Comments on: Do Virtual Tours Sell Houses Faster?

By: Arthur

Arthur — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:10:15 +0000

Virtual Tours, Hmm? You have to ask yourself first what is a VT.
VTs are just like pictures. A good set of pictures will get more interest than a bad set, same goes with VTs. Most virtual tours 80 + percent I would not list because they are so bad. Same can be said with pictures but I would only say that 70% or less are not acceptable. If you want to get to the point of the matter you would have to go through and look at the quality of the images. This is even more important than if you have a virtual tour or not. So to me does this research make a difference. Not really. If you can discard all listings with pour quality photos and virtual tours and then do it again it would have a lot more influence. Also quality pictures and VTs can cost a lot of money. A good set of photos for your 500k house could easily run $300 and good VTs could run you $100 each. Is $1000 for Photos and VTs worth it from a professional. I personally do not want to waist peoples time or mine. So if someone can rule out a house over the internet because of a good set of photos and VTs great, I just saved both of us some time. The high quality Photos and VTs are more for marketing me than the house anyways. If I can show a potential seller that I do this for you and my competition takes their photos with a camera phone who is the potential client going to choose.

By: Quintobean

Quintobean — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:47:13 +0000

Thank you Kelley, I would advise using virtual tours as a listing tool because, according to the NAR 85% of buyers start there search online. It also says, a listing with a virtual tour get 10 times more views than one without. Its great to use images. Using your own is awesome, NAR also says that the #1 draw to a listing is multiple images. But, big real estate sites like Realtor.com now have filters, a button you click so that you only view listings with virtual tours. This makes me think that its not at all a dishonest listing tool. I think its a HUGE advantage to have a virtual tour. I do think that it can deter a potential buyer, if you go with a cheap virtual tour, that has corny music or huge agent photo. I have never heard negative statistics on virtual tours. I’m not an agent, I don’t use virtual tours, I work with them. I found this very interesting. I like to hear both sides on a topic so thanks for your opinions.

By: Kelley Koehler

Kelley Koehler — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:01:41 +0000

Hi Quinn – I think it’s a matter of educating our Sellers. Regardless of what they want or think will work, it’s my job to know what works and to present it in a manner that is convincing and professional. I can discuss with a Seller any marketing item that they’d like to see included or left out, and have solid reasons as to why I do or do not include that item. If an agent uses VTs and finds them useful in selling the house, and not just for gaining sellers, then absolutely that person should do them. If an agent is just doing VTs to impress a seller with a new whiz-bang sort of feature, then, well, why do something if you believe it doesn’t work? I’d say that’s guilt money, not good business.

By: Quinn Peterson

Quinn Peterson — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:24:32 +0000

Thats interesting, Whether this be true or not. . I Think another thing for a realtor to consider in using virtual tours, is that using virtual tours on all your listings is a great listing tool. This is very convincing to a homeowner looking for an agent. . I am willing to say that an agent that uses virtual tours carries, and picks up more listings that an agent that doesn’t use them. What do you think?

By: The Feed Bag - Refried and Served Again

The Feed Bag - Refried and Served Again — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 19:52:56 +0000

[...] Housechick wonders if the Virtual Tour emperor has no clothes in Do Virtual Tours Sell Houses Faster? [...]

By: Rich Rosa

Rich Rosa — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 00:32:40 +0000

Kelley,

Really interesting post. I must say I don’t spend a lot of time viewing virtual tours myself, but assumed buyers would love them. Maybe not?

I don’t list properties (exclusive buyer broker), but the feedback I get from my buyers is that photographs are a must. I’ll never understand the strategy of simply using one photograph of the outside of the house.

I’ll have to pay more attention to these virtual tours on the MLS.

By: Kelley Koehler

Kelley Koehler — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 18:05:47 +0000

Hi Jennifer – I’ve always favored just good pictures, and have mine professionally shot. Most of the traditional VTours are sort of cheezy, with bad music and a big picture of the agent. I like to stop and look, really look, at a picture with my own music playing, instead of having the rooms fly by. Admittedly, I’ve never had one done for one of my listings, but it would be an interesting experiment to see if the VTour really helps things along or not. I have floorplan drawings made occasionally – and usually then only in the hope to find a larger square footage than the assessor records, and not as a “marketing” tool.

By: Jennifer Steck

Jennifer Steck — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 17:35:21 +0000

Kelley- I loved this article. What a unique take on marketing tools. I never would have guessed that the homes with virtual tours would take longer. That research had to take a lot of time. I’ll have to check this out in my market. I include virtual tours with all my listings, regardless of the price. Maybe the money could be better spent.

By: The Feed Bag

The Feed Bag — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 23:38:40 +0000

[...] Housechick wonders if the Virtual Tour emperor has no clothes in Do Virtual Tours Sell Houses Faster? [...]

By: Sock Puppet

Sock Puppet — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 21:20:18 +0000

The killer app of photos is that you can essentially perfect them and buyers can view them instantly. Virtual Tours are time consuming to create as an agent, plus time consuming to view as a buyer.

Sorting out Price and Photos is 95% of marketing I think.

-Athol