Hacker News Reader

Comment by ekrebs | Hacker News Reader

Agents and homeowners have been taking photos of homes for sale for decades, and all sorts of private info has leaked this way. I’m in the industry on the tech side and I’ve seen photos of people naked in mirrors, signed documents, children, hobbies/interests, framed photos saying things like “Joseph Edward Smith - born Aug 6, 2010”, bills and more.

This technology makes it more likely for the volume of leaked data to increase, and the photo resolutions give more data per image, but agents have been trained to stage houses for a long time and should be expected to handle this. Blame the agent.

Although the tech certainly has room for improvement. All it takes is for someone to sue Zillow for exposing their private images online for automatic blurring technology to magically appear.

View on HN

> All it takes is for someone to sue Zillow for exposing their private images online for automatic blurring technology to magically appear.

Honestly, I would expect such an event to lead to an indemnity clause magically appearing in their future contracts - it's the lowest effort option which gives sufficient defense.

Beyond assisting with contractual matters and negotiation, I feel this is the last value proposition of real estate agents.

We've had videos and virtual tours for a long time. I no longer need someone to show me around a physical space.

Making the process of searching for - and hopefully purchasing - your "dream home" as smooth and safe as possible is arguably the best way for these agents to retain their jobs as we enter an age where much of what they do can be automated.

I disagree. I found a lot of value in my realtor learning what we were looking for in a house and only showing me the ones he thought we would like. Some things can't be reduced to search terms.

Now, whether or not that's worth the high percentage they skim off the top is a whole 'nother question.

> Some things can't be reduced to search terms

I often find the process of mapping jargon takes one about halfway to expertise in many matters. Learning the search terms, their nuances, and their flexibility is work. There is value in someone who can translate my rambling into those terms.

> Now, whether or not that's worth the high percentage they skim off the top is a whole 'nother question.

This isn't how it works where I live. As a buyer, you pay no commission. The seller pays his agent a commission and your agent negotiates with the seller for a portion of that commission.

I thought my current house was garbage when I saw it on a virtual tour and only went to view it to amuse my agent who claimed he had found my house. I was skeptical but there’s a lot that doesn’t translate and my agent was right.

Like many other professionals, their services are only valueable if you value your time.

I don’t want to become an expert in real estate. I just want a place that matches my needs, has the right mojo, and fits my budget. I have time to see 3 places.

When that’s you, suddenly realtors (or a bored spouse with lots of free time) are crazy valuable.

Not being en expert in the place where you make your largest investment and commit your life to seems a bad idea. What is more important?

Exactly. Would you rather go with the advice of an expert who’s been doing this full time for 10 years, or the advice of an enthusiast who spent 3h/week for a few months (yourself) for something so important?

I can see having the virtual tours as a first pass to avoid needing to drive over, but they can't replace a physical tour at all. There's no sense of scale or size in the virtual tour, as images on a screen feel much different than being somewhere. You can't tell if the house smells of mildew. You can't have stand in the kitchen while somebody walks upstairs to see how much sound carries through the floorboards.

>There's no sense of scale or size in the virtual tour, as images on a screen feel much different than being somewhere.

Judging by the ludicrous FOV estate agents typically use in photos, that's a feature (to them) - as are the other limitations you cite.

But they aren’t the buyers

They are the buyers of the software.

Definitely agree. It's kind of hilarious when you see the same room in two different pictures, taken from different angles. The aspect ratio of the furniture looks completely different.

There's also a trend of photoshopping furniture into an image, which I cannot stand. The entire point of photographing a room with furniture is to give a sense of the scale in it. That simply doesn't happen with photoshopped furniture, because the relative size is determined by the scaling of the images, rather than the actual size of the room/furniture. The photoshopped images should be viewed with extreme suspicion, and only the barest hair's breadth away from false advertising.

Yeah, don't get me started on how offensive those furniture renders are.

I agree the FOV takes some getting used to, to mentally adjust for, but I like that you can see so much more of the room that way. In listings without the super wide lens, you just see a little corner of the room in each photo.

And you'll never see that one corner of the room that the camera somehow missed, where the ceiling has a hole due to the roof leaking.

> I no longer need someone to show me around a physical space.

Yes you do. Sellers get to be picky. Especially in Covid. They aren't letting in looky-loos. At bare minimum you need to have an agent and pre-approval as a buyer so you come across as serious and interested, or you aren't getting into homes right now (speaking of Bay Area).

And if you aren't going in person, you shouldn't be submitting offers.

I'm shocked Realator's even exist today. That shock is 10 fold for what they financially make too. I imagine a few percent of the cheerleaders/pretty boys make a lions share though?

Eight courses, and a easy test, and you are set to go. Two years experience under a Broker (CA law) was passed a few years. (The experience bill was heavily lobbied by Realator's lobby, and sadily--Gov. Brown signed it. During the hearing 1 example of inexperience was noted as the reason for the change in requirements. A four year degree was all that was required before Realtor's got their mitts on a bill.

The result has been less competition among brokers, while their job has gotten easier. Easier in terms of digital hone showings, and all their other tech being thrown at them.

The biggest schmoozer, or cheerleader, are usually the only one's making a very comfortable living?

I never thought I would say this, but I'm waiting for the profession to be gone.

It's just an added expense to overpriced homes. 6% on a 2 million house is crazy, and I'm even a fan of paying full commissions.

A four year degree for a flipping estate agent WTF.

You know what's even easier than becoming a real estate agent? Becoming a programmer. No training or certification at all!

Your comment reads as you don’t need a realtor as a buyer — and I agree to an extent. I always thought that the service was provided for the seller

Things our agent did I would not have done or not done properly on top of the paperwork and legal advice:

- got us in touch with home stylist and a photographer who were great

- had a phone book of prospective customers looking for a place like ours

- followed up with people who were interested and arranged a second showing

About the commissions, either it is very regional or we were lucky but we agreed on a flat fee plus some percent if and only if the price goes above some target.

I will also add the VERY, VERY, VERY important step of being a layer of communication between you and the buyer. With that relay, no statements made by you about the state or condition of your home would ever be directly seen by the buyer. That's probably why realtors have those discussions with sellers and their agents via telephone as well.

If there is human/human interaction and mediation and negotiation over hundreds of thousands of dollars there is always going to be a human in the middle. Always.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com