4 ms·
I'm not sure we're looking at the same photos... for some of them, sure, you're right. But many are bad photos like those you mention, except more egregious (he
by spi 3y ago
I'm not sure we're looking at the same photos... for some of them, sure, you're right. But many are bad photos like those you mention, except more egregious (hence they deserve the place on that site). The "garden" in one picture is rather awful, but why put that plastic chair facing against the wall to make it creepy on top of that? Why take a picture half naked (or not half - thankfully we'll never know) in front of a mirror? Why the cheap Christmas tree? Why those two sad soft toys in the corner of an empty room? Why a mower in the living room? Why include an old man watching TV in your photo?
As for the points you say, I'm not into real estate, I think often it comes down to limitations from reality. You know, actual _people_ live in those apartments you're trying to have pictures of. Maybe they'll just deny you entry (it's their place, after all, they might be renting and thus not give a damn about you willing to sell the property), in which case all you have to show is pictures from the outside. Or they might only agree to send you pictures themselves, in which case blurry pictures is all you get.
Of course, in general it's mostly incompetence, but hey, if everybody were perfect at their job the world would look totally different, in more important sectors than real estate...
- tiltowait 3y agoWhen my sister bought her house, she felt like the current owners were actively trying to make it unappealing. Weird photos (not as bad as these, mind), staying home during open house, etc. Turns out, the wife was trying to make it unappealing. She didn't want to move, but her husband did. I wouldn't be surprised if something like that was the case in at least some of these photos.
- afterburner 3y agoIf the husband was determined to move, that just meant they would get less money, not that they wouldn't sell. Oh well