Controversy over the Black & White Video

I happen to know your parents were in junior high when you were born. Just because I remember when the MLS was in a book and not on computer doesn’t make me old.

It makes me experienced. 🙂

It’s one thing to say an idea is stupid. It’s quite another to explain in detail, exactly why it may have missed the mark. People know when they’re being fed stuttering in text form.

A feeling or an opinion is fine — but back it up with intelligent, thoughtful answers which demonstrate obvious expertise, knowledge, and experience.

Making statements as if they came from the burning burning bush itself doesn’t cut it.

I posted this comment on Bloodhound and I think it fits here as well.

“Greg, I’m sorry but I can’t agree with you on this one since I usually do agree with you when I understand what you are saying.

First of all, this isn’t listing presentation material. But if it was, maybe sellers do need a sledgehammer to wake them up and get real with pricing their homes to sell when competing with thousands of other available homes. I think Daniel was cleverly ‘tongue in cheek’ in the message.”

Maybe, Norm, but I think those least likely to be impressed are those most likely to overprice their home. The medium’s different but the message isn’t. Don’t overprice your home. Don’t overprice your home. Don’t overprice your home.

For all that, for the mountain of statistics brought to a listing presentation, for all the data of time on market, homes that sell, homes that don’t … you still run across situations like the one I had two months back where I didn’t get the listing because “the other agent seemed more open to our list price” than I was.

Gee, guess why? Because he was trying to buy the listing and I was trying to get the seller’s home sold.

I didn’t post the video because I’m trying to kiss Daniel’s tuchas. I did it because I didn’t have time to write anything yesterday. 🙂 Oh, and because the message is dead on.

This is a perfect example of why I can’t get a loan with a dog collar as collateral.

Well isn’t this whole thing quite interesting?

My wife and I (both agents) both viewed Daniel’s video. Our initial reaction was, “Eh”. We found it neither good nor bad. I certainly don’t find it insulting, though I could see how some “consumers” might — and I can also see how some consumers would love it for its brutal honesty. I thought from a production perspective is was very well done. The overall message was spot on. The delivery of that message will appeal to some, and not others. But isn’t that the case with anything?

I think it’s impossible to write (or videoize) something that will appeal to anyone and everyone. Even if you have a “micro-focused” target audience, you’ll never please everyone every time.

I commented on Greg’s post and I will add my comment. I did not read all comments on either blog, so what is said may be repeated, maybe not.

Greg, I believe has some valid points, namely write to your “targeted” audience and know who that is. Greg can be very blunt with his presentation and may have gone overboard with this, but just as the video is driving the points home of “back to basics” and “simplicity”, Greg is driving home his points as well.

As I have said before, blogging should be an extension of yourself. I find neither side right, nor wrong, in this controversy as they are writing (or presenting) from their perspectives.

As I have found out in my own blogging, it is sometimes good to be offensive. It weeds out those who you don’t want to be your clients in the first place.