Notorious R.O.B.

The incredibly smart, sometimes bearded, Gahlord Dewald has a post up on Inman (will go behind paywall in 24 hours) in which he counsels brokers and agents to “break free from cookie-cutter real estate” by paying more attention to categories of information and data:

Think your brand is different from your competition? Go look at the categories for real estate on your site then go look at the categories for real estate on your competition’s sites. See any difference?

This isn’t a case of tools not existing. Categories are an inherent function in every database-driven content management system out there.

But a quick tour of real estate sites will reveal that most of these systems have been set on autopilot to mimic the same categories that were used for real estate in — you guessed it — newspapers.

His recommendation is to rethink the categories for a real estate search website, perhaps to better “narrowcast” information to a specific segment of the audience.  It’s an interesting approach, and one that I’ve recommended to others in a slightly different context via persona-based marketing, but… the post made me wonder about something.

Read the rest of this entry »

Let me tell you who my sponsors are...

While I’m recuperating from Rebarcamp NY and Inman Connect, and working on the next chapter of the RPR reviews, I thought I’d post something that crossed my virtual desk because, well, I feel like it.

I’ve heard from a couple of people during Inman week that some of the more prominent voices (and honestly, it doesn’t matter who, so don’t ask me) in the real estate space are paid to mention specific companies and products in their public speaking and public blogging activities.  Again, since I’m interested in discussing the principles here, names and identities are wholly unimportant.

In some cases, there isn’t a direct payment of cash, but there may be other sorts of compensation — revenue share on the back-end, cross-marketing arrangements, and the like.

Question is, should these arrangements be disclosed, and if so, how much disclosure of what sorts of relationships is appropriate?

Read the rest of this entry »

REUTERS/Mike Blake

Reuters reports that a major study by scientists from the London School of Hygiene & Topical Medicine at the University of London shows organic foods have no nutritional benefit over conventional foods:

A systematic review of 162 scientific papers published in the scientific literature over the last 50 years, however, found there was no significant difference.

“A small number of differences in nutrient content were found to exist between organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs, but these are unlikely to be of any public health relevance,” said Alan Dangour, one of the report’s authors.

“Our review indicates that there is currently no evidence to support the selection of organically over conventionally produced foods on the basis of nutritional superiority.”

Now we haven’t heard anything about possible contradictions to the study, flaws in the methodology, whatever, so the scientists who produced this report might be doing a whole lot of voodoo instead of science.  (See, e.g., climate change ‘science’.)  But let us for the time being and for our purposes assume that the study is accurate and true.

What is fascinating for me is the test this scenario provides for the idea of moral motivation in consumers.  Explored in articles like this one about what motivates people in social networks, the idea is that modern consumers like to Do Good, at least when it isn’t inconvenient to do so.  People apparently will buy “green” products because they like to Do Good, and it’s easy — as simple as paying money at the counter.

Now, the organic food movement predates all of this to some extent; Whole Foods (a flagship of the organic food movement) was founded in 1978 after all at the height of the Disco Era.  The premise behind organic foods, I always thought, was that naturally grown foods is better for you.  The reason that I, as a consumer, am willing to pay two or three times the price for a gallon of milk was that organic milk — free from hormones, pesticides, whatever — was healthier for me and my family.  Over time, the organic food movement has blended with a variety of other socio-political movements like sustainability, humane kill, local foods (“locavore“), green, ecological concerns, and so on.  But I still believe that most organic food consumers — like my parents for example — buy organic foods because they believe the organic foods are good for them, not for the environment or animals or whatever.

So… whither organic foods if this study is true?  The test between 7DS Marketing and Moral Motivation Marketing is at hand.

Read the rest of this entry »

But I don’t want some pretty face
to tell me pretty lies.
All I want is someone to believe.

- Billy Joel

I had a very interesting conversation with a realtor friend of mine today on the topic of personal branding.  She said something like:

You know what phrase I hate the most?  “To be honest with you.”  Like, what else are you gonna be?  And since you’re now going to be honest, does that mean you’ve been lying to me up until now?  I never want to tell someone I’m trustworthy; I want them to know that I am some other way.

A recent buyer’s survey I vaguely recall reading (at 2:10AM, I ain’t gonna go look) said that the number one reason why buyers selected an agent was “trustworthiness”.  It seems that consumers above all value someone they can trust to look out for their interests in the biggest financial transaction of their lives.

So why does it seem that when one thinks of real estate agents, honesty is rarely the first word that pops into one’s head?  (The same goes for, incidentally, marketers….)

Could it be because they (and we marketers) spend so much time telling people that they’re honest and trusthworthy?

Read the rest of this entry »

Okay, so with the comic book discussion sure to be going on (who knew there were so many comics geeks in the RE.net?), let me turn to something I think could be very interesting.  First, view this video:

This is a music video by the trance dance group OceanLab.  But it was edited from videos submitted by OceanLab’s fans.  From the YouTube description:

In November last year Above & Beyond launched a competition offering fans the chance to create the next OceanLab music video for “On A Good Day”. Jono, Tony & Paavo were overwhelmed with the quality and creativity of the entries and the official video has been made using the highlights from the best entries.

The resulting video is beguiling.  Of course, it doesn’t hurt that the track itself is haunting and beautiful.

Where my mind goes wandering is… is this sort of community-created marketing possible, especially in real estate?

Read the rest of this entry »

At the recent REBarCamp Orange County, I found myself staring at the board listing the sessions and enjoying the wonder of discovery.  The discovery was that apparently, I was supposed to be leading a session with Stacey Harmon on “Social Media and Branding”.  As they say, anything and everything could happen at a BarCamp.  That joy of discovery was followed by the joy of improvisation, as I learned that Stacey had to stay behind to finish up a session on using Twitter, and I had been planning on being Vanna to Stacey’s Pat Sajak.

So I got up and did a bunch of verbal tapdancing.  For those in attendance, I promise to refund your registration fees.  [ED: Rob, BarCamp is free, you idjit.  Yeah, well, it's the thought that counts.]  To my surprise, the session ended up being one of the better ones for me, in part due to the awesome people who didn’t seem to mind that I was speaking completely off the cuff, and in part due to the warm rays of the incredible southern Californian sun.

I wanted to expand on some of the concepts we discussed, however, because we didn’t really get into how social media and brand interact.  It also appears that we need to discuss things further because prevailing misconceptions on how social media fits in to an overall marketing scheme.

Read the rest of this entry »

Vive La Resistance! (Members of French Underground, WWII)

In my past writings, I’ve written about the seismic shift going on in the real estate brokerage industry from the perspective of Big Brokers and Big Brands.  You can find those writings here (and the parts linked there), here, here, and here.  At the same time, I’ve always wanted to write the other side of the debate, because the victory of Big Brands is so reliant on a major assumption: that they embrace major change, including putting new blood into the top executive positions, and changing the culture of the organization.  This is never easy, but nearly impossible while senior management is preaching the message of, “Batten down the hatches and get back to basics!” whatever that means.

While the Big Brands are struggling to figure out a strategy for moving forward, however, the Kristian Soldiers are hard at work trying all manner of new things, new strategies, new thinking, and changing the face of the industry.  They are winning far too many battles today, and may ultimately win the war.

This, then, is a series of thoughts on how the Real Estate Insurgency can out-maneuver, out-innovate, and ultimately defeat Big Brands.

Read the rest of this entry »

(Part 1, 2, and 3 of the Lessons from Counterinsurgency Series)

Final Thoughts from Gen. Petraeus

Finally, we always must strive to learn and adapt. The situation in Afghanistan has changed significantly in the past several years and it continues to evolve. This makes it incumbent on us to assess the situation continually and to adjust our plans, operations, and tactics as required. We should share good ideas and best practices, but we also should never forget that what works in an area today may not work there tomorrow, and that what works in one area may not work in another.

Honestly, this needs very little elaboration.

The American military is a huge organization.  It is not known for its friendliness to change.  If anything, the military tends to be conservative, holding onto its hallowed traditions.

Nonetheless, in a counterinsurgency, the doctrine is to continually assess the situation, learn, and adjust plans.

No matter how large a Big Brokerage may be, learning to adapt will be a key factor in whether they emerge victorious or fall by the wayside over the next few years.  CEO’s and other senior leaders must not only be prepared for rapid change but insist on organizational nimbleness across the board.  Bureaucratic barriers must be brought down; resistant personnel moved out; cumbersome processes reexamined to see if they are really necessary.

Senior leaders must also question some of their most hallowed, deeply held beliefs about how the industry works.  “Getting back to basics” may be fatal if the lessons from the last war you fought are completely inappropriate for the current counterinsurgency action.  Is having the greatest number of yard signs really the most important competitive advantage?  Really?  Don’t take the answer for granted: investigate it, and you may be surprised.

Finally, in the new business environment, I don’t believe that any answer remains the answer for long.  As Gen. Petraeus points out, what works in one area may not work in another; what works today may not work tomorrow.  Organizations must be remade, reforged, and retrained to deal with the fluid, ever-changing environment they face today.  Why?

Because the insurgents are constantly changing, constantly adapting, and constantly investigating how they can stay one step ahead of you.

-rsh

In part 1, I argued that we are living through a “post-middle” era as far as marketing is concerned, where consumers can be divided into either Thrift-minded, or Aspirational.  Then in part 2, I examined some ideas for how realtors might think about marketing homes for sale given that consumers are either driven by price or by lifestyle aspirations.

In this next part, I’d like to look at how service providers — the real estate agents, the mortgage brokers, the appraisers, etc. — might think about marketing themselves.

Read the rest of this entry »

Brian Boero of 1000watt recounts a dinner conversation and throws down some challenging questions and assertions:

This particular debate centered on the following question:

“Have we reached the end of the real estate story now that FSBOs and discounting have lost their menace?”

As Brian puts it, there were two camps, comprised of him in one camp and everyone else in the other camp:

Methods have changed. Markets have changed. The balance of power between brokers and agents has shifted. Consumers have access to enough data to choke a horse.

But the basic structure of this business remains remarkably intact.

There are two possible conclusions to be taken from this:

A. Real estate is exceptional. The complexities and emotions that characterize the real estate transaction will forever shield it from structural change. Bill Gates, Barry Diller and about a billion dollars in VC have been thrown against the barricade with no transformative impact. The story is over.

B. We’re due for a cataclysm. The forces of change, of technological innovation, of inchoate consumer frustration, are stacked high against the dam of Real Estate As We Know It. It will not – it cannot – hold. The story is far from over.

My dinner pals were in the “A” camp. I argued for “B.”

Given that the whole thrust here is theoretical and futuristic, I can’t help but charge in foolishly where wiser men fear to trod.

Read the rest of this entry »