I have asked the same question! I do not get it...
Ron and I not only take multiple photos...we visual tour EVERYTHING even vacant land. AND we make sure it hits 350 web sites. Our marketing plan is geared to generate the maximum number of showings in order to get offers and negotiate the best price for our sellers AND follow that contract thru to closing!
Debbie Albert, PA
Coldwell Banker Residential
In a time when "getting to know" a property through multiple pictures and details seems the "norm" - not seeing any pictures and descriptions can raise a warning flag - - or at the very least - - elicit a sense of incompleteness for the observer.
Whether or not exterior and interior pictures would be taken and when, should have been part of the pre-listing conversation held between Seller and Agent. For each property found lacking â€“ there could be a different reason â€“ but the short answer is â€“ its Seller must not feel there would be value or benefit in the pictures or the listing agent is just too lazy.
Why am I sighting the Seller asa possible reason? Making sure they hire an agent who can and will use effective, timely and innovative marketing techniques is their job! Giving the public what they want has long been the basis upon which SALES is done â€“ and today the public wants pictures AND in-depth descriptions.
Within the industry there are mixed emotions about the effectiveness of multiple photos. Remember, pictures can and do help a prospective buyer form an opinion before they actually have an opportunity to see, smell AND feel the property.
One theory is = a couple exterior shots along with number of rooms and their sizes, number of baths up or down, basement finished or not, garage 1 or 2 car, attached or not, type of heat & air along with the size of lot along with a brief description of the properties amenities should be enough to solicit â€œunbiasedâ€ interest on the part of prospective buyers thereby leaving the â€œfirst opinionâ€ to be gathered during a personal tour of the property.
Another = Buyerâ€™s today have less time and more definite wants in their homes. Seeing for themselves the colors, shapes and finishes in a home helps them narrow in on those they would prefer, thereby cutting down on the number of properties they need to tour and the time they would spend doing so.
In my experience â€“ more pictures has not lead to fewer tours, just more confusion or mis-impressions.
In closing â€“ though I would vote for fewer pictures and more details â€“ as advocate for the Seller (Sellerâ€™s Listing Agent), my job is to expose the property to the buying public and the make it â€œStand-Outâ€ in the crowd. If to be competitive in todayâ€™s real estate market pictures are necessary â€“ than its pictures they will get â€“ QUALITY pictures.
Sometimes, photos do lie - not all photographers are created equal.. I just had buyers toss out a house because the kitchen cabinets were PINK in the photos. I knew they weren't really pink, but it took a lot of convincing to get them to set foot inside - and it's one of 3 they are now weighing buying.
Great answers - and the truth is a mix of all. Some lazy agents. Some techo-dunces. Some al a carte brokerages that require the sellers to shoot their own photos and pay extra for their inclusion. Some rough condition homes that are being kept under wraps. Some high-volume REO listers that find it's not economically smart to spend that time (because the houses all sell anyway to buyers who are in the doors first and fast). Some sellers who request privacy and limit interior photos for security purposes. Some agents that are trying to keep thieves from appliance shopping the vacant high-end homes.
While multiple photos can be helpful, nothing beats a personal walk through.
Photos can lie and they sure don't tell you if the property smells like a litter box.
Let me give you a different slant on this. If you are asking about a normal sale or a short sale, then yes, it's pretty poor. Certainly a great reason NOT to hire that realtor in the future.
On the other hand if you are talking about bank owned properties, then the answer is slightly different. It could actually be a strategy on the part of the listing agent to ensure that potential buyers actually go see the place in person before they make an offer. Also, the big players in bank owned properties have hundreds of listings at a time and frankly it costs money to send staff out, take pictures, and up load them. They make very little margin selling bank owned properties and this is clearly a way to cut costs. To the extent that you find it frustrating looking at bank owned properties with only one picture, well so do those of us who work as buyer's agents for them.
I never understood that. I enjoy taking and posting beautiful photos of properties.
Faith Home Loans
Sometimes we are told when a Realtor comes from another Realtor board yet the MLS's show the listings of those boards, ocassionally a listing comes over without photos even though the Realtor has put them on the MLS in their area.
As a Realtor, I get so frustrated seeing listings with one photo and little or no description. It seems some agents do not want to sell their listings, so I totally agree with you.
Jeff Launiere, ALHS, CDPE
So no, it is not hard, but I assume for some agents it may just be too much of an inconvenience......
You nailed it so well. A thorn in my side too. I can see 1-2 pictures for the not so beautiful homes. You as a buyer already know, it's not worth looking at if there aren't any pictures. Your perception is "No pictures, must be a mess inside" and sometimes,yes.
In many cases, agents just don't take the time to take pictures. I have to admit, I don't take good pictures, so I have my husband do it. I am so in agreement with you and pray you are heard loud and clear.
If the client doesn't want any photos up, then the agent still needs to do their best to sell that property. No photos and no explanation equals a poor agent.
I think that there are just a lot of lazy agents out there! Here in my county in California you could receive a fine for not posting pictures, But most of all this is a disservice to your client who could be losing thousands of internet leads because online buyers will just move on to the next listing
As a seller, it is important that you take the advice of your Realtor when it comes to staging. We aren't being picky we are trying to show your home in the best light.
Out here in Seattle there needs to be at least one photo associated with the listing within 24 hours of it going on the multiple. The photo must be of the front of the home or a prominent view. Our MLS doles out fines for offenders. Maybe you should work with your local MLS to solve the problem.
Did you interview the agent prior to listing? Do you have a list of questions? You are hiring an agent to market and sell your house. If they do not provide the quality of service you request....Fire them.
1) If there is an urgency in listing the house and there is NO time at all to take pictures. But the agent should go back and take nice pictures to put on MLS soon after
2) If the property is in such a shape where pictures both inside and outside will discourage people to come and see the house
3) Tenant occupied, where there is no internal pictures, but the agent should be able to take external pictures.
I think this behavior is terrible for our industry. I can't understand what type of seller would even allow an agent to represent them this way.
I won't enter a listing into the MLS until I have all of the photos ready to go. I explain the importance of this to the sellers. With all of the syndication we have from our MLS, it's important to have the photos in place from the get go.
I share your frustration and can't understand why agents post without pictures. Although I have to say that sometimes there is a glitch with the feed that occurs when uploading to the public internet sites, like Trulia. I know that I have to check my listings each time to make sure they are showing up with the pictures. As should every Realtor who takes on the responsibility of selling an owner's house. I am shocked at how many Sellers never take the time to go into the public sites to make sure their Realtor is marketing their home in a way that will entice Buyers to take a look.
I often take my client out to show them properties that don't have great photos because many times we are pleasantly suprised. Other agents that don't show those homes may be missing out on the perfect house for their buyer.
120 Newark Avenue
Jersey City, NJ 07302
973-710-2293 cell phone
I agree with just about everyone here, except maybe the guy in Miami. If a property needed to get up immediately, like in less than a week, I can SORT of see them not getting an opportunity to get out and get a photo. But a property that has been up for weeks or MONTHS and STILL no photo or only one photo?!?! That's just laziness and poor salesmanship. Even if it's a foreclosure and the bank doesn't care if there are no photos, why would any agent want that property to just sit there and not make them money?
On our MLS system in the DC area, we can put up to 30 photos and I never put fewer than 20. The photos are what will get potential buyers interested in the property and most of my clients won't even give a property one look, much less a second one, if there are no photos, unless it just came on the market and I urge them to.
Listings with no photos, to me, mean that property is going to just sit there and drop in price. Maybe that's a reason to keep an eye on them???
My newest listing in Santa Monica with pro photography â€¦ http://www.1541Centinela.com was put on yesterday. I havenâ€™t even had a showing yet and I already have two buyers who may be interested in putting in an offer. All because they saw the virtual tour first, as it gave them a good feel of what itâ€™s like to be in the property before actually going to see it.