Exactly my point. Imagine if the printed information really did put the brokerage in a vulnerable position. At least, the so called supervisor could have realized this while reviewing the window display or public ads. Brownstoner was obviously able to detect this before the supervisor/director. Remember, these questionable ads also put the owner of these rental properties in a unecessary precarious position. Glad I’m not paying someone NOT to protect my business from potential exposure.
“I still question why such a sloppy rental ad made it past the supervisor/director. ”
I’d be stunned if the supervisor/director is proof reading something that you can churn out a new copy of on your office printer in 2 minutes.
It’s a funny/silly typo. Good for a laugh or two. But no big deal.
Chances are the broker didn’t even see it. Was probably some office temp or the lowest level employee who was given responsibility for typing up the ads.
Obviously, the identity of the brokerage can be figured out. Perhaps, the agent received calls concerning the ad. I still question why such a sloppy rental ad made it past the supervisor/director.
Wow, you really can’t specify “No Pets / No Smokers” when renting a place? Does that apply to larger buildings or does that also apply if renting out the top floor an owner’s brownstone?
The reality is a typo will get by the “editor” now and then. However, the text, as pointed out by other bloggers, is the bigger issue. Arguably, the language concerning smokers/dogs has the potential appearance of impropriety concerning the Fair Housing laws. Recently, due to problems in this area, the larger brokerages have become very sensative concerning this issue and have taken precautionary steps to educate the agents and brokers. Perhaps, this is a smaller brokerage. What an embarrassment if it is a larger brokerage; such stupidity is unexcusable since there would presumably be a Director of Sales for each office monitoring and watching for such potential problems. Salaried position to protect the company? One must pause and ask why.
Many times brokers will put “1.1 baths” when they mean “1.5 baths”. Why? I’ve no idea. I suppose they think 1/10 is the same as 1/2….
So, I’m presuming they meant “1.1” even though THAT in itself is wrong as well!
Exactly my point. Imagine if the printed information really did put the brokerage in a vulnerable position. At least, the so called supervisor could have realized this while reviewing the window display or public ads. Brownstoner was obviously able to detect this before the supervisor/director. Remember, these questionable ads also put the owner of these rental properties in a unecessary precarious position. Glad I’m not paying someone NOT to protect my business from potential exposure.
“I still question why such a sloppy rental ad made it past the supervisor/director. ”
I’d be stunned if the supervisor/director is proof reading something that you can churn out a new copy of on your office printer in 2 minutes.
It’s a funny/silly typo. Good for a laugh or two. But no big deal.
Chances are the broker didn’t even see it. Was probably some office temp or the lowest level employee who was given responsibility for typing up the ads.
Obviously, the identity of the brokerage can be figured out. Perhaps, the agent received calls concerning the ad. I still question why such a sloppy rental ad made it past the supervisor/director.
“Brownstoner was at least decent enough not to expose the brokerage.”
Uh, he exposed the Broker. That and 5 seconds on Google will tell you the Brokerage.
Wow, you really can’t specify “No Pets / No Smokers” when renting a place? Does that apply to larger buildings or does that also apply if renting out the top floor an owner’s brownstone?
The reality is a typo will get by the “editor” now and then. However, the text, as pointed out by other bloggers, is the bigger issue. Arguably, the language concerning smokers/dogs has the potential appearance of impropriety concerning the Fair Housing laws. Recently, due to problems in this area, the larger brokerages have become very sensative concerning this issue and have taken precautionary steps to educate the agents and brokers. Perhaps, this is a smaller brokerage. What an embarrassment if it is a larger brokerage; such stupidity is unexcusable since there would presumably be a Director of Sales for each office monitoring and watching for such potential problems. Salaried position to protect the company? One must pause and ask why.
But how many Totos?
An ad often runs in the NYT RE section for a $24mil place with 5 beds and 7 baths. His-and-her ensuite baths in the MB, hers with a bidet (natch.)