarging the space | - etc etc et bloody cetera :( | | nice post | asdff wrote: | Photos are basically showing you if the property is worth | inspecting by hand. I've seen it go the other way too, terrible | photos and a fine place. | nkozyra wrote: | > That's how all photos should be - original, no editing, no | staging; | | The second entry at the moment is an example of really bad | staging. | quietbritishjim wrote: | The second one is the fake bookshelves one (at least for me). | I think that the house really has been lived in with that | hideous wall. | | But yes there are plenty of bad staging photos, and at least | one totally ridiculous photoshop (the sofa planted completely | out of perpective and in front of a mirror that ought to be | reflecting it). | alok99 wrote: | I think the fake white bookshelf wallpaper has a certain | aesthetic about it. I would like it in an AirBnB type of | place, but definitely not in my own house. | | I would also want it to actually fit on the wall and not be | awkwardly cut off on the right edge. | al_be_back wrote: | well, either the 2nd photo is fake bookshelves (stock | image, white-label), or it's a painting/decorating job gone | horribly wrong lol | blowski wrote: | https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/1381671922/3d-books-on- | shelv... | | I'd guess it's this. I think you can colour it yourself | after you hang it. | oefrha wrote: | No editing you say? I raise you the funniest listing on the | site: | https://terriblerealestateagentphotos.com/post/6876067332328... | afterburner wrote: | This looks like a sofa took a selfie | Zak wrote: | > _fish-eye lenses (or similar) enlarging the space_ | | What focal length would you like the photos to be taken at? | timcobb wrote: | 28mm full frame | Zak wrote: | Because most smartphones are similar to that and most | people will think of it as the standard camera field of | view, or some other reason? | timcobb wrote: | To be honest I was just joking/thought for a second and | decided that 28mm probably sounds right: 16mm would be | useful (would show a lot) but also deceptive (too wide), | and anything more than 28mm like 35mm or 50mm would be | too narrow for capturing a space. | swarnie wrote: | Half of these just look like really terrible British homes people | have died in. | | IE bought 40 years ago, never changed, the children just want a | quick cash out now. | | I've viewed a dozen that would make it on to this blog this year | alone. | hereonout2 wrote: | Depressingly, am looking at these thinking yeah these are | pretty much par for the course in the UK. They must look | laughable from a US perspective, but quite standard for a UK | buyer without a boat load of equity built up. | mvdtnz wrote: | Fun website. Please make it less aggressive on the lazy loading. | weinzierl wrote: | I've heard that AirBnB used to send out their own photographers. | _" Do things that don't scale"_ I guess. | anigbrowl wrote: | This is amusing but more suitable for Twitter than HN. | [deleted] | furyofantares wrote: | Real estate photos have some bad incentives. | | It's a lot of work to visit a house you might want to buy, but | there's about 0 percent chance you buy one without doing so. So | the agent must optimize to get you there, essentially by lying | with photographs. | | This sets wrong expectations, and it's always disappointing to | visit because it's never what the photos told you. | | You get used to it as a buyer, but setting you up with wrong | expectations isn't really what the buyer or seller wants. | | Some of these aren't really bad photos, they're just a hard thing | to sell. And some others are bad only because they're too honest. | | Many are just bad of course. But the fire one is brilliant. | readenough wrote: | We made the offer on our current house without seeing it and I | know several others in the same situation. | hyperific wrote: | Reminds me a bit of fuckyournoguchicoffeetable.tumblr.com | Borrible wrote: | Why does Sartre's "No Exit" haunted by "Hotel California" as | Muzak come to mind when looking at these images? | | Living Hell Rooms | rootusrootus wrote: | These are just funny. Truly terrible real estate agent photos are | the ones that distort the image so much to make the room look | bigger that it has no real bearing on reality. | MiddleEndian wrote: | When I moved to Seattle back in 2011 and was looking for a place | to rent, I noticed that almost all the photos across multiple | listings looked like they were paintings or architectural | renderings or something. I could not figure out what was off | about them. | | A friend pointed out that the lighting was off because every | single one was photoshopped with one of a few pictures of a sunny | blue sky with just a few clouds in the background, despite likely | having been taken on a grey, fully cloudy day. | poulsbohemian wrote: | FWIW: NWMLS will fine agents if the photos have been "too" | doctored... adding some blue sky is generally considered ok, | but anything that hides a material defect or camouflages the | actual attributes of the house is a no no. | asdff wrote: | Does photoshopping furniture all over the flooring and walls | count? I've seen plenty of that, seems standard actually | since now you don't need to pay for staging. | mikeg8 wrote: | Digital staging always looks a little off though. Also, | open houses. If planning on an open house, which can be | very beneficial, paying for staging may be worth it. Was | for me at least. | brookst wrote: | I mean I would pay a huge premium for a sunny house in Seattle. | _ah wrote: | This is the famous "Czech Sky". | https://seattlebubble.com/blog/2010/09/30/real-actual-listin... | mike50 wrote: | A cash grab rip off of McManshion hell? Anyone citing the New | York Post on their website better be trolling or a parody. | craigching wrote: | Reminds me of https://www.cakewrecks.com :) | jahsome wrote: | An acquaintance of mine is an FBI investigator and moonlights as | a higher-grade Realtor. | | He would use the same memory card and high end camera both during | "stakeouts" for surveillance photos as well as listing photos for | the homes he was selling. | | One day he uploaded the entire contents of the memory card to the | MLS on one of his public listings, surveillance photos and all. | I'm pretty sure everything was up for a few days before being | cleaned up. | | It's been years but I still haven't made up my mind on whether | that makes him a worse agent of law enforcement or real estate. | passwordoops wrote: | I err to the side of incompetence, but want to believe it was a | deep cover op to penetrate an enemy org by making them think he | was compromised and had to act as a double agent, immediately | rendering him a triple agent on behalf of the FBI... | | Maybe I can moonlight as a writer in Hollywood | jahsome wrote: | The entire scenario is pretty unbelievable, and played out | like an awful Adam Sandler movie. If I hadn't witnessed it | with my own eyes, I would have trouble believing someone with | dueling top credentials such as his could possibly be such an | idiot. | smugma wrote: | Realtor top credentials? That made me LOL. | epcoa wrote: | Yeah, I know right? And the higher end you go has nothing | to do with any competence - your clientele becomes more | and more like the fucktards that bought into SBF. | jahsome wrote: | I mean to say that among Realtors he was pretty elite, | whatever that means. Put another way, he dealt in million | dollar listings, not just average family homes. | grimjack00 wrote: | Depending on the location, soon enough million dollar | listings will be average family homes. | jsight wrote: | If you were getting any significant number of million $ | homes, why would he keep the day job? Real estate | transaction fees are pretty high. | tomjakubowski wrote: | They might like the work. | pksebben wrote: | It's possible that his connections and encounters from | his work as an agent formed the foundation of his 'book' | - and being a real estate agent is like 99% about | building that book and 1% about doing things the rest of | us might refer to as "work". Many if not most of the | successful agents I know are moonlighters for this very | reason. | | Not ragging on real estate agents, it's not an easy thing | to pull off; convincing someone to hand you 3-6% of the | biggest financial transaction they've ever made just for | you to negotiate for what's probably a grand total of a | few hours and do some online shopping. And they do | provide value insofar as knowing the landscape can really | help a client avoid getting bent over a barrel. | | Source: did it myself (poorly, which is why I'm in tech). | hiatus wrote: | Government pension, avoiding traffic tickets among other | benefits, I'm sure. | cableshaft wrote: | Makes sense. Triples makes it safe. Triples are best. | | Clip: https://youtu.be/8Inf1Yz_fgk | reaperducer wrote: | _He would use the same memory card and high end camera both | during "stakeouts" for surveillance photos as well as listing | photos for the homes he was selling._ | | This really surprises me. | | I would have assumed that an FBI memory card used for taking | surveillance photos would have all kinds of security and | encryption on it for chain-of-custody purposes. Otherwise, the | photos won't stand up in court. | | The healthcare company I work for has cameras it uses for | photos, and for HIPAA reasons those cards are encrypted and | secured. They won't even mount on an unauthorized computer. | wpietri wrote: | Why would you say it wouldn't stand up in court? As long as | the agent shows up to say, "Yes, I took these photos of real | things that happened," that strikes me as the heart of the | evidence. | reaperducer wrote: | Because companies like Canon sell multi-thousand dollar | cameras and attachments to police agencies that are | designed to make sure photographs can't be tampered with so | that they're admissible in court. There can't be the | possibility that a rogue cop altered a photograph, or the | case can get thrown out. | | It's why the cameras police departments use cost 5x more | than the consumer versions. | convalescindrey wrote: | He surely should have lost his job or worse. | stronglikedan wrote: | I would have expected his job have guardrails in place to | prevent this sort of mishap, like a full audit log and chain | of custody of all evidence gathered during these | investigations, as well as SOPs on the handling and storage | of such evidence. | jahsome wrote: | Physical evidence is perhaps handled with a greater regard, | but from what I understand, background info gathered during | surveillance isn't always intended for use in court and | often really only serves to further the investigation | itself. Usually a stakeout is gathering enough probable | cause to effectively justify requesting search warrants, | which is when the "real" investigation kicks off. | | My shared connection to the Realtor dope I wrote about | originally is someone I'm quite close to, and through them | I've learned some pretty alarming realities of law | enforcement. | | It seems like the higher up the chain you look, the more | indifference or incompetence you find. | convalescindrey wrote: | > It seems like the higher up the chain you look, the | more indifference or incompetence you find. | | Well, let's say, you have a really competent | investigator. Is _that_ the person you want to be | promoted into a position where they are not doing any | investigating anymore? In that light it 's good to have | the incompetent higher up so that the people doing the | real work are those that are competent. :) | koheripbal wrote: | Nope. Usually all the court needs is his attestation that | he always had sole custody of the evidence | InCityDreams wrote: | >An acquaintance I know is an FBI investigator and moonlights | as a higher-grade Realtor. | | I really, really, really tried my best, but the only | appropriate i could think of was "Fucking hell!". | | Are you sure they're not a realtor masquerading as a....well, | at this point, who gives a shit? | jahsome wrote: | It's always stuck with me he was basically at the top of both | fields, yet somehow simultaneously and spectacularly | incompetent in both roles. | ruph123 wrote: | This reminds me of the "Worst of Chefkoch" blog [0]. | | Chefkoch is a German website where users share recipes. Some of | them show off their unholy contraptions in gross photos which is | then collected by the mentioned blog. | | [0]: https://www.tumblr.com/worstofchefkoch | SeanLuke wrote: | We just had pictures taken of our house to prepare for renting | it. I live in fear of being put on this website. | jonnycomputer wrote: | meh. i mean, there are bad photographs, and then there's bad home | decor (or at least, non-conventional ones). this site doesn't | really differentiate the two. not interested in laughing at | people for having unconventional taste, or for being poor, having | mental illness, or whatever. call me humorless if you want. | pnut wrote: | Image site that prevents me from pinch zooming on images. | quaddo wrote: | [dead] | wasmitnetzen wrote: | We only have about two years left to explain this masterpiece: | https://tmblr.co/ZATxmv1uEj_En | pelagicAustral wrote: | Over 9000 puzzle material right there. | eatonphil wrote: | Surprisingly frequently, photos of NYC listings are taken at | strange angles and are so blurry or small so as to be useless. I | thought this site was going to talk about these sorts of | listings. | | I really don't understand 1) how people take such | bad/blurry/small photos or 2) why they choose to use them in | listings. | bluedino wrote: | Wide angle HDR photos of listings should be outlawed. | mtmail wrote: | Interview with the author https://www.digitalesbild.gwi.uni- | muenchen.de/inexplicably-b... | | "KP: Is it important for you that the photos actually originate | from real estate marketplaces? If so, how do you verify their | origin? | | AD: Yes, that's actually really important, otherwise the blog is | just unverifiable user-generated content. If an image is | submitted without a link, or no agent's logo on the image, or I | can't find the source online, I tend not to use it. I'm sent lots | of images taken by agents of something funny or shocking they've | seen in a property that day, but if the image hasn't been taken | for the purposes of marketing the house, I don't use it." | junon wrote: | This is incredible given some of the listings. The fact one of | the pictures is the house on literal fire, coupled with this | context, goes to show that some people really don't belong | anywhere in marketing or sales. | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: | > The fact one of the pictures is the house on literal fire, | coupled with this context, goes to show that some people | really don't belong anywhere in marketing or sales. | | Namely, honest people who aren't total shitbags always trying | to put one over on their fellow human beings for profit. | jhony1104 wrote: | A youtube video from the buyer: | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbbwv-ZbXDk | pksebben wrote: | Man, that's actually pretty fascinating - to watch that | then the 10th video in the series (from a month ago) where | the roof is getting shingled. I'm usually turned off by the | "broadcast yourself" lifestyle but I'll admit this one is | pretty cool. | | HGTV, eat your heart out. | ethbr0 wrote: | Pt 10 link: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ebagb6zxZuU | | If you're in the business of making content and | advertising yourself... I could see how buying a burnt | mansion would be compelling. | | At the end of the day, my perspective is that builders | like decreasing risk. | | Anything saved after a fire is a risk. What's still | structurally sound? If so, what are its new limits? | | Custom = time and money. And everything in a post- | catastrophic damage rebuild is custom. | | Sure you can do it, but it might be cheaper (from a total | cost perspective) to demolish and rebuild from scratch. | xyst wrote: | I don't know what compels people to live in these | McMansions. Perceived status? Second vacation home? Fuck | you money? | | American lifestyle is so wasteful. It's disgusting. Climate | change is impacting everyone and these rich assholes | continue to waste resources on shit like this. | Domenic_S wrote: | You don't know what a McMansion is. This place is an | actual mansion. | gus_massa wrote: | You shouldn't have asked ... https://mcmansionhell.com/ | slim wrote: | The guy will pump the mansion and sell it for $5M in 3 | years | [deleted] | HeyLaughingBoy wrote: | Maybe they just like them? There's no accounting for | taste. | djbusby wrote: | There is no near-term direct consequences for their | choices. The feedback loop is too long. Not sure how to | solve for that. | pcdoodle wrote: | I agree that it's wasteful but let's leave "climate | change" out of it and call it what it really is: | ecological load. | brandall10 wrote: | RE: the fire, problem properties are actually a hot market... | flippers love those. In reality that's a fantastic photo for | marketing purposes. | stef25 wrote: | Isn't the damage from the fire trucks' water worse than the | fire damage ? It's like the whole house going through a | very long car wash. Wood, electricity must be wrecked. | rootusrootus wrote: | That much damage means it's getting gutted to the | structure to be repaired anyway. And wood is pretty much | impervious to water, especially a one-time thing like a | drenching from a fire truck. We build houses in pouring | rain all the time, it's not a big deal. Sometimes it adds | a week or so to the build time, but frequently it has no | effect at all. | jandrese wrote: | If you were planning to gut the place to flip it anyway | this is not a problem. | lelandfe wrote: | "Motivated seller" | Fatnino wrote: | Firesale | 8ytecoder wrote: | It's a great excuse and the price is usually right to | rebuild to your taste. Almost all new construction happens | in areas that are newly developed. It's cheaper to rebuild | these houses than to tear down one that's sold for a price | that includes the structure. | fallinghawks wrote: | Hot market indeed | intrasight wrote: | Not exactly the same but close. There was a listing a couple | blocks away from my current house. Nice brick colonial. | Listing said "completely renovated". The exterior had been | painted. In zillow, you can click a "see it in Street View | which I did. The image was of a house gutted by a fire. I | remember thinking "how could the listing agent not notice | that?" and then "Perhaps there's nothing they can do in | Zillow to turn off that feature". Well, the following week | the Street View images had been updated. Which resulted in me | wondering if there's a special Google hotline to request a | driveby. | soperj wrote: | https://terriblerealestateagentphotos.com/post/7073623358404. | .. | | For anyone else who wanted to see that one specifically. | afavour wrote: | When I see something like that I just assume the realtor | knows they've been handed a dud listing and is expending as | little effort on it as they possibly can. | raincole wrote: | > goes to show that some people really don't belong anywhere | in marketing or sales. | | Yes, for example, people who think it's a bad idea to show a | picture of that house on fire. | | You can't hide the fact it's burned before. It would be | illegal. Making it clear so the potential clients think it's | cheap is your best chance. | dreen wrote: | And it got sold! I happen to remember this | | https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64389615 | | I suppose leading with a picture of it actually on fire is | better than a post or pre fire photo. | hinkley wrote: | Our old house had problems. When we listed it, the best | prospect thought we were stupid not honest, so he kept | trying to get us to lower the price when inspection turned | something up. In retrospect maybe a picture with the | proverbial roof on fire might have been a good idea. | | Here's the thing about getting a house loan: If you try to | buy a house for too far under or over market value and | can't explain why it's that far under market value, it sets | off all sorts of red flags for lenders. Before we bought | that house we passed on another because it was a unicorn in | its neighborhood and our agent was having a terrible time | coming up with documentation of comparable listings in a | reasonable distance from the house. And then I discovered | water damage and we bailed. | | If you buy it for 15% under market and have a bunch of | inspections that say why, that's less of a problem. | robocat wrote: | In New Zealand, houses can be sold "as is" which means | cash only. It usually means that insurance cannot be | acquired for the house, and mortgages always require | insurance. It means there are bargains still available in | my city (Christchurch) because there were so many houses | damaged by the earthquake a decade ago. There are still | houses that are about 2/3 the price compared to similar | insurable houses. Few people can buy the as-is properties | because most people need a mortgage to buy a house. | People with cash usually buy better houses. A saw an as- | is sold the other day to a buyer from the US. | | Insurance policies have some queer rules that all | insurers share - perhaps due to building code, or maybe | due to a common reinsurer? | | Your floor cannot have more than 50mm (two inches) drop | between two corners of the house, as it can't be insured. | Unless you can show the unlevel floor existed pre- | earthquake, in which case you can get insurance! Wierd. | js2 wrote: | Life imitates art: | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFwS_Dqd-IU | | (Scene from Synecdoche, New York.) | zirgs wrote: | Of course it got sold. The seller was completely honest | about the condition of the property. | LanceH wrote: | You're going to have to disclose the fire. May as well | use it to get lots of people looking if you're confident | in the rebuild. | | I do like imagining trying to sell it during the fire | based on apparent damage done and the perceived | capabilities of the fire dept. in stopping it. | B1FF_PSUVM wrote: | The Crassus approach? | https://imperiumromanum.pl/en/curiosities/crassus-fire- | briga... | boringg wrote: | I thought that too. First fire department - ruthless! | meshaneian wrote: | How did they not say "fire sale"?? | Gordonjcp wrote: | Would that not be a total writeoff, given that it's a | timber building? | tomcam wrote: | Only after insurance is factored in | https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc515 | Gordonjcp wrote: | Not sure what taxes would have to do with it? | | You'd have to bulldoze that flat and start from scratch. | ejstronge wrote: | Write-off is an accounting term that would seem not to | have a meaning outside of taxes. | olddustytrail wrote: | Its meaning outside of taxes is something which has | dropped to zero value. So if you damage your car beyond | repair, for example, that would be a "write off". It | means it's not worth the repair costs because it's | cheaper to buy a new one. | JohnFen wrote: | Right. What it doesn't mean is that the thing being | written off is valueless, though. I've seen several | perfectly safe and drivable cars written off because of | cosmetic damage that would have cost more to fix than the | car was worth. But the cars were otherwise fine. | | Except this part: | | > because it's cheaper to buy a new one. | | is not true. A write-off is because the repairs exceed | the fair market value of the thing being written off. But | the thing is used, not new. The fair market value is | likely to be well below the cost of replacing it with | something new. | jorvi wrote: | > It means it's not worth the repair costs because it's | cheaper to buy a new one. | | No, it just means insurers are assholes rigging the game. | | A simple example: my personal MacBook broke. MacBooks are | written off in 5 years. My insurer only wants to pay the | surplus value (EUR200). | | I tell them okay, instead of the EUR200 find me a | replacement MacBook of the same model and year with | approximately the same config. "Sorry sir we don't do | that." | | Okay, do they think I can find the same MacBook for | EUR200? "Probably not sir.." | | Fuck insurers. | pessimizer wrote: | Property in Franklin, Tennessee is obscenely expensive, for | no good reason. | avalys wrote: | Nah, whoever chose that photo knew exactly what they were | doing - they chose a photo that will appeal to their target | market, which is people looking to get deal on buying a house | that they will repair and flip for a profit. | | The picture simultaneously shows that it is a nice, stately | house, and also that it suffered significant damage which it | needs to be repaired. It's the perfect choice. | | There is zero chance that anyone in the market for a house in | general would choose to buy this one, so there's no point in | choosing a pretty picture which hides the damage. You'd just | be wasting your time and that of your potential customers. | mcpeepants wrote: | This was my initial impression to, but up-thread there's a | link to an article about the buyers. Tl;dr they are | wealthy, wanted a house in the area, and are "super stoked" | to rebuild it and live there forever. | brandall10 wrote: | Well that's the other target market, those who buy it for | the land to build a custom home. | | In both cases, the marketing was correct. It's sorta a | miss for the article author to not understand that. | rootusrootus wrote: | IIRC that's not a flip house. That's in a wealthy, | desirable area and what is really being sold is the land. | It's not nearly affordable enough to make flipping a good | business plan. | itronitron wrote: | That's just flipping for wealthy people. | notahacker wrote: | The worst ones aren't the funny ones where the homeowners | have terrible taste, or the one on fire which was brilliant | marketing for a home nobody was going to buy under the | assumption it hadn't been on fire. | | The worst ones are the subtly bad ones that just manage to | make perfectly adequate rooms look much dingier or more | cramped than they actually are because they settled for the | first cheap snap they could manage without caring at all | about the lack of lighting and didn't even move stuff like | clothes drying racks that fill up floor area. | | There's a particular flat I might actually consider buying | that's on the market for a third less than the identical flat | upstairs for over a year without selling. One of those | listings has a "view" photo that shows extensive river | estuary views on a sunny day. The other has the basically | identical view on a day so wet and grey all you can see is | the road and warehouse roofs. | parkersweb wrote: | And for that reason the horse photo is still one of my long | standing favourites: | https://terriblerealestateagentphotos.com/post/62824754189 | stef25 wrote: | With my parents we rented a house once in Italy. There were | two ponies in the garden, they just walked all over the house | whenever they wanted to. There was one in the kitchen most of | the time. In the early-mid 80's people just accepted whatever | (as my parents did, after driving 4000Km there and back with | my dad chain smoking in the car and us kids in the back not | wearing seat belts). The whole experience involved breaking | at least half a dozen laws & regulations. | praptak wrote: | This must be the inspiration for Salvatore Ganacci "Horse" | clip, the vibes are eerily similar. | rvba wrote: | Does the author steal the photos or asks for permission? | themadturk wrote: | It sounds like they accept submissions, since they rarely put | up photos that don't have links to the actual real estate | listing the pictures comes from. | jimmydddd wrote: | I like that they try to authenticate the photos as being from | actual listings. Of course people could generate crazy photos. | These are kind of just slightly bad, which makes it | interesting. Also, I think the captions add a lot. | hamedsargolzaee wrote: | [flagged] | taylorius wrote: | Aren't quite a lot of these just photos of terrible or ridiculous | properties? | pamoroso wrote: | There are often better photos of $0.99 eBay items than real | estate listings worth hundreds of thousands of Dollars. | MarkusWandel wrote: | Real-estate photos have improved a lot in recent years. Too much, | maybe. Ultra wideangle lenses make rooms seem much bigger and | airier than they are. | | But I remember the days where the agent would stand at the end of | the driveway and snap a polaroid. Invariably these were the | "garage forward" kind of house, which from that perspective | looked like a big garage door with a house kind of attached in | the back, in a by-the-the-way fashion. Awful. Of course that | vintage of house (mid 80s) kind of was that way. | paxys wrote: | Real estate agents can only do so much. While some of the | photographs are truly terrible, in other cases it's the subject | matter that is unsalvageable. | j00pY wrote: | I actually used to live in a flat share with the author. I don't | know if that's a good thing or a bad thing | candyman wrote: | This reminds me of a site that I miss that was called Regretsy | and I often had tears in my eyes because it was so funny. Bravo! | janeerie wrote: | Oh I haven't thought about Regretsy in ages! That was a good | one. | everdrive wrote: | I was really hoping it was going to be photos of how silly real | estate agents look in their profiles. | lowercased wrote: | That's what the domain name suggests. Every realtor photo on a | business card I've seen always looks like they went to Glamour | Shots at a local mall. | d136o wrote: | When I was looking for an apartment to rent in Palo Alto I found | a great deal on rent because I visited a place listed on | Craigslist that had awful photos. | | It turns out the owner was just an older man who wasn't good with | tech, the place was pretty great in person and I ended up living | there for a couple of years. | | Normal untouched photos are more honest. I also dislike when | photos make it ambiguous which unit in a duplex is for sale, or | don't make clear/hide that it's only part of a lot or something | like that. | artur_makly wrote: | oh dang.. i was expecting something more along the lines of this: | https://awkwardfamilyphotos.com/ | | .... but for agent portraits. | dahwolf wrote: | I'm not in the market for a new home but still do a weekly check | on property for sale in my town, just for the entertainment (and | sometimes educational) value of the indoor photos. | | I'm still only an amateur voyeur. Pros in my country would attend | open home day, where you can go into homes for sale without an | appointment. You take your spouse, tour the homes, feast on the | free cake and drinks, and never make any offer. A fun and | affordable day out for the family, kind of like a real-world | Pinterest. | mxuribe wrote: | Oh wow; the captions are devilishly hilarious! | igetspam wrote: | I don't always have good days and I love that there are things | like this. Some of those quotes have me rolling. | quaddo wrote: | [dead] | msluyter wrote: | "Limes Against Humanity." ;) | mxuribe wrote: | Absolutely brilliant! :-D | altacc wrote: | Finally, somewhere to share my a list of dubious property | listings! In Norway agents hire house stylists to make a house | look good. Airbeds dressed up to look like somebody just got up, | magazine pictures on the wall, etc... often to a farcical level | in a rundown house. | | On a similar theme is Zillow Gone Wild | https://twitter.com/zillowgonewild and McMansion Hell | https://mcmansionhell.com/ | mjb wrote: | I viscerally dislike McMansion Hell. It's so mean-spirited and | snobbish. People build themselves homes in the suburbs for | their families to live comfortably and safely, and some jerks | on the internet act all superior about how they have better | taste. It sucks. | astura wrote: | Most suburban homes aren't McMansions. | ansible wrote: | > _... or their families to live comfortably and safely, ..._ | | Well, it is safe-ish, in that street crime is usually not too | high. | | But living in car-centric suburbs, with a lack of common, | public spaces and physical and social isolation isn't | _really_ comfortable, or that good for your mental and | emotional health. | bamfly wrote: | The parts that make them bad are mostly about trying to make | the houses look (even) bigger than they are, and making them | look fancier than they are _as cheaply as possible_. | | That kind of inept, absurd pretension is a recipe for comedy. | kashunstva wrote: | > to live comfortably and safely... | | If the design goals for the houses presented on McMansion | Hell were simply that - comfort and safety - I'd have to | agree with your assessment. But houses appear there because | they seemingly have one over-arching design goal which is to | appear impressive and thereby signal the owner's wealth. Most | of the content points to the sheer purposelessness of certain | architectural features, highlighting the owner's need for | recognition over utility. | OkayPhysicist wrote: | McMansions are a symptom of wanting to _appear_ rich, they | 're expensive, but nowhere near as expensive as something | built with an architect aiming for taste. | glonq wrote: | I immensely enjoy McMansion Hell! | | Kate Wagner does a fanastic job of distilling the history and | language and sensibilities of architecture down into | something that anybody can appreciate. | | And quite the opposite of snobbish, she presents her | critiques in a raw, geeky, low-brow format that would | probably feel at home on 4chan or SomethingAwful. | | She is not knocking down regular suburban homes and families | -- she critiques the top few percent who live in | ostentatiously monstrous homes. | | Kate is a treasure and her site is a pleasure. | [deleted] | post-it wrote: | I'm just trying provide a safe and comfortable home for my | family, me, and my dozen baluster cherub statues. | leephillips wrote: | I love McMansion Hell. It's hilarious and I've learned from | it. People with atrocious taste and enough money to impose it | on the world should be exposed to ridicule. | glonq wrote: | The British seem to have a well-established culture of | "taking the piss" out of one's superiors, whereas the US | seems to have zero tolerance for biting the hands of the | corporate overlords who feed us. | | I'm saying that as a Canadian who is exposed to both | cultures. Also _sorry_. | mjb wrote: | McMansion Hell isn't about taking the piss out of one's | superiors, it's about looking down on the lower classes | without the refined architectural taste of the author and | audience. | | It's punching down. | astura wrote: | Sounds like you've never seen the website you are | commenting on. | leephillips wrote: | I don't see how you could describe it that way. He's not | ridiculing poor people. His target houses are usually | fantastically opulent, selling for well over a million | dollars. It's the same genre as publishing pictures of | Donald Trump's gold plated bathrooms. | | In fact, the article you posted here traffics to a large | extent, with either implied or explicit ridicule, in the | attempts of what look like struggling and desperate | people to sell their neglected properties. | | One should not laugh at people with bad taste. It's bad | taste combined with power and money (Trump: a convenient | example) where the lack of taste makes the world uglier, | because it's jammed into the public eye. | glonq wrote: | Have you actually visited the McMansion Hell website? It | is literally the exact opposite of what you are | describing. | | It's looking down on people with >million-dollar, ten- | thousand square foot homes that are also designed and | decorated in an ugly and/or antiquated manner. | | And the author is never shy to admit her own low-key low- | brow style preferences; I don't sense any | refined/pretentious vibes at all. | jonnycomputer wrote: | Possibly. But I also tend to think that the idea is to | mock the tastelessness of new money, but not, the more | educated and refined tastes of old money families. | OkayPhysicist wrote: | Well, yeah. The nouveau riche are targets, because | they're scorned by both the people without money, and by | people with money. Combined with a combination of | insecurity about their newfound wealth, and a lack of the | cultural norms and social ties that old money has, and | hilarity ensues. | jonnycomputer wrote: | Yes. But I think there is something problematic about | that, in of itself. Old money isn't any more acceptable | just because they (supposedly) have better aesthetics. In | fact, on the face of it, there is a lot to congratulate | the nouveau rich, relative to old money, don't you think? | In most cases, they worked for it. | quaddo wrote: | [dead] | jhoechtl wrote: | Highly subjective. Can't recommend. Seems like some aesthetics | wieners gathered to dismiss others. | elliottinvent wrote: | If only all properties were pitched expertly by the vendor, like | the "never ending property" [1] | | With high end 70s chintz and cheese production values. | | 1. | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kynbFDou6GI&feature=youtu.be&c... | borbulon wrote: | Our house had photos that made it all look so small and close, | which is the exact opposite of what you get when you walk in the | door. | | We were supposed to be auditioning the RE agent but we walked out | saying "this is the house we're going to buy." | tempodox wrote: | Many of them are veritable horrors, but I find Malcolm's | staircase somewhat interesting. | jroseattle wrote: | Lots of these types of sites from the past ten years, where the | best ones capture the oddity of the photo with a hilarious | caption. This one in particular seems really well done. | | I expect the next phase of these sites liberally employ the use | of AI tools for image generation, i.e. "an apartment with a lawn | mower in it". | kleiba wrote: | In my opinion, if anything, what makes these pictures less than | ideal is the property itself which has nothing to do with the | real estate agent. It's actually a net positive for potential | buyers seeing all aspect of the object - what else should the | agent do, hide unfortunate corners? Right, like anyone who | actually cares to go and look at the property before buying it | (so almost everyone) would not see these things anyway at | inspection time. | | What I am used to in the area I currently live in, is much, much | worse - and actual incompetence on the side of the agent. And | what's worse, you see it _all the time_! Here are a few | highlights: | | - A total of five pictures for the property, all of which are of | the outside, none of the rooms. | | - Blurry pictures as if someone first had to learn not to move | the camera in the middle of taking a shot. | | - Severely tilted pictures, as if taken on a boat. | | - Three pictures of some door (the same door each time, mind you) | | - ... | | You might think this is a joke, and I wish it was. Unfortunately, | though, this kind of thing is _commonly_ found on real estate | websites where I live. I don 't know how anyone can ever get | traction - I guess it must be a seller's market. | WarOnPrivacy wrote: | > You might think this is a joke, and I wish it was. | Unfortunately, though, this kind of thing is commonly found on | real estate websites | | The 2021 ad for our current rental had 1 interior picture. It | was an old crayon drawing on wrinkled paper. The listing got 50 | applications in the 2 hours it was up. | | In that market, an ad that said nothing but 'Rental Available' | would have been flooded with applications - every day. | | It's less awful now. Many people have transitioned to | homelessness and the rental market has eased up a little bit. | FastEatSlow wrote: | > Many people have transitioned to homelessness and the | rental market has eased up a little bit. | | Well that's a sad state of affairs. | spi wrote: | I'm not sure we're looking at the same photos... for some of | them, sure, you're right. But many are bad photos like those | you mention, except more egregious (hence they deserve the | place on that site). The "garden" in one picture is rather | awful, but why put that plastic chair facing against the wall | to make it creepy on top of that? Why take a picture half naked | (or not half - thankfully we'll never know) in front of a | mirror? Why the cheap Christmas tree? Why those two sad soft | toys in the corner of an empty room? Why a mower in the living | room? Why include an old man watching TV in your photo? | | As for the points you say, I'm not into real estate, I think | often it comes down to limitations from reality. You know, | actual _people_ live in those apartments you're trying to have | pictures of. Maybe they'll just deny you entry (it's their | place, after all, they might be renting and thus not give a | damn about you willing to sell the property), in which case all | you have to show is pictures from the outside. Or they might | only agree to send you pictures themselves, in which case | blurry pictures is all you get. | | Of course, in general it's mostly incompetence, but hey, if | everybody were perfect at their job the world would look | totally different, in more important sectors than real | estate... | tiltowait wrote: | When my sister bought her house, she felt like the current | owners were actively trying to make it unappealing. Weird | photos (not as bad as these, mind), staying home during open | house, etc. | | Turns out, the wife _was_ trying to make it unappealing. She | didn 't want to move, but her husband did. I wouldn't be | surprised if something like that was the case in at least | some of these photos. | afterburner wrote: | If the husband was determined to move, that just meant they | would get less money, not that they wouldn't sell. Oh well | jsight wrote: | Yeah, I was really expecting a lot of blown out shot with | terrible exposure, and weird angles. | | This was mostly just bad houses. In some cases, the | photographer seemed to do a decent job of making the best of | it. | stefncb wrote: | Isn't it like that everywhere? It's been this way everywhere | I've ever lived. | wombat-man wrote: | Yeah, or they just reuse the photos from a listing in the early | 2000s, which is the lowest res camera phone picture. Seriously? | just go to the property and snap a few pics with your phone. | Fezzik wrote: | This is a fun blog. It reminds me of old sites like Fuck Yeah | Mens Wear, that smartly poked fun at consumerism. These days such | pages seem to get commercialized and soul-crushed so quickly we | hardly get time to appreciate them. | gbrindisi wrote: | In italy the real estate agent can be sidestepped if you know | directly the seller, as a consequence the ads they put up are | comically balanced to trigger your curiosity but not too much | revealing to let you figure out where the place is. | | Such a terrible experience as a buyer, i'm baffled this whole | charade hasn't been disrupted by tech already. | SanderNL wrote: | This is IMO a good example of a situation where tech or lack of | it isn't the problem. | zabzonk wrote: | indeed - one of the uk's biggest on-line estate agents value | was reduced to just about zero recently | | https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/17/online- | esta... | arkitaip wrote: | At some point you would have to actually visit the property, | though? Couldn't you sidestep the real estate agent anyways? | whynotmaybe wrote: | In Quebec it's starting to be disrupted by duproprio.com where | the sellers manages the sale themself. The company takes the | pictures & 3d scan and provides legal support. | | I guess real estate agents are so good at marketing that we | believe it's a hard job that we can't do ourselves. | convalescindrey wrote: | > are so good at marketing | | Yes, that's their job and primary purpose. Yes it's hard. | Most people have anxiety to even talk to their neighbors | without sweating. | | Sure there are lots of idiots out there, like in every | profession. But those who are not idiots are providing a | valuable service. Try selling your house yourself and then | let's chat again about how it's not a hard job that you could | just do yourself. | whynotmaybe wrote: | What puzzles me the most is that some people have no | trouble doing dangerous DIY like fixing their lawnmower | with some duct tape but are scared of selling their house | because "legal stuff". | | Real estate agent are always hitting the nail with the | message that we won't have to worry if we hire them. And | because of that message, people have a tendency to think | that selling is worrying. | | If you are genuinely worried with the selling process, like | if you have trouble speaking to your neighbour, sure hire | an agent. Same if you don't have the time to do it | yourself. You'll pay them for the real service they provide | and their real purpose. | | If you are worried because they told you it's worrying, see | for yourself. | convalescindrey wrote: | Every apartment and house I've bought up to this day in | my life (and I've moved quite a lot over the decades) | would have been almost an impossible sale by the owners | themselves. Their realtor was able to present the place, | reply with empathy (that is, understood where I was | coming from and what my interests are) and get back to me | with important info about the property and district that | the owners themselves usually had little clue about. The | owners themselves where often awkward, hard to talk to | and overall pretty clueless. | | So, all those folks definitely got something out of | hiring a realtor. Nothing to do with "legal stuff". Most | people are just terrible at presenting and selling | things. And that's fine. Claiming otherwise is closing | your eyes for what's out there in the real world. | snickmy wrote: | I bet 95% of those come from England. | yodsanklai wrote: | From the title, I expected much worse. | Tade0 wrote: | I'm looking for an apartment at the moment, and I already amassed | quite a collection of such photos. | | My favourite is an attic divided by a wall of plasterboard, where | on one side you have a full bathroom, on the other a bed. Floor | panels everywhere, especially next to the tub. Only one window - | on the side of the bathroom. | stef25 wrote: | These are almost flattering compared to some of the ones I came | across recently. Check out these beauties | | https://www.immoweb.be/en/classified/mixed-use-building/for-... | | https://www.immoweb.be/en/classified/house/for-sale/anderlec... | | https://www.immoweb.be/en/classified/apartment/for-sale/brux... | steele wrote: | Generative AI staging is hilarious | xmdx wrote: | reminds me of reddit.com/r/spottedonrightmove but this one has | properties with interesting design decisions | hospitalJail wrote: | About 10 years ago, me and my wife took LSD on a vacation, and | the sheer uselessness of a real estate agent appeared to us. | | What does a real estate agent do? They unlock doors. | | Who are real estate agents? We can all think of a few real estate | agents, none of them are top performers. They are usually on | their ~4th career before the age of 30. They are the type of | person to wear a suit in public to pretend that it makes them | important. | | I know an exception to the rule, except he sells multi-family | real estate, and owns ~10 single family homes himself. I'd hardly | call him a real estate agent at this point, he is a landlord. | nvr219 wrote: | It's definitely a MLM type racket | pg5 wrote: | Have you both bought and sold a primary residence without a | realtor? | | Interested to hear about the experience. | nmcfarl wrote: | I have done both (I have also purchased with a realtor), | all in rural Oregon. | | I did a FSBO in a tiny town and the property was purchased | directly by a buyer that was also without a realtor, but | both sides had a mortgage from a national bank, and | inspections happened, there was a boilerplate contract (the | same one the previous realtor used for us buying the house, | the lawyer's name was on the contract) and a title company. | The transaction was on rails. Could not have been smoother | or cheaper. | | For that place we knew the local market was small and the | rumor mill active and figured we could FSBO for a bit | before we contacted a real estate agent if we needed access | to the MLS and non local buyers. | | As for the time we purchased without an agent, we purchased | a few 100 acre ranch from our family and did so with a real | estate contract, seller financing and no mortgage. It would | have been difficult to get financing at a reasonable rate | for a property of this kind. This involved a fair bit of | time dealing with lawyers and neither party is happy with | the lawyers but the deal got done. | | Anyhow - both experiences were good. | codekilla wrote: | Bought current house without agent (very desirable part of | Los Angeles). Selling now without agent. If you buy with an | agent you put yourself at a disadvantage because the | selling agent will need to split the commission (typically | 2.5% a piece or so). When you make an offer on a home | without a buying agent, suddenly your offer looks a lot | more attractive to the selling agent, who is the only point | of contact the seller has into what is happening with their | property in terms of offers. People wonder how we got our | house so cheap--bank on the real estate agents being | greedy. They are the worst, period. I have not met a single | one who will not double end a deal in 10 years in the LA | market. Not sure how the current sale will go, but I will | not work with an agent, I've dealt with too many to make | that mistake. | poulsbohemian wrote: | >If you buy with an agent you put yourself at a | disadvantage because the selling agent will need to split | the commission | | I can't speak to California law, but this isn't | explicitly true in either market where I work. Non-agency | is a thing in some places, and depending on the terms of | the listing contract the listing agent might pocket both | sides regardless if there isn't a buyer's agent. | | I'd also argue that there are a lot of properties where a | buyer benefits from expertise on the part of an agent - | either negotiating strategies or local market concerns. | In my market for example understanding environmental and | construction issues and value add that a buyer won't know | without doing meaningful research on their own. | smugma wrote: | I've seen this happen many times in LA. Never in SF, and | once in Oakland. I don't have much experience outside | California but helped friends in Chicago buy a condo. It | definitely helped that they didn't have an agent and | leveraged the listing agent. | | Not having an agent is generally a big asset when buying | a home, much more than anything an agent will bring to | you. | poulsbohemian wrote: | >definitely helped that they didn't have an agent and | leveraged the listing agent. | | Ooof. Gotta be careful with this one and understand | agency law in your respective state. That listing agent | may not actually be working for you the buyer, even if | they help you fill out the paperwork. | dwater wrote: | They're not working for the seller either, they're | working for themselves. They are not a fiduciary to any | party. You can get screwed by an agent regardless of who | hired them. | kube-system wrote: | > What does a real estate agent do? They unlock doors. | | > Who are real estate agents? We can all think of a few real | estate agents, none of them are top performers. They are | usually on their ~4th career before the age of 30. They are the | type of person to wear a suit in public to pretend that it | makes them important. | | Let's not pretend the software engineering world isn't full of | hubris. Even the title itself is illegal in parts of the world | because our career isn't a real engineering field. | jandrese wrote: | I wouldn't go quite that far. They also handle the paperwork | and coordination with the other agent, which is not a trivial | job. It's highly questionable if the value they add is worth 5% | of the gross sale price of the house, especially in our | amazingly inflated markets, but few if any agents seem | interested in working at hourly rates. | poulsbohemian wrote: | >few if any agents seem interested in working at hourly rates | | It's because most agents work as self-employed contractors | under the auspices of a brokerage, and the brokerage is not | going to allow that. And/ or, in a state using standardized | legal documents, we don't even have a form for that, which | means we'd need to come up with an hourly contract from | scratch - and the brokerages will put their foot down on that | too. | robertlagrant wrote: | In the UK paperwork is mostly done - surprisingly slowly - by | lawyers. | poulsbohemian wrote: | This is the practice in many countries and even several US | states. The listing services we have in the US are not | universal either, which I think performs a really important | role in providing information to the public and creating a | more level informational playing field. | jsight wrote: | Same in the US, and for a separate set of fees on top of | the realtors 5-6%. | rcme wrote: | Agents are facilitators of the deal. They are the lubricant | that gets the deal done. | smugma wrote: | Agents are the friction that increases transaction costs. | scott_s wrote: | Strongly disagreed. Unless you regularly buy and sell houses, | when it comes to buying a house, you are out of your depth. You | need the help of a professional, and you want one who is | looking out for your interests. | | I admit _finding_ a real estate agent who you can trust is not | easy. I don 't know how to do it, other than from who you know. | I was lucky, and ours was a friend of my wife's family. | bombcar wrote: | Just find one who has been working through a few downturns. | Hot markets spawn real estate agents like locust, but | downturns burn out all but the best. | cwilkes wrote: | What does a software engineer do? They type on a keyboard. | anonzzzies wrote: | I had a client who only sold 5million$+ estates and I went with | them a few times on showings and I bought quite a few houses | myself in the 5-20k range. The effort made by the estate agent | was the same; close to nothing. I don't know what's wrong with | these people and they definitely don't deserve the commission. | But when I ask just give me the location and the keys, they | don't do that. So totally useless and yet they want to come | with you. | arkitaip wrote: | Yes, just hand the keys to someone's home to a complete | stranger, what could possibly go wrong. | anonzzzies wrote: | Here you have to sign a contract (so competitors or the | owner don't sell it cheaper to you) and they take a copy of | your passport and proof of residency. So not exactly | strangers. And in this cases where I asked for the keys, | they were local realestate agents I went to school with. | Not that anybody locks their door over here; it's just | often not clear what the location is to prevent personal | negotiations. | dna_polymerase wrote: | > it's just often not clear what the location is to | prevent personal negotiations. | | Oh no, we had a bug once when our software uploaded the | property to the web with the address unlocked. The place | got swarmed by people who would just enter the property | at any time, not giving a damn about the owner's privacy. | They were ringing the doorbell, asking about the price | and if they could see the place right then and there. | Agents are the first line of defense against shitty | people. | hospitalJail wrote: | Eh, with security cameras for ~$20 per camera, you can buy | a lot of security cameras for the 25k commission. | | Heck, you can buy over 1000 security cameras and still save | money. | tzs wrote: | There was a now deleted reply to that, probably intended | as a joke, about how the cost of electricity for all | those cameras would wipe out the profit. | | I was curious and did the math. I'm using motion | sensitive security cameras that only record and upload | when motion is detected. At the places with the most | expensive residential electricity in the US or the EU | 1000 of those cameras would need under $5 of electricity | per year. There's also the thing that the cameras upload | to. I don't know how much power that uses, but it is | powered by a 5 W USB power supply so can't be more than | $22/year. | [deleted] | Solvency wrote: | This is the most cliched HN thought pattern I've ever | seen. | asdff wrote: | Realtors thrive on nepotism though and double ending jobs with | their friends or even themselves. There's plenty of homes that | are bought and sold without hitting any public listing site. | Agents just might call up another agent the know and go "Hey I | got a buyer for a 3br in these neighborhoods, you guys got | anything coming up?" and vice versa. Without an agent you are | locked out of that side of the market and probably at a serious | disadvantage, overpaying for property that didn't manage to | sell through this "premarket" for whatever reason which could | in fact be for red flag issues. | yodsanklai wrote: | > What does a real estate agent do? They unlock doors. | | I think it depends on the local market, but this was certainly | my feeling when trying to rent a place in London. I visited 15 | properties in a couple of days. Most agents just unlocked the | door, sometimes seeing the place for the first time, most often | clueless about the place. Actually a couple of them weren't | even able to open the door and didn't have the right key. | jon_adler wrote: | This is probably because in London, the flat will rent in a | few days anyway. There isn't any incentive for relatable | agents to try any harder. | dataengineer56 wrote: | In the South East of England I found that estate agents were | very proactive, stereotypical Audi TT-driving widemen who wore | suits and had good haircuts and would work hard to make a sale. | When it came time to sell then I found them to be lazy and | almost useless, taking bad pictures, writing incorrect | descriptions and showing no urgency. I guess they figure that | the house will sell one way or another and the difference | between a good or bad listing might only be a few % of the sale | price, which means their cut will only change by PS100 or so. | | Alternately in the North East then I had a much different | experience (albeit only on the buying side) - estate agents | were almost exclusively women who answered phones, and viewings | were done by the sellers themselves. | HeyLaughingBoy wrote: | When I bought my first house, my agent was invaluable. He | certainly helped me avoid a bunch of bad decisions. | | He never actually said "don't buy this house" at any property | we looked at, but he would point out things I wouldn't have | thought about like, "it's nice, but I wonder if there's a lot | of noise from that street later in the day when people are home | from work" or "I guess you wouldn't want to play with marbles | in here" (house with a sloping floor likely due to foundation | shifting) and a lot of other remarks to point out things that | I, as an apartment dweller, wouldn't have considered. | | I may have gotten that first house entirely due to him: I | wanted to lowball the offer, but he pointed out that that | neighborhood was a hot area and the house was very reasonably | priced. I later found out that there was actually a slightly | higher offer than mine, but since I had offered the asking | price and came in first, the owners thought it was only ethical | that they sell to me. | | I've certainly met useless RE agents since, but there are | definitely some that earn their percentage! The guy who sold my | last house was also a builder and he fixed a problem that would | have held up the sale on his own dime! | rightbyte wrote: | > He never actually said "don't buy this house" at any | property we looked at, but ... | | Taking hints from realtors is a skill. They are so subtle. I | got exactly the same experience. | pdntspa wrote: | There's a South Park episode about this | WHYLEE1991 wrote: | I think you highly under-estimate the sales skills and other | life competencies required to be in a high pressure sales job | like being a real estate agent. Frankly, I think most of the | people on this site would be fish out of water in most any job | that requires social soft skills and that shows dramatically | whenever ya'll discuss jobs that are outside of the very small | tech circle you happen to be a part of. | | Lets wonder this too, is your job incredibly beneficial to | society? is it not something many other people can do like | "opening a door"? I'm sure to you your job is very complex and | interesting, but to me and everyone else don't you just get | paid to open or unlock a series of doors metaphorically? It's | soo odd that you people think that somehow our jobs are the | meaningful ones lol. | | Also never use the term "top preformers" ya sound like a d-bag. | msluyter wrote: | Weird, having bought/sold a number of houses in the last ten | years (our family moved several times), I can't say I've ever | run into a real estate agent that seemed like a "high | pressure" salesman. Perhaps its just the market so they don't | really need to try, but IME the best real estate agents -- on | the buyers side, at least -- were the ones that listened | carefully and did a good job of finding houses that matched | our needs. Definitely requires soft skills/empathy, but not | really a sales role. | | Do such things exist? Are there real estate agents who are | like "and if you buy today, we'll throw in this grill!"? | Genuinely curious. | | On the general utility of real estate agents... Really | knowing a market and understanding | construction/houses/permitting, etc... is a pretty important | knowledge/skill set. I had one excellent agent figuratively | drag me away from a condo that she understood to have serious | foundation/construction defects. The good ones will help you | understand what's good/bad about a house, problems to be | alert for, etc... | | Like a lot of middle men, I think they do provide some | service of value. Now, is that worth 3%/6% of a houses value? | In many cases, undoubtedly not. We sold a house in Austin | when the market was so hot that we got an eye popping offer | the day after the agent put a "pending" sign in the yard. I | think he did like 4 hrs total work. So afaict, the profession | as a whole acts as sort of a rentier over the MLS listings. | JumpCrisscross wrote: | > _can 't say I've ever run into a real estate agent that | seemed like a "high pressure" salesman_ | | High-pressure job, not high-pressure sales. Real estate | sales is not a business that's kind to underperformers (in | the long run). | poulsbohemian wrote: | A year ago when our market was much hotter, I listed a | property that I knew would sell quickly. Where I added | value though was in knowing exactly when to list it, the | price to list it, how to build pre-market interest, how to | bring it to market in a way that would force buyers to | compete only on price, and ultimately, I got the price up | another $200k (and other concessions) for my sellers | because of how I negotiated once offers were on the table. | So even in a hot market, your agent's skill does matter in | yielding an optimal rather than just a "good" outcome. | go_discover wrote: | New word: Intracriticnescient | | Definition: A person who criticizes the group they are in, | without realizing that they are also implicating themselves | in the criticism. | the6thwonder wrote: | > I'm a people person. I have people skills. | | I don't agree. | | In my experience, there are people with a talent for talking, | and have a natural attraction. People just want to talk to | them. But that's not most people in sales (even if they are | often top). | | The key skills to be successful in sales are similar. | Dedication, problems solving, and an interest in what you're | doing. Many here could pick it up. | makeitdouble wrote: | Yes, they have much more skills than just wearing a suit and | opening doors. | | It's also a job which accomodates way more scum type people | than you'd see in typical office jobs. As you note the | incentives are very different, the pressure as well, and the | recipes for success can involve screwing people over a lot of | money. | | The profession doesn't seem to have much interest in dealing | with moral hazards. | zikduruqe wrote: | > I think you highly under-estimate the sales skills and | other life competencies required to be in a high pressure | sales job like being a real estate agent. | | Also, be really good looking. | robertlagrant wrote: | Real estate for normal housing is definitely not a high | pressure sales job. | poulsbohemian wrote: | Agreed - I laugh when people call me a "salesman". | Matchmaker and project manager are more in line, with a | whole lot of very specialized knowledge of finance, | marketing, negotiation, soils, fencing, construction, | environmental law... | robertlagrant wrote: | Yep - it's tricky, but not full on sales. Just a | definitions thing - I'm not in sales either. | intrasight wrote: | Right. "opening doors" can euphemistically describe any | capable salesperson. Gotta open doors to sell that $100m | fighter jet. For that matter, it can describe a dealmaker in | any tech company. | goolz wrote: | Yes, and even if you are a "top performer" doing gods work... | that does not give you any right to belittle others. I | wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment and would pay money | to see us as a collective (me included) try our hand at | something like real estate. I for one know I would fail, but | that's me. | cj wrote: | We software engineers already have tried, and failed to the | tune of $550 million. Oops. | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29087479 | robertlagrant wrote: | The right thing to do is I think to digitise the process. | Having a transparent way of following a bidding session | and subsequent legal arrangement to completion would be | extremely useful, and would surely scale pretty well. | goolz wrote: | "The algorithms are fooling themselves..." I loved that | comment haha! Great link. | jsight wrote: | Sometimes real estate agents fail at flipping and stick | to brokering other people's transactions too. | hospitalJail wrote: | That isnt being a real estate agent, that is | buying/selling the market. | cj wrote: | Ok I'll rephrase: We software engineers tried to buy/sell | houses using algorithms, and failed to the tune of $550m. | I think we collectively would have similar success (or | lack thereof) as actual real estate agents. | hospitalJail wrote: | These are two different jobs. | jen20 wrote: | Hard disagree. For people taking 6% of purchase price in | fees, real estate agents need to be vastly better than they | are. They were insufferable in Austin over the past few | years, the silver lining of a serious housing crash would | be watching them try to join the ranks of the productive. | | It reminds me of IT recruiters in the UK a few years back: | [1] sums up the situation very well and applies just as | much. | | [1]: https://gist.github.com/CumpsD/696599d1bd4cd472a056586 | 967293... | rplst8 wrote: | The reply was a bit harsh, but let's not act like the real | estate industry isn't riddled with skeezy practices. | | 1) Home inspections that aren't really "inspections" and are | just there to grease the skids 2) Buyer's agents don't have a | fiduciary duty to protect the buyers. 3) Pricing "knowledge" | that is typically public info, just locked behind access | restrictions 4) predatory lending practices | | It's a very incestuous market where the agents are friends | with mortgage loan officers at banks, handymen, inspectors, | and law offices that handle closing. | | The fact that it costs somewhere between 10-15% of the value | of a home to actually transfer ownership is highway robbery. | alistairSH wrote: | Totally agree on the inspection. They're next to useless - | a friend bought a home a few years ago, super-weird water | heater/HVAC system (co-mingled, WTF), never mentioned by | the inspector. When it broke a year later, it was a VERY | expensive fix, and I think they might have recovered a few | hundred $$ from the inspector (on a many thousands repair). | | An agent is only getting 5-6% of the home value (assuming | no split with a second agent). And a big chunk of that goes | to the brokerage. | ffgjgf1 wrote: | 5-6% of the purchase price still seems like a huge | amount. Of course I don't really know how many houses | decent agents tend to sell per year. | alistairSH wrote: | It's highly variable. | | Sample of 1, but my agent was frequently closing several | homes/week during peak season (Spring, early Summer). At | the time (2017), typical listing would be $500-$1 million | (Fairfax County, VA). | | So I'd guess 20-30/year for her. | | Broker keeps 30-50% of the commission. | | So, a good agent in NoVA is probably making | $250-$500k/year (but has to pay their own payroll taxes | and stuff out of that, IIRC). | poulsbohemian wrote: | >And a big chunk of that goes to the brokerage. | | Thank you for this - the public should redirect a lot of | their anger away from the agents and toward their | brokerages. Likewise - please don't use Zillow, Redfin, | etc to contact an agent. Call the agent directly, as | these online sites take a big pile of money out of the | agents pocket as well. | | I want to believe changes are coming in real estate, as | the long standing brokerage model exploits agents and | confuses the public. | Solvency wrote: | If their inspector sucks that's on your friend. | | We searched and vetted and found our own inspector. On | Yelp of all places, one of the least trustworthy | websites. It took us less than a day to find someone | good. | | And he found absolutely every single imaginable problem | even down to the most hysterically unimportant detail. | Like the tension on one of the kitchen/garage door hinges | being slightly higher than the bottom door hinge. This | was on a list of over 100 other things. | | The point is, inspectors are jobs like anyone else. Some | are good, some bad. | alistairSH wrote: | The problem isn't whether they find a problem. Even the | best inspector will miss things occasionally. The problem | is they have zero legal liability for that miss. The | buyer is making the biggest purchase of their life on a | report that cost ~$1000 and has no legal backing (beyond | maybe recovering the ~$1000 inspection fee). | | And then you have home insurance which isn't a whole lot | better. They might fix the problem or they might manage | to declare is pre-existing and deny coverage, but even if | they do fix it, it'll be the lowest bidder installing the | cheapest parts possible. | PawgerZ wrote: | When dealing with Home/Property insurance, always talk to | a reputable public adjuster or general contractor. I | worked at a general contractor construction company in a | state where contractors can also act as public adjusters. | We routinely caught insurance adjusters overlooking | damage, lying, or straight up committing fraud. | | The laws for insurance are very complex, and all of the | material standards are locked behind paywalls. For an | average person (me before I worked there) insurance is | basically a black box; you can't argue against any of | their points because they hide the criteria. | | >but even if they do fix it, it'll be the lowest bidder | installing the cheapest parts possible. | | This is true, but illegal. You are owed for "Like Kind | And Quality" according to the law. This means that the | insurance company can't downgrade your materials, and | they have to repair the property to AT LEAST pre-storm | conditions. Additionally, it is your legal right to | choose a construction crew or contractor of your choice, | and the insurance company can't veto your decision. After | the work is complete, make sure that you, the | construction company, and the insurance company have | copies of the specifications of your materials and what | work was done. This way it will be much harder for | insurance to fuck you over on your next claim. | | Most contractors in my area are genuinely trying to help | the clients. There are some contractors who take | advantage of the innocent and gullible population, | though. I hate them just as much as insurance companies. | alistairSH wrote: | Sorry, I was thinking of home warranties. You're exactly | right on home insurance. | | Two very different products, the former being a | borderline scam much of the time, the latter being a | requirement for financing (and common sense). | | Current example for me... house is 50+ year old, with | copper pipe for water supply. We're starting to get pin- | hole leaks on some pipes. AFAIK, insurance considers this | a maintenance item. They'd probably fix a major burst and | the damage it causes (after the fact) but have no | interest in even subsidizing preventative work to avoid | the costly repair. | anotherman554 wrote: | "And he found absolutely every single imaginable problem | even down to the most hysterically unimportant detail." | | The fact an inspection document is impressive to read | doesn't mean it is accurate. If he blew you away with his | ability to name 100 minor things, but missed a structural | issue, you'd be screwed, and would have no way to know | this until the structure starting cracking. | onlyrealcuzzo wrote: | > The reply was a bit harsh, but let's not act like the | real estate industry isn't riddled with skeezy practices. | | Let's not pretend like this doesn't apply to almost every | industry either... | dehrmann wrote: | High-value emotional purchases attract it more for | obvious reasons. You see it less in cheap commodities. | Your transactions at the grocery store tend to be pretty | honest. | poulsbohemian wrote: | >Home inspections that aren't really "inspections" and are | just there to grease the skids | | I hear this a lot on here and I wonder what state people | are in or if the laws are somehow different elsewhere. In | the states where I do business, there are state mandated | checklists of systems and inspectors could be held liable | if they don't show reasonable care and professionalism in | gathering the data for their report. The inspectors I use | pride themselves on the adoption of technology (drones for | checking out roofs, thermal imaging for heat loss and | insulation, etc) and often take the better part of a day on | even small houses. So, I dunno man - I hear this stuff | about inspectors a lot, but it doesn't jive with what I | expect the ones I refer to people to actually do. | js2 wrote: | Real life example from Chatham County, NC. Family built a | new house. Passed all inspections. House is not | structurally sound and they've been advised the house | needs to be completely rebuilt. They won a suit against | the home builder, but the builder hasn't paid. | | The county inspector was fired, but the county is not | taking financial responsibility. | | https://abc11.com/chatham-county-forever-home-dream- | nightmar... | | https://www.wral.com/family-says-chatham-county- | inspectors-m... | traviscj wrote: | Building inspections are not really the same as purchase | inspections, or at least don't seem to me like they | should be. Purchase inspection generally might not see a | partially-constructed building or blueprints or otherwise | be able to verify the engineering plan is being followed | --They're looking for broken/nonfunctional | appliances/mechanicals/systems, clear fire hazards, mold, | infestations, and the like. | | The outcome of a building inspection is a certificate of | occupancy where the authority is stating the home is safe | to live in, the outcome of a purchase inspection is a | report of things to ask for a discount on, part of the | purchase negotiation. | | The Chatham County thing is crazy, I'm hoping the family | manages to find someone accountable in that mess -- | clearly either the original architect, the builder, or | the county let them down somehow. I'm just not sure it's | really an indictment of the "inspector" profession as | discussed in this thread. | hattar wrote: | Colorado here and that wasn't the case for me. | | There were many, and varied things missed in my | inspection. The biggest was the entire HVAC system being | messed up. The furnace was incorrectly installed, | improperly sized for the house, and didn't even have any | return ductwork installed. | | The air flow seemed really bad in the bedroom and so one | day I decided to climb up into the attic and take a look. | The problem with the return air missing was immediately | obvious. When I called the inspector to ask why they'd | miss something so obvious I was given an excuse and | pointed toward the part of the contract that states | they're not liable. I eventually got them to refund the | cost of the inspection, but it was hundreds of dollars | back for over ten thousand dollars in missed issues. I | was only able to get anything because I worked for a real | estate company at the time and knew the right people who | could apply pressure. | | IMO Home inspections are a total scam. | mr337 wrote: | I agree, it feels really odd that making a huge ticket | item purchase, if something goes wrong the max liability | it the inspection price. A drop in the bucket for some | issues they should have brought to light. | poulsbohemian wrote: | Here's something I say to my clients: personally, if I am | buying a property, I am unlikely to do an inspection | because I've seen a lot of houses and systems and am | generally able to assess for myself the quality of the | systems and construction. But - especially for first time | buyers - people who buy and sell houses infrequently and | who don't have a background in these things are at an | informational deficit. For that reason, while the list of | things an inspector checks can never be complete, it's | more information than a buyer may be able to gather on | their own. Houses are just like software systems - they | will never be bug free, bugs pop up for various reasons, | and all an inspector is really doing is telling you the | state of the system on a given day. | | Also - I'm about to stop recommending one of my | recommended inspectors, because he's at best a "B". He | catches most issues, but the level of care isn't what I | want for my clients. There's another guy I used to | recommend but again, he's nearing retirement and getting | sloppy. | mike50 wrote: | Those issues would require engineering judgment to | assess. An inspector would be qualified to verify | function and presence of the heating system. | AngryData wrote: | I had a friend of mine get his house inspected when | buying, they never found (so apparently didn't plug a | tester into it) multiple loose plugs, didn't note the | plumbing line wrapped in an inch thick of electrical tape | for a leak, and said the roof was inspected for leaks and | "certified" for atleast a year but told 5 years it would | need a replacement. When their kitchen ceiling started | bubbling a year in I went up into the attic space and it | was clear the roof had been leaking since before they | bought it by the stains and mold it left on the wood. It | was a complete joke of an inspection, and what makes it | worse is none of that was hard to access. The attic space | was accessible from the garage area with no ceiling and | was easily walkable with 10 ft+ height, the loose plugs | were in the living room and in plain view right when you | walk in, and the taped up pipe was 15 feet into a | concrete basement with a mere glance upward. Not to | mention the other laundry list of items that weren't | broken really but should have been noted by an inspector | doing their job. | | They tried to get the inspector for the obvious bullshit | roof inspection but after getting ran around multiple | times to the point of needing to hire lawyer to go any | further. But eventually dropped it when some roofing | company came by and offered to do the roof for "free" | through their insurance because of supposed hail damage | in the area that basically replaced half the roofs in the | town. That too was probably a scam on the insurance by | the roofers because we never had big enough hail for | damage, but they weren't going to complain about a free | new shingle job. | | TL;DR Don't just grab any random inspector, and | especially never take recommendations from anybody | connected to real estate. | bombcar wrote: | Good inspectors exist. They're not usually recommended by | agents because they could cause a deal to fall through. | deelowe wrote: | In my area, agent fees are 6%. | rcme wrote: | The seller is paying the buyer's agent so I'm not sure why | they'd have a fiduciary duty to the buyer. Agents aren't | about representation at all. That's what your lawyer and | lender are for (the lender acts in your best interest in | their own self interest). The purpose of the agents are to | make the transaction happen. The seller's agent handles | this on the seller side, e.g. showing the house, making it | available for inspections, etc. The buyer's agent makes | this happen on the buyer's side, e.g. makes sure the buyer | schedules the inspections, has their lender lined up, etc. | The agents are there to make the deal happen. That's their | only purpose. | pessimizer wrote: | Neither agent has a fiduciary duty even to the person | that hired them, in the US. That situation took a lot of | lobbying to create, and takes a lot of lobbying to | preserve. The agents can make a deal between them that | they both profit from and screws both the buyer and the | seller. | jon_adler wrote: | The estate agent percentage in the U.K. is typically around | 2% of property value in total, paid by the seller, with | virtually nobody using a buyers agent. I have never | understood why fees are so crazy in the USA. | pessimizer wrote: | Real estate lobbying associations such as the NAR writing | state laws, massively donating to campaigns, and paying | huge speaking fees to ex-politicians. I once worked | pretty deeply in the industry. | pg5 wrote: | I disagree with this. You pay a realtor because a good one | stays up to date with what's happening in the market, has a | network of vetted contractors/potential buyers/other | connections, has up-to-date frameworks for handling the | processes and timing of tricky situations that can arise. | | Sure, you can do all that yourself if you want, but for the | average person, they are providing value. | mike50 wrote: | A Rolodex and a limited understanding of the real estate | market. If they really had expert housing market knowledge | would they be working as a real estate agent? | bamfly wrote: | IME the ones who are successful long-term and make | _serious_ money do indeed use their market knowledge, | connections, and access to make real estate plays | themselves. Move into owning rentals, do some flipping, | that kind of thing. The easiest path seems to be having a | spouse who 's in a different, but relevant, career (e.g. | general contractor). | tiedieconderoga wrote: | A good real estate agent can provide a lot of value, especially | if you're a first-time buyer. | | * They've seen a lot of houses, and know what to look out for | even before you commit to calling in inspectors. | | * They've seen a lot of closings, and can handle all of the | title/law crud. "Quick closing" can be a big plus to some | sellers. | | * They've seen a lot of negotiations, and can help you get a | feel for how the other party is thinking. | | There certainly are people who unlock the door, stare at their | phone all day, and collect their commission. Those aren't very | good agents, even if they can get the job done when the market | is extremely short on supply. | version_five wrote: | This will sound harsh, but mostly real estate agents are | suckers who are actively getting scammed by the brokerage. | Brokerages have a virtual monopoly (oligopoly) on listings and | comparable sale prices though MLS (I'm in Canada but I think | the US is the same) and as such it's in most seller's and | buyers interests use them. Agents are getting charged all sorts | of scam fees to market themselves in exchange for getting to | tap into the MLS. Every ad and stupid video and contract and | mailer and whatnot is getting sold to them by the brokerage who | is siphoning off all the money they can. The real suckers are | the agents, even if they don't really do anything. | poulsbohemian wrote: | There might be some nuance here between the US and Canada - | would love to chat over frosty beverages and learn more and | the system up there as eventually I'd like to expand into BC. | The MLS fees (I belong to two and will likely join a third | and possibly fourth) aren't terrible and I would say listing | services are generally a good thing for both the consumer | public and agents. But - as you note - the public has a very | limited view of all the ways brokerages and various third- | parties try to scam and fleece agents. The overall system is | exploitative of agents and that has a role in the cost to | consumers for real estate services. And, name brand online | services are just another third party looking to make money | off agents. | jsight wrote: | I think you are being a little unfair to them, but at the same | time... | | They get 5% of most single family residential transactions. And | recently it was 6% that was standard. And the industry works | really hard to protect those profits. | | It is a lot of money that comes right out of consumers pockets. | moioci wrote: | > me and my wife took LSD on a vacation | | Did dropping acid enhance your vacation, or does LSD also stand | for something else? | scop wrote: | Ha! I feel like I'm in the crazy house as you're the only | other person who has asked that...all these well thought out | responses that seem completely oblivious to the doozy of an | introduction. | | "So I once played poker with a gorilla and [insert point]" | and everybody only talks about the point and not the | gorilla??? | | -\\_(tsu)_/- | 2023throwawayy wrote: | Taking LSD on a vacation is a pretty mundane thing for many | people. | CamperBob2 wrote: | Honestly, I had this exact same attitude before my last home | purchase. We began by assuming that Redfin was good enough. By | the time the deal closed, we really appreciated what an | experienced agent with at least a vague awareness of real- | estate law could do. When the FSBO seller tried to back out at | the last minute, our (obviously motivated) buyer's agent was | able to set him straight. Without his help, I'm certain the | situation would have turned into a nightmare scenario involving | actual lawyers. | | That doesn't mean I won't try the easy/cheap way first next | time, but it does mean I no longer dismiss all realtors as | useless parasites who need to be "disrupted" at all costs. | xyzelement wrote: | If your wife and you took LSD and it "appeared" to you that all | doctors do is run around in stupid white coats, would that | reveal more about the field of medicine or the two of you? | | "It requires professional help to facilitate emotionally | charged, million+ dollar transactions" would be the more useful | insight. | | Very few people chose to forego aan agent when dealing in RE, | there's a reason for that. I am a finance dude quite capable of | negotiating etc and I still found out agent super valuable and | would use her again. | | It's possible you know crappy agents who deal in low-end | transactions but again that may reveal more about you than the | field. | alistairSH wrote: | There are plenty of next-to-useless agents, just like there are | plenty of next-to-useless software developers. | | Our agent (used twice, 15 years apart) was great. Both times, | in strong sellers markets, so lots of offers made and rejected. | Lots of last second "OMG, just listed, can we see it | NOWNOWNOW!" | | Very expensive, but so is a house. | | Now that I've been through the process a few times, could I do | it without? Probably. At the right price, would I use an agent | regardless? Absolutely. The old 6% rate seems quite high for a | basic sale given online MLS listings, though for a very | specific home in a small market, might still be worth that (I'm | think lake homes in my neighborhood - rare listings, selling | for $50k+ premium over non-lake on same street, often have a | buyer lined up before listing, so really hard to actually buy | one without an agent who knows people). | afavour wrote: | Having been through buying a home I think I'll push back on | that a little: our agent knew what was a fair price, what we'd | likely be able to push the sellers down to, advised us through | the whole process. | | Rental brokers on the other hand... now they're absolutely | useless and you can sometimes pay astronomical brokers fees | just so they can sit between you and the landlord. | eddieroger wrote: | I had a similar experienced, though I'm biased by being | related to an agent, but having worked with good ones and bad | ones, there can be a difference. Bad agents are glorified | door unlockers and sign placers, but good ones have | experience marketing, know the market well enough to make | recommendations, help with staging and making a property | attractive, and advocating for their client during sales. If | the game was different, maybe they'd be redundant, but a good | agent is a real ally and can move a house quickly. | saalweachter wrote: | Even an incompetent agent serves a very valuable purpose in a | real estate purchase. | | Without the agents, you'd have two people attempting to | negotiate a 6 (or 7, nowadays!) figure purchase directly. | Before it was over, you'd hate the other party too much to | ever complete a sale. | | Agents sit between the two parties and have a vested interest | in seeing a transaction take place. They talk to each other | and soften the communication so that you can tell someone you | want to pay them fifty-fucking-grand less money for the | single largest asset in their life that they were counting on | to fund their retirement, and have that met with a counter- | offer instead of an angry storming off. | CHSbeachbum420 wrote: | You do not need an agent to know a fair price lol | poulsbohemian wrote: | You aren't wrong, but it means you have to do your own | research and generally only have access to public | information. A realtor who knows their market has done that | research for you (saving you time) and generally has | information beyond what you can get off Zillow et al. | afavour wrote: | I don't need a mechanic to repair my car, either. I could | spend hours doing the research, risk maybe being wrong and | fix the thing myself. Or I could hire a professional. | jsight wrote: | > our agent knew what was a fair price, what we'd likely be | able to push the sellers down to, advised us through the | whole process. | | I've seen cases where the sales agent knew the seller's | minimum and basically told that to the buyer. They didn't | negotiate on the seller's behalf so much as negotiate to get | the deal done quicker. | | I'm sure the buyer's agent looked good to the buyer. This | scenario and the one you describe are almost | indistinguishable, depending on which party you are. | cableshaft wrote: | Same. Our realtor wasn't in any hurry to sell us a house | (showed us 40 houses over about 7 different days actually) | and wasn't afraid to point out the negatives of the house and | what we should be looking for in a good first home and take | into consideration if we ever wanted to resell it. I learned | quite a bit from him during the process. | | He also didn't mind seeing a bunch of houses because even if | we weren't interested in a house it built up his knowledge | about the market and could possibly recommend the house to | others. | | We did have another realtor that wasn't like that though when | we were considering moving to another state, who mainly was | just there to show houses and never pointed anything out, in | fact she barely talked. | | Didn't really see the value with her, although shortly after | the mortgage rates jacked up fast and made moving less | appealing (we looked just before the Fed jacked up interest | rates), so we didn't go any further in the process anyway. | Roark66 wrote: | I have to say I found estate agents quite useful (mostly when I | was renting). I much preferred dealing with a letting dept. of | a reputable estate agency than random landlords. Yes, I had | good landlords(funnily enough when I was quite poor in the | cheapest accommodation possible), but I had bad ones too. I | never had a bad renting experience with an agency. Stuff always | got repaired on time, cleaners got hired to clean common areas, | electricity and gas got inspected regularly. All those things | are not a certainty with random landlords and you only find out | once you've moved. | poulsbohemian wrote: | >What does a real estate agent do? They unlock doors. | | Think of real estate agents through the perspective of the 10x | programmers we love to talk about here. The multitude of agents | are as you describe - they publish listing photos from their | phone, they know how to open a door, and then can mostly write | down what you tell them on standardized forms. A 10x agent on | the other hand, will absolutely benefit you in the same way | that a 10x programmer will outproduce. Classic 80/20 rule | stuff, where you want to be working with the 20 and ignore the | 80. | alexpotato wrote: | Not exactly real estate agents for buying/selling but related: | | I remember reading about the fact that, at the time, most | apartments in NYC were "broker only" (aka you can only see and | then rent an apartment if you are using a licensed real estate | broker). | | The more I thought about this, I started to see the benefits | for both sides: | | - for the landlord: the broker acts as a filter for people who | are serious vs "looky loos" (actual quote from a real broker) | | - for the tenant: the broker wants repeat business so they | will, in theory, only deal with reputable landlords | | - for the tenant part 2: if you are a busy, hard working | individual, the broker acts as your "agent" (in the principal | agent sense of the word) to save you time by going and finding | apartments for you so that you can focus on your high paying | job. | uw_rob wrote: | The problem with brokers is that they can charge 1-2 months | rent. That means you can easily be left with a 8k bill for | moving into a new apartment. | | The job literally could not exist anywhere else because no | one would pay it. But they aren't making any more land in | Manhattan and they aren't building subway lines quick enough | so landlords get to pass that expense off to tenants | alexpotato wrote: | If you are a top earning investment banker or lawyer, it's | still worth it to pay that rather than spending 10+ hours | of your time going to apartments etc. Most of "seeing | apartments" is "let me get to the apartment by cab (stuck | in traffic) or by subway (oh, delays, oh well)" so it's | even less efficient for you to do that vs a broker. | santiagobasulto wrote: | This one made me ~laugh~ blow air outta my nose: | https://terriblerealestateagentphotos.com/post/7142462056617... | ansible wrote: | I'd argue that this is a really _good_ real estate photo. It | tells you what your next-door neighbors are like. | nakedrobot2 wrote: | Is it only me, or are these photos not bad at all? They are real | and honest, and... just not actually bad photos! | mauvehaus wrote: | Having just gone through a year and a half long search for a | house, I'd like to add another good rule: | | If the listing lists a room, but there isn't a picture of it, | there's usually a good reason. | | Real life example: saw a house listed with four bedrooms, listing | had pictures of two. The remaining two were unfinished to the | point of not having drywall on the ceiling or finished floor | materials on the floor. | ookblah wrote: | you should see how some real estate offices operate in korea. i | guess because housing is seen as such an investment in some hot | areas the offices literally just put the price with the square | footage, zero photos. maybe a "renovated" note if it has new | wallpaper. | | completely baffling and infuriating to me as you have no way of | knowing what you're looking at. easiest job in the world here. | irrational wrote: | They should have used an M.C. Escher drawing rather than Indiana | Jones and the Last Crusade for that kitchen picture. I stared at | it for a good 5 minutes and still can't tell what is going on. | muxator wrote: | This site is impossible to visit on my setup. Firefox 114, | default tracking protection, uBlock origin with default settings. | | I am not interested in spending time debugging it, and I can live | without seeing those photos. | | Better spend that time whining here, where I suppose the ratio of | web developers is high: what happened to web development? How | come is it so complicated to write a site that displays some | photos without falling apart at the first not-totally-mainstream | user agent? | | Just wow. | jp191919 wrote: | Same here, website doesn't work on FF. | | I even tried edge and it doesn't work. | pjc50 wrote: | Surprisingly, it's a frontend for Tumblr, with the | "fuseblue.com" theme. | muxator wrote: | Thanks for explaining. | | I never really used Tumblr, I just know it's the site Yahoo | bought many years ago instead of Netflix. | | The website in this submission is probably just a low | technical effort site. This would explain its flaws. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-06-30 23:00 UTC)