Wisest of the crowds

Who you ask? Banksy is a UK based artist that has largely used the streets of London as his canvas. Yes, it is graffiti. But really it is so much more. His manifesto gets to the point. It is political and social satire simply executed. The process of having to create a piece of art in a handful of minutes means that the art has to be direct and to the point. Nothing is wasted or indulgent. Banksy is, I guess, reminding us about the state of things and the state of our humanity. Or he is just another opportunitist media whore and I am a sucker.

Banksy was the subject of an article in the New Yorker entitled “Banksy was here” by Lauren Collins. My favorite quote:

“Imagine a city where graffiti wasn’t illegal, a city where everybody could draw wherever they liked,” he once wrote. “Where the street was awash with a million colors and little phrases. . . . A city that felt like a party where everyone was invited, not just the estate agents and barons of big business.”

So the question is why am I saying be like Banksy? Well, his art is simply reminding us, if I may be so bold, to be ourselves again and to take back the world from the stories we are told by people we don’t care about. People, typically, that run crap brands that make promises like “eat me and you will be happy (but fat)” or “buy me and you will be beautiful (but poor)”. We own the world and we will think for ourselves. Bring a point of view and decide for yourself. Look around and see what is happening. Do you approve? Feels somehow like I am just waking up and feel like the one guy who wasn’t in on the joke.

Okay so I am not some lefty anarchist. In fact I am the opposite. I believe markets are an underutilized gift (clearly). I also believe certain institutions and government have a key role. But my hope is that the artificial value being extracted by incumbent businesses based on false promises - promises that most people have been brainwashed to believe in - are over. The internet is changing the way we do business and everyday people will benefit. Will you be a force of change or will you help enslave another generation of suckers?

No not what you are thinking - not social, ethnic, or racial discrimination. Redfin discriminates on price. PRICE! The 60 minutes piece was a yawn for me personally but it does give Americans the right to start to push back. See the posts and comments at TechCrunch, Redfin, Inman, BloodHound for an early read. Whether it becomes a consumer zeitgeist or fades will be seen but the open question is this: will price variation become mainstream in american residential real estate?

There is an old economic idea called price discrimination that is popular with every micro-econ 101 student, and their professors, that says you reach more customers and make more money by offering variation in pricing. Its sort of definitional for anyone who believes in supply and demand. It works like this: when you go to see a baseball game, there are a 100 variations in pricing to meet everyones needs and to tap into every possible cross section of demand. For example, there are ticket prices for corporations who entertain in luxury boxes and ticket prices for those who mostly prefer a beer and some sun in the bleechers. Ticket prices for season holders and ticket prices for last minute shoppers. In short, EVERYONE can have their demand met for baseball. A small example with the mighty SF Giants here.

What would happen if every ticket was the same price? Mayhem and lost profits. Some people willing to pay more for MLB tickets will transfer their money to an underground marketplace that will use price discovery to allocate tickets. Meanwhile, people at lower price points will be shut out resulting in further lost revenues to MLB. Thats why we have pricing variation. Its better for everyone because everyone gets an allocation and the business folks maximize their revenues.
People might argue that the price variation exists is in the underlying house price and not in the intermediary execution price (brokers & agents). If that were true, then why did trading volume in financial markets explode when electronic execution came into acceptance? (For a slightly more technical explanation {very slightly!}, see my earlier post here).

Redfin discriminates. So do I. It makes sense and it is better for everyone. Many people have commented that Redfin basically passes their work load to external agents to facilitate their transactions and to make their business model work. I can certainly see how that might play out. But if the consumer is footing the work load “bill”, don’t they deserve to get a rebate? Don’t consumers deserve the right to choose their level of service? In the end I believe that consumers will still depend on full service agents because housing is complicated and its something we do rarely. But by offering price variation, we get to grow the pie. Anyone else out there a discriminator? Anyone else want to make more money?

Trulia took a big step into socializing camp by creating a Q&A platform with the help of Pat Kitano. Very sharp looking implementation that now solidly takes Trulia from exclusively broker centric to also being agent centric. The list of reviews worth reading follows: Pat Kitano, StartupSquad, TechCrunch, Joel Burslem, Greg Swann.

Trulia’s implementation is clean and certainly ups the feature ante but is basically catch-up with others including Zillow and My-Currency. User generated content is interesting and valuable but is this going to turn into some sort of vertical social networking war where winner takes all? The audience of home shoppers currently is much older and much more tech phobic than what you might see at typical social networks so what the hell are we all doing? Is this web2.0 hipsters flexing, an investment in future behavior by home buyers & sellers, or part of some master plan to disintermediate the existing ecosystems? All three isnt a bad guess.

For a while I have been wondering which direction Trulia would point their ship - towards the incumbents or away?. It feels to me like listings are a commodity waiting to happen and so the question for listings aggregators, like Trulia, is what next? Going social gets them on plan to taking Zillow head-on without alienating their existing constituents. Zillow has ignored the brokers while Trulia has made them their buddies. Each has their natural advantages and disadvantages but Trulia’s is a safer and more optionable route. Only if you raise a bunch of money can you take the path Zillow is taking. The payoff for Zillow, however, is much bigger with the risk because the consumers are the customers and Zillow does this very well. The real estate industry will never go back and the question I have as an entrepreneur is which strategy will win? One that eats its way through the ecosystem (Trulia) or one that completely goes around it (Zillow)?View blog reactions

The Washington Post has a hilarious (but real) article discussing the inside of New Century Financial - the sub-prime mess to end all messes that is now bankrupt. I first read about the article at Inman blog, entitled You WILL play ball. Below is a WP sampler:

“The stress in that place was ungodly. It was like selling your soul,” said Hardiman, who worked for New Century in 2004 and 2005. “There was instant notification to everyone as soon as you rejected a loan. And you dreaded doing it because you paid for it. Two guys would come with a bat, and they were all [ticked] off because you cut their deals.”

I have posted several times about the conflicts between the appraisers, lenders, and agents here, here and here. Bottom line is that it may be time for buyers to hire their own appraisers. This doesn’t represent a new expense but rather a disaggregation of a current expense. If a buyer uses cash, rather than having the costs buried in other transaction costs, than the buyers can control quality and appraiser can get on with their jobs with conflicts.

Also, we might consider the conflicts from the lending side as to communicating affordability to consumers. Does it make sense to expect a lender, who is commissioned based on the number of closed transactions, to actually protect the customers side of the equation? I suppose the logic is that its the banks money but in truth, lenders sell loans and loan agents get new jobs. So the buck gets passed, Wall Street just play the odds (and gets a commission), and the financially illiterate get stuck holding the bag. Nothing new from “big business” but certainly NOT something part of the new business models powered by the internet - including ours.

The solutions to these and other vexing consumer problems are being addressed by market forces. Entrepreneurs like us see this problems as opportunities to add value to people by being open and transparent about our businesses. We put people at the center of our model and drive everything to satisfy this focus. Gone will be the days when trapping and or tricking a customer into a piece of business is THE model. Gone will be the oligipoly’s upon which many incumbent industries are based. Power is being pushed down to people and the economics will follow. Selling your soul in sub-prime, or any other industry, is a dinosaur waiting to happen. A lot of other charts will look like the one below over the next few years.

Yesterday, Russel Shaw at Bloodhound Blog posted a note he received from a young person sniffing the real estate industry. Entitled “I’ll bring you a big basket of cash if you’ll let me sell your house for free” Shaw responds to the young persons overt question whether the industry is crowded and the covert question as to whether pricing can be used as a competitive weapon. Shaw tells the young person not to use pricing to differentiate (and yes there are too many agents). This got me thinking. If EVERY industry has price discrimination, why doesn’t housing? (yes there are firms like Redfin and FSBO’s but traction is light) This is not whether orange people get better prices than purple people. Not that kind of discrimination. This is you using e-trade for stock execution rather than Morgan Stanley. Does variation in transaction costs make sense for housing?

I am not an economist but here goes.

The graph above is what Shaw is saying. There is one price for transactions (or something like that) and that you should stick to it. An economist would say that given the demand at that price, sales will be S1. Lets see if we add new prices…..

So by adding new prices, we tap into a larger amount of the total demand. From an industry perspective, price discrimination (price variation) yields HIGER total number of transactions. This is why airlines use it. This is why software companies use it. This is why EVERYONE uses it. Ever clipped a coupon? Ever cashed in on frequent flier miles? This is price discrimination at work.

So the one thing to consider that might debunk this basic economic notion is whether the demand curve (in blue) is in fact oddly shaped. Lets take a look….

So if demand is the same regardless of price then Mr. Shaw is correct. In fact, if demand in the real estate industry is oblivious to transaction costs than Mr. Shaw and all the other realtors are bloody idiots for not raising prices. So I guess the question is this: is demand for housing sensitive to transaction costs or not? If it is, like most things, then everyone stands to be better off by offering differing levels of pricing (and service). If demand for housing is not sensitive to transaction costs…then put your orders in for those new german cars because margins are about to get much better.

Giddy up little doggy!

Ardell DellaLoggia of the Rain City Guide pens one the best pieces I have seen regarding housing valuations at a hyper-local level. Entitled Home Valuation “Tools”, Ardell goes on to detail how to properly value a property and how to seperate the value of the land versus the value of the house…an important consideration, often overlooked, in expensive markets where most of the value is actually land (I am talking to you San Francisco!).  Her analysis is deep so get a pencil out but the basic takeaway is that if you can determine the cost of land, and make adjustments for slight differences, you should be able to determine which houses are overpriced and which ones are underpriced.  Ardell finds a home that was torn down after being purchased and so was able to get a solid market value for land. Getting everything apples to apples is critical - and not easy.
Her analysis is not only thorough, but also demonstrates that housing valuation is a highly complex problem that has variation from property to property. In other words, it is very difficult to model and so AVM’s will largely miss the nuances. Naturally we at My-Currency have built our site for this very reason - to enable the local experts to shine and to collect these nuances both in detail and as an aggregated value in our prediction technology we call CrowdValue.

Joel Burslem continues to demonstrate his deep knowledge of tech by discussing how the real estate industry can leverage social networking sites like Facebook to broaden their network of clients and market their listings. In an article entitled Marketing Real Estate on Facebook, Burslem outlines five basic ways an agent can use social networks. Naturally, we agree with Joel. My-Currency is a vertical social network, a term I first read many moons ago at the blog Social Degree. The difference between My-Currency and Facebook is the difference between Walmart and Whole Foods. Walmart has everything but Whole Foods has only the best.

My-Currency is trying to be more relevant to users by focusing on, and aggregating, content specific to housing consumers. We give you all the tools you need to get inside housing problems. For a professional, it should prove a resource that demonstrates to your current clients authority while hooking and incubating future clients. For consumers, its an opportunity to share information and get professional advice - free. The site has all the basic building blocks in place. The open question is whether a vertical network will better serve consumers and professionals than a horizontal network. We obviously think so. That is not to say Facebook and their like are not of value. They are - use them! In fact, we will look to integrate with them and other parts of the internet ecosystem. Its just that we think focus, focus, focus will create better relevancy and better engagement with those interested in housing.

So when you want to purchase Tide Detergent go to Walmart. When you need a 25 year old bottle of Academia Barilla Balsamic Vinegar from Modena, Italy, go to Whole Foods. Do you, as an agent, want to be lost in aisles of Walmart like poorly selling lines of Tide detergent?