Disqus - Friends of jsheehan200

Re: http://blog.sellsiusrealestate.com/social-media/lucky-strike-club-has-first-meetup-in-soho/2009/02/05/

Notorious R.O.B. — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 09:53:21 -0000

Hey Joe -

As I said on Twitter, I recruited us some serious help to organize this.

I think we're talking bout first TUESDAY not THURSDAY of every month, since Thursday evenings can be a tough night for some folks.

We'll talk :) And thanks for giving us the name!

-rsh

Re: Comic Book Economics By The Federal Reserve

Notorious R.O.B. — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:34:32 -0000

This just rocks. :) Thanks Joe.

-rsh

Re: Once Was America

Notorious R.O.B. — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 09:56:30 -0000

I've always found it kind of funny that Statists always seem to find force where none exists. Read the article again, and cite me just ONE place where Ben advocates forcing anyone to do anything at all. The elegy for a lost America (in Ben's mind, whether you agree or not) somehow gets converted to "force people into roles". I suppose it's because to the Statist, articulating a vision automatically means trying to force people to follow it (see, e.g., Obamacare).

As a father of two, I do wonder, however, if you choose not to have children, why my kids and grandkids should pay for your Social Security, Medicare, and the like. Talk about forcing people into roles...

-rsh

Re: Once Was America

Notorious R.O.B. — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:19:12 -0000

So "social pressure" is the same thing as "force" in your eyes?

I suppose legions of folks were forced to vote for Obama. Or pretend to be environmentalists. All results of great social pressure to conform.

It is a truism to say that with taxes you end up paying for things you don't use. So I'll make you a deal. I'll go along with you not paying taxes towards my kid's education, since I'm perfectly willing to pay for private school, if you go along with them not paying taxes towards your old age care. Deal?

This way, we can reduce taxes (which is ACTUAL force, not just social pressure, since cops with guns come to your house if you don't pay) to the bare minimum of national defense, the legal system, and one or two other things -- all clearly laid out in that old document, the Constitution.

Howzzat sound to ya?

-rsh

Re: Once Was America

Notorious R.O.B. — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 12:31:56 -0000

I figured as much, Tom.

Of course, I said nothing about "government a la carte"; what I suggested as a deal is to reduce taxes for both you and me (and my kids). I believe politicians call this 'horse trading'. But so be it.

Plus, for a guy who doesn't want to make it personal, you sure do like to characterize me as 'unwilling to help others'. I'll stack my voluntary charitable contributions as a percentage of income against yours any day. More generally, political conservatives donate more to charities than political liberals: http://www.signonsandiego.c...

Who's willing to help others again?

The difference between us, apparently, is that you see government as "helping others". How naive. I see government as "taking money from you and me at gunpoint to spend as the elite deem fit" -- including bailouts for their connected buddies, graft, corruption, and payoffs to constituents. The facts, I think, are on my side.

-rsh

Re: 5 tips for dominating local

Notorious R.O.B. — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:48:30 -0000

Good stuff, Chris.

This is one area apparently where real estate is way ahead of the curve compared to everyone else. Not surprising, I suppose, given that real estate is inherently local. Some of the top realtors do precisely this, to great effect. I might take a look at, for example, Teri Lussier's The Brick Ranch (www.thebrickranch.com). [No relationship w/ Teri; just a friend in RE.net.]

-rsh

Re: Qualify Your Prospects To Convert More Leads

Notorious R.O.B. — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 02:34:22 -0000

I'm tagging this to follow it later :)

/gets popcorn.

Re: How do you spell Twitter without a Strategy? T-O-Y…

Notorious R.O.B. — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:55:16 -0000

Hey Jim -

I suppose it's appropriate that I be the first to respond :) First, thanks for your comment and disagreement; you know I believe in learning through argument, heh.

I guess your argument boils down to something along the following:

1. Sphere of Influence ("SOI") is the key to success as a real estate agent.
2. Expanding one's SOI is the most important marketing one can do.
3. Twitter lets you leverage your existing SOI to reach people they know, thereby increasing your SOI.
4. The "relaxed social nature" of Twitter lets you easily traverse the "six degrees of separation" in Twitter to reach people you want to reach.

Let me know if I got that wrong.

I suppose that's possible. Let me distract you completely with an anecdote from my younger, single days.

Back when I was single, living in NYC, with a couple of other gainfully employed, but lonely and horny single dudes, we used to talk about the strategy for picking up chicks all the time. Of course, now that I'm married, I never have those conversations anymore.

One of the strategies we came up with was what we used to call the "Yahoo Strategy" -- this was when Yahoo was the dominant search engine. Whoa, dating myself. :) The Yahoo Strategy involved getting close to ugly girls we knew from college days or from work or whatever, and making sure she was invited to all of our parties and such. We figured that she would bring her friends who were cute, and that we would leverage our relationship with her to "link into" her friends.

Surprisingly to our young minds, this did not work as well as we'd imagined.

First, the Yahoo Girl usually suspected our motives; one of them even said to us, "You guys are using me to get to my friends." Hmm, so we weren't particularly original, I guess....

Second, the Yahoo Girl and her friends almost always conferred like they were UN bureaucrats after every party/meeting. It was like they were compiling a dossier on each of us, comparing notes, what we said to whom, etc. I'm sure there was a fair amount of cockblocking involved as well, but who knows?

The long and short of it was that we learned over time that if the Yahoo Girl did not initiate the introduction, we usually failed. Going up to a girl at a party and saying something like, "So... you're Karen's friend, eh?" resulted in the conversation being reported to Karen, and the rest of the Council, a judgment of something like, "He's such a dork" or "What a playa!" and that was that.

What ended up working for us -- well, some of us -- was to become friends with Yahoo Girl for real and stop paying attention to her friends. We'd still party, go drinking, go dancing, whatever and if Yahoo Girl came, great; if she didn't, fine. Sometimes, she'd set one of us up with one of her friends, either directly or indirectly: "You know, that Steve is awfully cute -- and he's really smart too!" or some such.

/anecdote

I suppose my view is that expanding your SOI is a wonderful thing to do, and should be a focus for realtors. I just think Twitter isn't necessarily the best channel for it, however.

First of all, exactly how "active" is your strategy going to be? Follow everyone who follows whoever follows you, then start sending them @replies? That doesn't strike you as... a wee bit creepy?

Second, will you be seeking permission from your connection to do this? Or are you seriously just counting on the "relaxed social nature" thinking that's okay? Imagine one of your contacts reached out to one of your other contacts, "Hey, so you follow @jimmarks too? Great -- I've got some oceanfront property I'd like to show you soon; DM me!" Think how mortified you'd be.

FWIW, LinkedIn does it right with the in-network introductions; it goes through your link to his link to his link and so on. That's how it probably should be. But Twitter doesn't work that way now, does it?

Third, I think 140 characters is hugely limiting. Of course, I go on and on and on, and can't seem to say "Hello" in fewer than 700 words... so there is that... but still, there's just not THAT much that can be said in 140 chars. It's just enough to maintain an existing relationship, but I'm not sold that it's adequate for developing new ones easily. I think about people I've met purely on Twitter vs. people I've met through other means -- e.g., blogs -- and it's just not that many people. Example -- I met @HeyAmaretto through her blog, because she writes beautifully. That then went into Twitter, into Blip, and then we finally met at a Lucky Strikes in person. Now we're friends.

Which is not to say it never happens; I've made enough friends on Twitter to know it does happen. But what I find is that usually, people don't become real friends until I've met them in person, or at a minimum engaged in long-form (usually blogging) to get to really know how they think, what they're interested in, etc.

FWIW, I think you want to separate "Social Media" from "Twitter" because I think LinkedIn and Facebook are both extremely effective marketing channels. Twitter, on the other hand, meh at best as a marketing channel. Again, it roxxorz as a relationship channel, assuming you have a relationship to begin with.

-rsh

Re: The Coming Civil War in Real Estate: The RPR Saga Begins

Notorious R.O.B. — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:08:11 -0000

The original webinar/webcast is now available in full:

http://webcast.streamlogics...

-rsh

Re: A Question: LPS, Marketing, and RPR

Notorious R.O.B. — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:24:26 -0000

I think the key question in your post (great one, btw) is what sort of access to RPR data, and under what terms, will the MLS have.

I would think if the RPR offered an API, Dale Ross or Marty Frame would have mentioned it.

The other part -- which I should have mentioned -- is whether the "marketing channel" of LPS includes the marketing channels that exist in LPS Real Estate Group, which sells to brokers, agents, and associations, or if it's only the LPS main group that sells to lending institutions.

My guess is that RPR data will be sold to brokers and agents under some terms of use that prohibits further re-distribution, but includes usage on consumer-facing websites. That right there could be a sticky wicket too. :)

Oh, interesting times.

-rsh

Re: In Which I Announce the Death of RPR

Notorious R.O.B. — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 05:32:27 -0000

I think the core/key to the RPR deal was the Data Analytics and the Sales & Marketing that LPS is bringing to the table. The software app itself, as cool as it is, does not generate the $$$. Those two things do.

-rsh

Re: In Which I Announce the Death of RPR

Notorious R.O.B. — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 05:34:44 -0000

I think you're right, Bob. Trouble is, won't First American (and LPS apparently) simply offer the same trade to MLS? Free data for internal use, plus data sales, but with proceeds being split with MLS directly?

-rsh

Re: In Which I Announce the Death of RPR

Notorious R.O.B. — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:05:36 -0000

Thanks for the comment, Reggie.

As I mentioned to you directly, I happen to think RPR is pretty darn cool. I have extremely high regard for all of the people involved with the project, and yes, I would like to see it be successful. So if everything you're saying is correct, then you're not going to find anyone happier for RPR than me. Well, except you, and Marty Frame and Dale Ross and others. :)

Having said that, I am merely reporting on impressions and facts. Based on those impressions and facts, I am saying that RPR -- in its current form -- is DOA.

Let's not discount the value of the cost savings for a national compilation of public data, fine. One issue there is, I just don't see why some MLS in Florida would care about getting neighborhood and school information in Seattle. They care about getting their market area data, right?

As I've reported, LPS has retained its copyrights on all of that public data. They have retained the data analytics, and they have all of the data sales and marketing channels. And they have no exclusivity, no prohibition, and no non-compete vis-a-vis RPR, based on what I've been told. IF that is untrue, and in fact, LPS cannot "compete" with RPR by working directly with a MLS, then I'll retract nearly everything I've said.

In some respects, however, exclusivity with LPS doesn't matter, because First American is still in business. Presumably, they're not just going to concede the market segment without at least a fight.

So let me spell it out:

- MLS opts out of RPR
- MLS strikes deal with FirstAm/LPS, in which they receive a license for public data that is substantially the same license that LPS has granted to RPR.
- MLS further strikes a deal with FirstAm/LPS that is substantially the same as the one that LPS has struck with RPR: MLS data is merged with public records data, products are created by the Data Analytics folks, and marketed to Wall Street through Channel Sales folks. But, instead of RPR getting 50% of the proceeds, the MLS gets 50% of the proceeds.

So at the end of the day, the bargain for an MLS to work with RPR is essentially that they surrender this 50% of the proceeds from data sales to get the RPR software, the user interface (which is admittedly very nice). Whether they do so or not depends on (a) competition, such as from Move, which we know has retained copyrights to their version; and (b) what the MLS believes the 50% of the data sales proceeds for their data (or products derived using their data) will amount to. If XYZ MLS believes that their cut of the data sales revenues will be $500/year, then they might be thrilled to sign up for RPR; if ABC MLS believes that their cut will be $1mm/year, then I really doubt they would.

The larger MLS's with significant market coverage, I would imagine, would be getting a fairly significant dollar amount for their cooperation with FirstAm/LPS post opt-out. But those are precisely the ones RPR needs to become viable.

Maybe your point is that the $12mm that NAR paid for Cyberhomes assets and a data license is money that the MLS doesn't have or won't want to spend. Maybe. What's unknown is how much the LPS data license is costing RPR every year; perhaps nothing, as it may have been a straight barter deal. Perhaps the amount is in the millions of dollars every year. All of these facts are as yet unknown, and you have the ability to reveal such information to us. Perhaps NAR/RPR struck a great deal with LPS for data license based on economies of scale; perhaps not. I for one would love to get some concrete answers to these mysteries.

So none of my points are based on skepticism of RPR; I have been singing RPR's praises as a software product. But the incentives and the economics don't appear to lineup for me, based on what I know.

As a fan of RPR, and as a fan of innovative products, I'd love to know which of the facts I'm reporting or assuming are wrong. If my facts are wrong, then my prediction of RPR's death is wrong; but if my facts are correct, then the conclusion is, I think, inevitable.

-rsh

Re: A Question: LPS, Marketing, and RPR

Notorious R.O.B. — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:34:12 -0000

Hi Kris -

I think you probably meant to post this comment on the Death of RPR post :)

I suppose if I'm wrong, that'd be just fine by me, as I like RPR quite a lot. And since I don't see myself as a "journalist" (whatever that means), I guess I'm good with looking silly a year from now. Especially since this post (as opposed to the other one to which I think you meant to respond) is pure conjecture, as evidenced by the Question at the very top of the post. :)

-rsh

Re: In Which I Announce the Death of RPR

Notorious R.O.B. — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:36:29 -0000

I'm not Reggie, and I don't play him on TV, but I did point out in the "liveblog" thread that Marty Frame mentioned a VOW API for RPR. That would imply that members would be able to provide RPR data to their clients via a VOW (Virtual Office Website) at a minimum.

Clarification would be good though.

-rsh

Re: In Which I Announce the Death of RPR

Notorious R.O.B. — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 04:41:31 -0000

Coolness -- thanks for the clarification, Reggie!

Re: Climategate & You: The Real Estate Edition

Notorious R.O.B. — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:43:01 -0000

Bye Kevin!

FWIW, I didn't tell you what *I* thought about global warming as much as I pointed out the obvious-as-your-nose fraud that was perpetrated on all of us.

Seeing as how the subject was how realtors and the real estate industry should now respond to the news of faked data, I suppose others will find it valuable even as you choose to close your eyes and ears to the information.

By the way, if you think this is the first time I've let my politics show on this blog, you obviously haven't been reading it that long... I had a post up on Obama's election night for cryin' out loud.

Finally, it's worth noting that this is my *personal* blog where I air my *personal* opinions. Let me know when you see blatant politicking on my business site or blog. Kthxbai.

-rsh

Re: Climategate & You: The Real Estate Edition

Notorious R.O.B. — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 20:49:21 -0000

"Really, Rob? I think what you've done is point out that your seemingly reasoned analysis is filtered through a particular political point of view."

Well, shoot, that would make me like... Thomas Friedman. I guess I'll have to learn to live with that.

BTW, I thought global warming wasn't politics, but science? The mask is slipping, eh?

-rsh

Re: Realogy Dodges A Bullet; Future Looks Good

Notorious R.O.B. — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 01:54:37 -0000

Ah, but Kathy, you're ignoring the fact that bankruptcy was in the cards in Q3 of 2009. The lenders chose not to go down that road, and elected to save Realogy instead, taking 68 cents on the dollar and lower priority, in exchange for 2.5% more in annual rate. What it augurs is that Realogy's creditors are very unlikely to play hardball with Realogy going forward. That looks good.

Plus, you make it sound like Realogy is just some little brokerage with nothing much going for it. Even in a horrible housing market, these guys did $1.17b in revenues. They still have major assets in our space. That augurs very well indeed.

You know what they say: owe $100K, and the bank owns you. Owe $100m, and you own the bank.

-rsh

Re: Realogy Dodges A Bullet; Future Looks Good

Notorious R.O.B. — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 11:10:22 -0000

"What good are revenues without profits?"

Well, first, they did post profits in Q3. But more importantly, revenues generate cashflow. Realogy has debts to pay -- $3B worth -- and generating $318m YTD in cashflow to pay those creditors is a good thing for all involved.

As to the "assets" vs. "assets", you're taking the terms out of context, KathLEEN (hehe, sorry about that). In the first graf, assets are meant in the context of a liquidation proceeding; in the second, it includes the intellectual property, goodwill, etc. that generate cashflow.

Finally, the future looks bright to me because the major reason why Realogy is posting losses is debt service. If you look on the 10-Q, you find that for first 9 months of 2008, Realogy had interest expenses of $468m and posted a loss of ($210m); for first 9 months of 2009, they had $430m in interest expense and ($216m) in losses. It sucks for the shareholders and employees of Realogy, perhaps, since that $430m could have gone to them, but as a going concern, Realogy isn't doing that badly.

It's like the family that overextended on a mortgage, is now underwater, but is still making monthly payments -- while skipping meals out, vacations, and a new car. Then the bank comes along and restructures the mortgage so as to prevent them from going into foreclosure, with promises of more restructurings if the husband loses his job. Yeah, I'd say the future looks pretty good.

But that's just me -- not saying invest in Realogy securities, but things don't look grim and dire.

-rsh

Re: Future of Mobile in Real Estate: B2B, not B2C

Notorious R.O.B. — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 10:51:43 -0000

Great stuff, Victor -- and it's shocking that B2B adoption is less than 5%.

Now, it occurs to me, Victor, that an MLS more than any other entity has the power to enforce technology standards. Yes, the users will bitch and moan about it, but the fact is that today, the MLS is a de facto monopoly within its area -- somewhat like how cable TV used to be.

Why couldn't an MLS -- like Trend -- simply say, "Our mobile platform is BlackBerry" and urge its members to switch to that platform? If their mobile app is really providing the value it should be, then professionals whose livelihood depends on data access, would switch. Spending $400 on a mobile device if you are a working real estate agent is not an undue burden.

I rather think MLS's and brokerages should stop trying to support all of the wide variety of platforms out there and just pick one -- then deliver an optimized superior experience to that platform such that the users are able to get business value from the mobile app.

-rsh

Re: On Social Media Education

Notorious R.O.B. — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 21:26:21 -0000

Thanks Matt :) Bill is indeed a mensch, and you guys at C21 should highlight the dude more. Actually, have Bill and me at your annual conference debating this topic -- it'll be fun for all. :)

In any case, the only place where I differ with you is this: "social media is a culture all of its own". My point is that the INTERNET is a culture all of its own; the ability for many-to-many conversation is enormously transformative, and created the culture of the Web. Trouble is, that culture at its very heart is uncontrolled and uncontrollable. Any attempts to do so ends up sounding fake and hollow.

So yeah, good writing skills are useful on the Web. They're also useful everywhere else, and was useful back when Homer was writing on papyrii with octopus ink. And with the many-to-many environment of the Web, I think anything other than being yourself will get sniffed out and in a hurry: far too many critics. :)

Which leads to... value of social media training. I can see it being useful as a way of deprogramming realtors who have been brainwashed into being realtors 24x7 -- I wonder if single realtors go on dates and try to get listings. But apart from the decrypting, what is the value of such training? How will anyone measure the value?

If I go and pay $250 to be trained on how to do REO's and short sales, at the end of that session, I should know how to do a REO transaction. What should I know how to do after a SM training session, that I didn't know how to do before it?

-rsh

Re: On Social Media Education

Notorious R.O.B. — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 09:25:27 -0000

I think the little Korean BBQ jaunt is going to turn into something more akin to the Symposium :) You, Joel, Marc, and dozens of others I can think of all drinking and eating and talking this stuff? :D

Let's set the groundwork for some of the discussion we may be having there.

1. I think it's a grave error on the part of so many social media partisans to look at the Obama campaign as a success story for social media. If anything, I regard Obama campaign as the crowning testimonial to the power of mainstream media who did everything possible to suppress all of the news, info, and revelations coming out of social media. I wonder if the 2012 elections will be different; if it is, then we'll know that social media has truly arrived.

2. At the heart of our disagreement is this:

Remember that every communication between individuals is comprised of three things
1. What the sender wanted to communicate
2. The message they sent
3. The perception of the communication by the recipient.
There is always some variance between the three - the trick is to minimize that variance so you get what you were trying to send - and that's where the training comes in.

To me, Bill, this is public relations 101. And it goes counter to the grain of Cluetrain and the culture of the Web, which calls for the natural human voice, as it actually sounds when people are un-self-consciously chatting. I fear that this sort of conscious, intentional focus on "what you want to communicate, perception thereof, etc." is taking a few steps down the path of the corporate voice, the sales pitch, the ad jingle. And quite frankly, that's how so many realtor social media efforts sound -- quite like a sales jingle and quite unlike a normal person talking.

If the purpose of social media education is to train individuals how to be "more professional" in the chaos that is the Web... okay, I can see the value in that... but I also can't see it being all that successful in the end because the resulting work product will be closer to what Publicis puts out than what a free individual puts out, and people will feel it instinctively.

Furthermore, if the focus of social media is on the message and the crafting of the message and the perception of the message, then I think it will end up ultimately doing more harm than good because it necessarily detracts from the much harder and much more valuable work of creating the better product. Would it not ultimately be more effective for a realtor to spend the limited time she has on becoming the best damn agent she could be, and being herself free of worry about what message she is sending out? I argue that it is, and your take on social media training, I'm afraid, takes the focus away from actually BEING the best to messaging to SEEM like the best.

-rsh

Re: On Social Media Education

Notorious R.O.B. — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 09:29:16 -0000

So Ardell,

"2) Effectiveness of Social Media education

You cannot measure the effectiveness of social media or education on social media if you don't understand who is to benefit from social media. A person who is thinking about buying a house who is able to google questions at 2.a.m. in their jammies,is the person who benefits from social media. When the consumer can access real info and discussions on how to approach buying a house or what actually happens during escrow, then social media will have "succeeded". At its best, social media has a blog post outlining the topic, and many comments from people buying homes who are talking about that experience in the comments, with the post author addressing the questions of many home buyers REAL questions in the comments.

Until agents understand that the net result of "good" social media is not about them at all, the discussion is tilted in the wrong direction."

Would you then say that an agent who spends 4 hours a day blogging and doing "social media", thereby benefiting numerous consumers, but generates exactly ZERO inquiries or leads or transactions from all of that effort is engaging in a successful social media practice?

And that is what you would advocate in your training sessions?

-rsh

Re: Who You Gonna Call? Part 1: Audience Participation

Notorious R.O.B. — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:08:11 -0000

Care to pick one (first name or initials or whatever) and explain why?