I might be on the first page of  Google for the search term “real estate in the United States of America.”

What does that do for my seller in New York?

The answer is nothing – absolutely nothing.  The same could be said for being on page one for “New York real estate.”  That might get me a lot of phone calls, but  it does nothing for a seller in a village or town in lower Westchester.   People who are searching an entire state may not even be contemplating a purchase.  Why are they looking?  Who knows?   And if – perchance – they are looking to buy a home in that state – they are a looooong way from  buying anything.  They are cutting a wide swath because they don’t know what they want yet.

How about the search criteria – “Westchester real estate”?

What does this do for my seller in White Plains?

Well, we are closer – but no cigar.  That buyer is  searching an entire county.  This isn’t a buyer – it is a long-term lead that an agent might cultivate over a period of six months to two years.   This does nothing for a seller whose home is on the market NOW.

How about the search “real estate White Plains”?

What does this do for my seller in Gedney Farms (a famous neighborhood)  or in Jefferson Place (a large condo complex)?

Well, we are certainly getting warmer – but have you ever looked at what comes up with such a search?  Not so great as one might expect.  When I searched “White Plains real estate”  Google pulled up several broker sites and maybe one or two agent sites.  Most of these were “sponsored” – that is the brokerages or agent paid for that position.  The organic results (not sponsored)  pulled up large national sites such as Trulia and Zillow.   These are still big generic sites that are guiding the buyer to their public-facing MLS – which covers the entire county and beyond.

Anyone happy with those results is still a long way from buying.  Those who are narrowing down their search are frustrated. By the time most buyers are ready to call an agent or are ready to go to open houses – they are drilling down to specific neighborhoods, subdivisions or condo/coop complexes.   The frustrated group is going to scrap that search and start looking for far more specific search terms.

But its those very frustrated searchers that sellers want to pull in. Those with an itchy finger on the trigger that are ready to act and are looking in your subdivision or your condo complex.  Sellers – listen up – you want your listing front and center to this type of buyer.

How about a search for “[Jefferson Place] White Plains NY” or “[Gedney Farms] White Plains NY”?

Does this  help my seller in Gedney Farms or Jefferson Place.  YES!

This can and does help.  A web page about a complex or subdivision that ranks on the first page of Google that is  linked to specific listing information is something that will catch a buyer’s eye.  This is what is know as a long-tail search. One that drills down to very specific terms and pin-points what the searcher is looking for.

It is interesting to note that this may not help the agent grab buyers as much as they would like to.  By that time, many may already have agents.  But – once they find the information – their agent will show them the property.

In a market with high inventory loads as high as they are, being on the first page for THIS kind of search  – puts the listing front and center to the most buyers that are actually ready to make a commitment.

So yes, an agent having a presence on the first page of Google matters – as long as the search criteria is specific enough to pull in ready, willing and able buyers.

© 2010 – Ruthmarie G. Hicks – http://thewestchesterview.com.  All rights reserved.

First, the inspiration for this post belongs to C.Tann-Starr. She wrote a tremendously refreshing and honest post  - Momentum After The Tax Credit Expires? Seriously? Suffering From Lookie-Lou-Itis?

Second, I don’t have a crystal ball.  I can only use common sense to look ahead.  The only thing I know is this:  What goes up, must come down – and what goes down, eventually goes back up.  We can also look to the past in order to better see the future.

How I stole a house in 1996:

The year was 1996 and willy nilly I found myself thrown into the housing market. There were no incentives out there, no $8000 tax credits, interest rates were hovering between 7-8%.  The country was MIRED in a real estate recession that seemingly had no end.  Few were buying – and those that were – were offering low ball  after low ball.  Homes languished on the market for months if not years.

But I needed to move.  I moved back in with my mother when she became ill and now she had passed on.  It was time to sell the big family home that had housed three generations of my family.

My friends told me I was crazy:

Why buy in this mess?  And a HOUSE no less. Wouldn’t a condo be less risky?  Surely prices would drop still further – in a few years they told me – I would be able to “steal a house.”   But driving the purchase of a house forward were two issues.   I had two dogs – one was mine, one was my mother’s.  Renting can be problematic – particularly since my mother’s dog was a “barker.” Then there was the condo vs. house conundrum.  Market forces pushed me towards a house when I recognized that home prices had fallen further than condo prices.  In fact, at that time I  could buy a house for less than I could purchase a comparable condo.

So I bought a house.  I bought the house for $245,000.  Prices continued to decline for another 18 months.  My initial “investment” went down in value during that time.  Prices didn’t start to climb back up for another 2-3  years.  Then I sat and watched the biggest housing boom in history unfold before me.

The lien on the home now is roughly $160,000.  Even after an over 20% correction in our city’s home market…my home is worth nearly double what I paid for it.  The likelihood that I would ever be underwater on said house is pretty slim.  Prices would have to go back to levels not seen since the mid 1980s for that to happen.

The lesson here was that I bought into weakness.  When everyone was scared and staying away, circumstances forced me to the plate and I pulled the trigger.

I pulled the trigger while others waited and watched:

At the time there were many more buyers that decided to “wait it out” so they could “steal  a home.” Many of those lookie lous that held  would  later  look back wistfully at the period before 1998 saying “Those were the good old days!  Houses were cheap and there were plenty to pick from. I wish I had bought back then!”  They never got their “steal” because they waited until a boom was in full force before pulling the trigger.    I got the steal.  How?  By paying market value for a home when prices were depressed and everyone was running scared.

The fence sitters of today may well look back upon this time the same way  people  looked upon the mid-90s.   For home buyers, these may well be the good old days!

© Ruthmarie G. Hicks – http://thewestchesterview.com – All rights reserved.

In truth, I can’t blame sellers for this…their minds have been levered to continued price increases to such an extent that the current market has left most sellers blind sided.

The first thing I often hear is that “I need to get X out in order to buy my next home which I can now get for Y  because its gone down in price.    The trouble if the property you want to buy has gone down so much in price, chances are the property that you want to sell has gone down by a similar percentage.  Wishful thinking is often the culprit here.  Markets are fluid – that was fine when prices were going up – but it also holds true when prices decline.

Misinformation is another issue.  Many sellers look at what their neighbor is asking for their home.  Asking isn’t getting.  Many listings are overpriced  in this market – so setting your price on the basis of other listings is not a wise strategy.

“But my neighbor sold their house for X just six months ago!”  Six months is a lifetime in a depreciating market.   If your market is depreciating – and many markets still are – then prices have decreased over six months.

Zillow zestimates and other information on the internet may or may not be accurate.  Zillow has been off as much as 25% in our area.   So if the zestimate of your property seems too good to be true, it probably is.

If you need to sell, price your home competitively – this is particularly important in a declining market where inventories are high and buyers are few. Overpricing your property will result in fewer or no showings.  The property will sit as the market declines further – resulting in an even lower price down the road.   Overpricing a home is just about the worst thing you could do in this competitive market.

© 2010 Ruthmarie G. Hicks – http://thewestchesterview.com – All rights reserved.

Since there was such a debate over my blog on designations and their relative value, I thought it would be nice if I culled through the responses in order to get a consensus and also offer up some references for further reading.

There were 41 responders to the blog – excluding those who posted more than once and of course my responses.  There were three distinct camps:

1.  49% Felt designations were of dubious value (I included myself in that group.)
2.  29% Felt that having one or two made sense.
3.  22% Felt  that felt multiple designations were valuable.

This is hardly scientific and may be skewed against the pro-designation camp because of the venue involved.  Bloggers as a group are probably more likely to gain knowledge through reading and disseminating information on-line and may have less of a need for a formal classroom.

One trend I did see was that of all the designations out there the CRS appeared to mentioned over and over again as the most valuable for the agent and their clients.  Here is link to blog about the CRS  - My CRS Designation – by Randy Prothero.

The following are some links for further reading on this subject.

The e-Pro Designation – Where it all began for me….

My journey started with the ePro designation So I first turn to Jim Cronin of the Real Estate Tomato for inspiration:  e-Pro is a Tinfoil Badge.

Nick Van Assche also wrote something similar on AR in 2008.  E-Pro is a waste of a designation.

Designations and Agent Education in General….

Kris Berg from Inman wrote a scathing piece on  the state of the low bar to entry and the training that is currently state-of-the-art for agents.  In Real estate dodges tech bullet - she mentions designations specifically.  For those who thought that what I wrote was too strong,  I warn you – this article might raise your blood pressure to a point of no return.  She writes better than I do – so it is well worth the read and if you like sarcasm, you will like Kris Berg.

While you are at it, you might also want to take a look at another article she wrote along a similar train of thought.  Don’t forget the customer.

Mariana Wagner  of Agent Genius wrote a very critical blog about designations and the process.    Proposed New Real Estate Designations for 2009.

Renee Porsia – also from Agent Genius – wrote a piece highly critical of the “self-aggrandizing” ways in which agents behave and unleashed some of her wrath on those with too many designations.  Do You Need a Trophy Case For Your Meaningless Accolades?

Also, David Saks wrote a rather strong blog on AR.   Designations: Continuing Education or Continuing Humongous Absurd Rip Off ???

So there you have it. There is a body of opinion within the industry that shares some of the concerns that I brought up in my post.  The issues have been  out there and are under continuous debate.  So please don’t shoot the messenger.

© 2010 Ruthmarie G. Hicks http://theWestchesterView.com. All rights reserved.

Personally, I have a problem with designations simply because the testing required doesn’t have any teeth to show that the agent actually learned something.    Much of the testing is open book – and sustaining the designation involves paying your way and has nothing to do with learning new skills.

Agents have always wanted to look upon themselves as “professionals.”  Often likening themselves to doctors and lawyers and other high-paying professions.  A truly skilled agent is indeed worth a great deal.  However, how can our “value” be disseminated by the public when “qualifications” are shrouded in a blizzard of inexplicable letters?

Those other professionals that we often choose to intone in the same breath with our own  actually utilize degree granting institutions to confer professional or academic degrees upon their candidates.   Wow!  What a concept!  They actually expect the candidate to earn a degree that requires a some amount of academic rigor.   Maintaining the degree does not involve a fee. Another unique concept!  It may seem strange but my alma mater has not threatened to take away my doctorate just because I didn’t contribute the the alumni association. Once conferred, most  degrees actually stay with the candidate. Again – a unique concept.

Its also interesting that most professionals that go through extensive  courses of study don’t put every single degree they ever earned at the end of their name.  Had I splattered my degrees after my name the way some agents display their designations, it would have turned signing my name a massive ordeal.  It would also have looked absurd.   Somehow, I can’t imagine calling myself Dr. Ruthmarie G. Hicks, B.A., M.A., M.S., Ph.D. At least not while keep a straight face.   In all seriousness, who would do this?  Had I put all that gobbledegook  on my professional card, I would have been a laughing stock.

So why do agents persist in this?  Perhaps we are trying too hard to show that we are serious professionals.  But in so doing we actually trivialize  our position and make ourselves look foolish. Wouldn’t actually BEING a serious professional be more effective then leaving a blizzard of initials in our wake?

We need to ask ourselves, does any other profession really do this?  Perhaps if we want to be taken more seriously, we need to rethink what message it sends when throw designations all over the place like they were confetti.  If we don’t, someone will come up with a series of designations that read

Th ISIS ToTaL CraP.

Don’t think it can’t happen.

© Ruthmarie G. Hicks, http://thewestchesterview.com.  All rights reserved.

But Tundra has taken to wanting to be in the driver’s seat.  I’ve told her that she needs to be at least 16 for a learners permit, but she just doesn’t want to listen.  So when I get back to the car – it really looks like she’s driving the vehicle.

It reminds me of one of my favorite SNL skits from the late 80s.  “Toonces the Driving Cat.”  For those who are too young to remember – enjoy  the clip.  For those of us who were watching SNL in the late 80s and early 90s – this should bring back memories.

Sure, I’d love to look the way I did 20 years ago. Well…not quite. I’d love to look as YOUNG as I did 20 years ago and still have an updated look that says 2010 – not 1990.   One of the reasons I don’t have a photo on my business card or web site is because agent photos have gotten so ridiculous.  I’m firmly convinced that if I put my 45-year-old mug on a card, people would automatically think I was 80 years of age.  After all, having a photo that is dated to about half of our actual age seems to be the industry standard.

So here are 10 signs that the photo on your card and other publicity might be a tad — ahem— dated.

1. You have a child the same age you were when that photo was actually taken.
2. Your eyeglasses cover your entire face.
3. Your hair is bigger than the eyeglasses that cover your entire face.
4. The padded shoulders on your power suit make you look like a football player.
5. Your kids laugh hysterically when they see the photo and ask “did you really look like that once?”
6. Your hair, clothing, and makeup make you look like you are dressed for a costume party with a vintage theme.
7. NO ONE recognizes you from your photo.
8. You have a full head of hair and sideburns in the photo – even though you have been bald for years.
9. You lapels and tie are so wide they cover your entire chest.
10. Your new client runs away in fear because they think the strange older person approaching them is impersonating the young hot agent they contacted.

© 2010 Ruthmarie G. Hicks, http://thewestchesterview.com.  All rights reserved.

Now, I think most consumers would understand that in order to keep their doors open, a brokerage needs to be profitable.  The bottom line for any business is that they must turn a profit or close their doors.   Ideally, profitability should be tied to customer service.  The agents of a brokerage should provide outstanding customer service including intelligent negotiating skills, a fine marketing plan, and service that smoothes  the transaction process.  Unfortunately, that model is not the prevailing one among brokerages.

The way brokerages function often is a mystery to the consumer and it often comes as a shock to new agents who think that the brokerage is there to “support” them.  After all they are paying very hefty splits to the brokerage -supposedly for leads and support and training from the brokerage. And therein lies the rub for the consumer.  Most brokerages disconnected from customer service and the newly licensed agent course became the big  cash cow.  They recruited and recruited throwing  anyone with a license and a pulse up against a wall and hoping that something will stick.  Even a non-productive agent had a couple of good deals in them from family and friends.

But what does this offer the consumer?  Pretty much nothing more than a crap shoot with respect to selecting an agent.  WIth “training” generally at a minimum and a lot of newly licensed hopefuls trying to learn by the school of hard-knocks, the consumer is left out in the cold.  This model has been  a win-win for the brokerages and a lose-lose for the consumer.

Has this worked for the agents?  No, not at all.  The ease with which a license can be gotten and the fact that most brokerages will recruit just about anyone has created a glut of agents that has been seen in very few areas of business.  The joke is that you can’t throw a rock out the window without  hitting a real estate agent and I would say that this is largely true.  The result is thousands of agents crawling all over the unsuspecting public for a small slice of the real estate pie.  Some competent professionals, but many more struggling agents who haven’t seen a deal in months if not years.  For those who must make their bread and butter this way, the time and money spent lead generating is daunting and inevitably impacts the time spent on customer service.

Thus you have the vicious circle:  As more brokerages recruit ever more agents, each brokerage must step-up to get more of their share of agents.  As this continues, customer service gets left behind and the system becomes so glutted that the focus has to be on generating new leads.  Right now brokerages are addicted to sheer volume. Customer service will only return when someone gets brave enough to turn the model on its ear and say “quality over quantity.”  I’m not holding my breath…

© 2010 – Ruthmarie G. Hicks – http://thewestchesterview.com – All rights reserved.

The contrast between old-school hyper-local agents and the newer nomad agnet was driven home to me while I was working with two listing agents who still work exclusively in small niche markets.  I was at a closing with one of them and she implied that since I had the entire city of White Plains to cover, why didn’t I simply refer out the client who finally bought in Scarsdale?

Can a real estate agent be too local?

I knew that the attitude about staying hyper-local is alive and well though it appears to be a staple of old-school real estate.  Still, I was more than a tad surprised.  Scarsdale is not the moon.  It is the town directly adjacent to the west side of White Plains and about a whopping six miles from my front door to the center of the village.  If we followed this line of thinking to its most extreme would mean that a buyer potentially moving from New York City to Westchester NY would have to have as many as five or six agents to explore all the possibilities open to them that were within about 30 minute commute.    For the consumer this seems most unwieldy if not highly impractical.  Could you imagine the mountain of agents all crawling over each other for the buyer’s attention?  What a mess. Not to mention a monster of coordination.

From the agent’s perspective, there could also be a danger to being too local. What if something happens to that small segment of the market you represent?  If your geography/price range are razor thin – you are setting yourself up for trouble.  This was clearly seen this year when agents who specialized in small high-end markets got creamed because jumbo loan issues bit them in the backside.   Another listing agent I encountered was used to selling about 10 major properties a year – but this year had only managed a single sale.

The nomad real estate agent:

On the other hand, we have the opposite trend.  I’m seeing this from the listing side.  There are a cohort of listing agents that are increasing their range to encompass as many as five counties.  These agents list in such a wide ranging area that I refer to them as “Nomads.” (Please don’t yell at me if you are from a rural region.  I am speaking from a local perspective in a densely populated area.)  Densely populated areas tend to have more gyrations in market conditions per square mile than more rural locations.  The number of towns, cities and villages with their local governments and school systems  within Westchester County alone is daunting enough.  Market  nuances that can seriously impact home values would be a black box to an agent that is overextended geographically.   I have to question whether this is in the best interests of the seller.   Let me put it this way:   If going to each listing once a week would entail a gasoline bill that looks like the national debt – I submit that you are probably trying to cover too much ground  and that this could seriously impact the result to the client.

Why do I say this?  Well, I’m a numbers type of person, and I started looking at the raw numbers of agents who cover large territories and found a disturbing trend.  I will give the caveat that this was not totally scientific. I looked at a handful of agents randomly.  Still, the results from my informal survey were pretty compellling.  When comparing solds to expireds and cancelleds, the ratio of closed sales to listings was consistently under 50% .  35-45% success appeared to be the norm for the Nomads  whereas anything from a 55-90% success rate was the norm for those who stuck closer to home.   To be fair, I  chose not to include expired or cancelled listings that the agent re-listed.  Nor did I include sales listings that wound up as rentals.   The further the range, the lower the actual ability to close the sale.

Now, as a business model, being a Nomad might make sense.  It’s probably exhausting to service so many listings that fail, but  many businesses are based on throwing as much up against a wall as they can to see what sticks.  It can be profitable to work that way.

But what about the seller?   For the seller, listings that just won’t sell are like beating your head against a wall – it feels so good when it finally stops.

Personally, I take a line right down the middle of this controversy.  I have too many buyer clients who want one-stop shopping to limit myself to one town or community.   Therefore, with respect to buyers, I cover pretty much the bottom half of the county. With  listings, I have traditionally stayed closer to home.  However, I am gradually extending my listing range to also encompass the lower part of the county.  When listing opportunities arise in areas where I have not taken listings previously, I generally choose to work with a co-listing agent who is experienced with respect to the neighborhood in question.   In that way, I have started to expand my territory while retaining top service for my clients.

© 2010 Ruthmarie G. Hicks, http://thewestchesterview.com All rights reserved.

Sellers with homes listed today will be able to identify with some of the antics that buyers in a bear market will pull.  But this is about a listing that was active 14 years ago in 1996 – during another deep housing recession.   I wasn’t a real estate agent at the time,  I was a seller.  My mother had just died after a prolonged illness and I was listing her house for sale.  The house in question was a beautiful 1932 Tudor sitting on prime property with sweeping golf course views in wonderful residential area in White Plains.  There was a good deal of emotion involved since the home in question had been designed by my Grandmother and built by my Grandfather.

Although I wasn’t an agent  I was smart enough to read the newspapers and  so I know it was a crummy market.   The house would have been worth roughly $600k just a few short years ago – but in 1996-1997 I was hoping for about $550k – but knew I would probably only see a litte more than $500k. Gut instinct told me to rent the place, but my co-executor was adamant that the house had to be sold.

Nothing prepared me for the crazy home buyers that came through looking for a “deal.”

90% of them were bottom-feeders looking to steal a house – and looking for ANY excuse to chisel  the price to the bone.   My beleaguered broker  came to me with all sorts of concession requests – some of which made  sense.  But more often than not, the requests bordered on the absurd. Some of the more hilarious issues are worth noting because when we see frustrated sellers – we need to be aware that their pain is real and that some of the crazy concessions being asked by buyers can be truly ridiculous.

Among the more ridiculous issues I encountered:

1. “We are offering $50k less than listing price because  the fact that one bedroom is on the ground floor, makes this a 3 BR house. “

My response to my broker:   That non-bedroom was quite large with two ample closets and a full bath.  Further there are two other full baths in the house and an additional half-bath – so there is no bathroom shortage either.

2. “Since the house is ‘old’ I want the ENTIRE PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS replaced from scratch at the seller’s expense.”

My response to my broker: Sorry, the electrical is fully updated and I’m not pulling every single pipe out and replacing the entire plumbing system.

3. “Since the house obviously has lead paint – I want all the walls stripped of all lead paint at the seller’s expense.”

My response to my broker: You’ve got to be kidding – it’s a 3500 sq.ft. house with cathedral ceilings.  Tell them to  buy a newer home if they feel that strongly about it.

4. “I don’t like the Tudor look of the wood beams across the living room ceiling.  I want $20k off the house to be able to drywall over them.”

My response to my broker: If they don’t like Tudors, why are they bidding on a Tudor home?  There is a glut of homes on the market and this is TUDOR – so much so that Henry VIII would find the home quite comfortable.

5. “I want all the asbestos removed completely even if it is encased and not friable at the seller’s  expense.”

My response to my broker:  Sorry, the asbestos is contained and in good condition (not friable) I’m not about to open Pandora’s box and create a problem that didn’t exist before.

6. “We want all the windows changed out at the seller’s expense because they are so old.”

My response to my broker: Yes most of the windows ARE old but the reason they are still there is that they are one-of-a-kind original leaded stained glass windows!  I’m not taking those out.
Note: My favorite comments involved the balcony.  To me it was a beautiful and elegant feature – but boy did it become a bone of contention.

7. “I have two children, that balcony is DANGEROUS, they could fall off.  But I’ll consider it anyway if you knock off  $20k.”

My response to my broker: How did they determine that each child’s life was worth about $10k?  $20k is not going to solve this problem.  They either need to admit that this is a red herring or move on to a home that they have fewer fears about.

8. “The balcony overlooks the living room and there is a big picture window.  I could see a burglar entering through the LR window – swinging on the chandelier, landing on the balcony and entering our bedrooms at night.”

My response to my broker:  They’ve  been watching too many action movies.  My family has lived in this house for nearly 65 years and you would be amazed to know that NO ONE has ever tried to do that.

So when I have sellers who are tearing their hair – I try to look back over 13 years  and remember crazy and out-of-control things seemed to me.  I would add that my ability to play hard ball reflected my situation.  There was no lein on the home and at the time, property taxes weren’t that high.  I had the luxury of being somewhat picky.  For those who really need to sell,  its a far more complex problem.

© 2010 Ruthmarie Garcia Hicks http://thewestchesterview.com All rights reserved.