ChCh Press advertising for real estate sales
| # | Post |
|---|---|
| 1 | Would it be a waste of money advertising your home in the paper?? Who even buys a paper? mahairy - 2020-12-01 10:08:00 |
| 2 | You've answered your own question. Pay for a feature listing on TM instead. sparkychap - 2020-12-01 10:09:00 |
| 3 | 98% agree, no need for print advertising, with some very rare exceptions. Also, totally agree with sparky, the upgrades on TM (premium in particular) are really worthwhile. We use them on every listing. Edited by paysanne at 6:40 pm, Tue 1 Dec paysanne - 2020-12-01 18:39:00 |
| 4 | I know people who have got the internet but are not into sitting at it so for those people newspaper advertising would work. cassina1 - 2020-12-01 22:35:00 |
| 5 | Put a sign out the front. Quite effective. pcle - 2020-12-02 08:27:00 |
| 6 | Trademe listing plus a professionally prepared sign out the front .. pf - 2020-12-02 12:59:00 |
| 7 | and supply a copy of the LIM pf - 2020-12-03 21:09:00 |
| 8 | cassina1 wrote:
So much demand for housing that missing the fifty people that get the Press regularly isn't going to matter one iota. sw20 - 2020-12-03 21:42:00 |
| 9 | pf wrote:
Save yourself the trouble. A vendor supplied LIM is worthless. sw20 - 2020-12-03 21:43:00 |
| 10 | sw20 wrote:
what was the reaction of all RE companies in NZ when you told them that ? pf - 2020-12-04 09:25:00 |
| 11 | pf wrote:
The vendor is the only one that has the contract with the council when obtaining a LIM if it ends up being incorrect. The vendor could doctor or omit information in the LIM when providing that as part of the house information. sw20 - 2020-12-04 18:47:00 |
| 12 | sw20 wrote:
the majority of 'reputable' NZ Real Estate companies disagree with you .. pf - 2020-12-04 20:42:00 |
| 13 | paysanne wrote:
I’m interested in this, are you seriously telling me people about to spend 3/4 of a million (isn’t that the average price of a house) can’t scroll down a list of a few houses or use a filter search function for latest listed? Plus it’s hardly like a featured listing is going to pop up and they can just go and buy it there and then Not saying you’re wrong just surprised!! Edited by deendon1 at 9:36 pm, Fri 4 Dec deendon1 - 2020-12-04 21:35:00 |
| 14 | pf wrote:
See Altimarloch v Marlborough District Council. sw20 - 2020-12-04 21:43:00 |
| 15 | deendon1 wrote: It's very similar to product placement in any industry. In the supermarket for example, FMCG suppliers pay more to have their products at eye level, rather than on the lower shelves. Sure I can look down, but being at eye level tends to attract interest. Same with listings - although I will look at all listings - the more a property appears at the top of a listings feed, the more it can become imprinted in my mental watch list and there more interest it can generate. Its also a good way of reigniting a "stale" listing which is now only on page 2-3 of the normal listings list order. sparkychap - 2020-12-05 07:23:00 |
| 16 | LIM Reports: From an agent's perspective, the desire to provide a LIM is in the hope that the buyer will rely on that rather than obtain their own under a LIM clause in the ASP. LIM clauses add time delays to going unconditional and provide an "out" for cancelling the contract if there is an issue. However, the agent cannot just claim "mere conduit" should there be an issue relating to the LIM, if they, as experts in their field, fail to pick up and issues identified in the LIM and investigate and potentially disclose specifically. The disclaimer on the front page does not get them out of liability around that. The agents can't just claim they are passing on documents without reading them - they can't just rely on caveat emptor. From the buyer perspective, as SW20 points out, the council isn't responsible to a third party if there is an issue with a LIM, making action against a council far harder should you buy and then find the LIM was deficient in some crucial piece of data. So there's no reason why an agent can't provide a LIM, but they'd be foolish to do so thinking the Disclaimer protects them from any/all liability. I also think agents should make it quite clear that relying on a vendor supplied LIM has its risks as well. sparkychap - 2020-12-05 07:41:00 |
| 17 | deendon1 wrote:
Not saying that people can’t filter and order the listings in the way you describe. In fact, that is what a number of people will do. However, a large number of people don’t do that or even know that they can. As far as I can remember, property searches are changed from “featured first” to “latest listings” just over 50% of the time, making it pretty worthwhile to be at or near the top of the default search. paysanne - 2020-12-05 08:29:00 |
| 18 | paysanne wrote:
Interesting thanks and thanks sparkychap too deendon1 - 2020-12-05 12:00:00 |
| 19 | sw20 wrote:
yes that 15 year old case is often quoted .. many Councils have learned from it and moved on .. it's one thing to supply a document with a disclaimer, it's another for it's intended recipient to allow the document to be viewed by a 3rd party .. Edited by pf at 12:01 pm, Sat 5 Dec pf - 2020-12-05 12:01:00 |
| 20 | pf wrote: in what way have councils “moved on”? sparkychap - 2020-12-05 12:56:00 |
| 21 | sparkychap wrote:
their disclaimers are now more comprehensive and fit for purpose .. pf - 2020-12-05 17:18:00 |
| 22 | pf wrote: Still can't disclaim yourself out of negligence. sparkychap - 2020-12-05 18:25:00 |
| 23 | sparkychap wrote:
true .. apart from that 15 year old case do you know of any other examples of a non rural residential property that had a resource consent to extract up to 1,500 cubic metres of water per day from a passing stream ? .. pf - 2020-12-05 20:43:00 |
| 24 | pf wrote: You know that the specific defect in that case is irrelevant, don't you? sparkychap - 2020-12-05 21:02:00 |
| 25 | sparkychap wrote:
depends what defect you are referring to .. pf - 2020-12-06 13:00:00 |
| 26 | pf wrote: what defect do you think and how does that matter? sparkychap - 2020-12-06 13:40:00 |
| 27 | sparkychap wrote:
it doesn't matter .. getting back on track a LIM supplied by an agency or private vendor is not worthless as claimed above .. while it may not be desirable, as long it is an acceptable practice then definitely more effort should be made to ensure the 3rd party is fully informed on the pro's and con's of using the information contained in the LIM .. pf - 2020-12-06 14:04:00 |
| 28 | No wonder newspapers keep talking up the property market.....the real estate advertising is what keeps the papers afloat. Immoral the whole lot of them. To add salt to the wound, the papers are now sanitising and selecting which way to manipulate people’s thinking. I have completely switched off the TV and I am gradually drawing back from other media. We want the news, not a brainwashing. lakeview3 - 2020-12-06 14:28:00 |
| 29 | pf wrote: I know it doesn't matter, that's why i said it doesn't matter when you suggested the Altimarloch case was somehow different in post #23. But I'm glad you agree, the LIM is not worthless if the value is to con the buyer into not getting their own LIM, and if the agent actually thinks that flimsy disclaimer offers them complete protection. sparkychap - 2020-12-07 08:03:00 |
| 30 | sparkychap wrote:
you are out of touch with the market if you think the reason for a RE agent or vendor supplying a LIM is to con the buyer into not getting their own LIM .. pf - 2020-12-07 21:13:00 |
