The opening sentence of the cover story of this weekend’s NY Times Real Estate section sets up the article with a false premise: “As unsold properties proliferate and encounters with the scalpel fail to move them, some New York City sellers are being undermined by an often nameless enemy.” See, we’d argue that the sellers aren’t being undermined at all (except in the case when actually false information is put forth). Rather, in our view, sites like Curbed, Brownstoner and StreetEasy are just expediting the process of bringing sellers’ expectations in line with the market—and calling lazy brokers to task for providing insufficient information and sub-par photographs. Input from thousands of other market-savvy readers can also help to bring much needed transparency and frankness to the process, all of which—hopefully—makes the market more efficient. People are asking questions they can’t ask their broker, and they’re really interested in the qualitative perspective, in getting opinions of people,” said Dawn Doherty, the vice president for strategic development at StreetEasy.com. While there have been instances of brokers and owners identifying themselves and countering criticism successfully on Brownstoner in the past, some brokerages are clear gun-shy, and probably with some reason. We basically do not allow our agents to post comments without prior approval, because we think it’s a can of worms, said Diane Ramirez, the president of Halstead Property. Unless something is egregiously incorrect, it’s almost better to let it die, because if you comment on it, it takes on a life of its own. Some brokers realize that, more often that not, the benefits of publicity are worth the price of a few online pot-shots.
Snark Attack [NY Times]