DISQUS

geordieromer · 1 year ago

I think it goes back to content. Trulia does a better job so far on content, but Zillow isn't far off either. In my market, none of these have very good content (irrelevant statistics, small portion of the listings, poor maps, no tax data). If there isn't anything sticky for the consumer, why would an advertiser pay to be here?

Trace · 1 year ago

Great stuff, great coverage. More targeted platforms are just what the doctor ordered.

mattgoyer · 1 year ago

I'm considering both vaporware until I can use either of them as my advertising solution on my Seattle condo blog, Urbnlivn. I'd certainly love to ditch low paying Google Ads for something higher paying (though most of the time the Google ads are surprisingly on target.)

Erik · 1 year ago

Hey Joel. I'd argue that the success will be determined not by who gets the most publishers to sign up (I think that's the easy part), but by who has the best sales team and can get the most advertisers on board.

retrove · 1 year ago

The other item that I think is interesting about this real estate advertising vertical is that in traditional (print) real estate advertising the money was spent by agents / brokerages to brand themselves and listings. Now most RE sites allow the agents / brokers to advertise for free who will purchase the ad inventory?

Z's Ez ads don't seem to have really taken off... T already allows the brokers to post listings and now brand listings.

Sure all the ancillary services to real estate transactions (moving, painting, cable, etc) may advertise but that seems like a small percentage of traditional ad dollars that are migrating online.

Regarding who will last? At this point I have been underwhelmed with Cyberhomes but they have the most potentional due to the access to FNIS resources and data while Trulia already has many good relantionships in place and has a strong organic SE foothold but seems more vunerable due to dependance on agent community for listings.