9 ms·

Zillow Said to Be Seeking to Buy Rival Real-Estate Site Trulia

68 points by chrisaycock 12y ago

harrystone 12y ago
Good. When I have a problem, I can get a hold of a human at Zillow and they're nice to work with. As far as I know Trulia is just a very complicated cron job.
uptown 12y ago
If this deal were to go-through, it'd be a massive consolidation of the online real estate industry. Zillow keeps saying otherwise, but local MLSs are going away.
- bellerocky 12y ago
  What's an MLS?
  - tptacek 12y ago
    Multiple Listing Services, run by real estate agents, which can't die soon enough.
    - spacehome 12y ago
      Good riddance.
  - uptown 12y ago
    It stands for Multiple Listing Service. Essentially, it's the database used to manage listing information about a property which has been entered by the realtor handling the sale of a property. In the "old days" you could really only find out about properties for sale by looking in the newspapers, or speaking with a realtor who could search for-sale properties in these databases. There are thousands of them in the United States, and you generally need to have a realtor's license to gain access to your local MLS. MLS's can choose to syndicate their data to third-parties using services like ListHub or Point2 - but usually stipulate that the data must always point back to the listing agent so they stay part of the selling process. Companies like Zillow and Trulia have challenged this model. Increasingly, they've become the de-facto starting-point for real estate research. They've built more-user-friendly interfaces, and surfaced public-records information along with property listings in order to present a more-compelling way to buy and sell houses. Furthermore, they've done this while positioning themselves as advertising companies so as not to upset realtors or make them feel as-if they're being cut out of the process. The big complaint realtors have had with Zillow and Trulia usually centers around two concepts. One is "stale" data. The typical claim is that once data is syndicated from an MLS through a syndicator like ListHub to a site like Zillow things may have changed on-the-ground and the data may be stale. Another complaint is that Zillow's business model is built on the backs of the work realtors have done. They source all the information, and Zillow earns money from redistributing that data. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_listing_service http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_listing_service
- kumarm 12y ago
  And they should go away. Local MLS's are fraud and add very little value to either buyer or seller collecting 6% of total value. When I bought the house, My agent spent total of less than ten hours showing the houses and made 30K with 3% he collects. (He was even absent at final walk through vacationing) I believe Real Estate Agents even got a law passed where you can't be a real estate agent unless you work for someone for year in California. Really? You can be a doctor and do surgery on Patients on your day 1 as a Doctor but you apparently being real estate agent requires some unknown skills.
  - smackfu 12y ago
    Isn't that the fundamental problem with percentage based compensation? It doesn't take that much more work to buy / sell a million dollar home vs. a $300k one, but the agent's income is vastly different.
    - ceejayoz 12y ago
      I'm not a realtor but I'm not sure "It doesn't take that much more work to buy / sell a million dollar home vs. a $300k one" is true. I wouldn't be surprised if it involved pickier clientele with more difficult to accommodate hours, for one.
      - smackfu 12y ago
        My issue is that you can also have picky clientele at $300k, but you don't get paid any more. Or for instance, compare a client who spends every night checking Zillow for the latest listings vs. one who relies on the agent for new listings. There may be some correlation between home price and effort, but there are other factors that often dwarf that, and those aren't priced in at all.
  - JPKab 12y ago
    It is a fucking sham! I'm about to make a big move, and it is absurd that the only value the agents I'm talking to are (that a user on Reddit can't provide by telling me about the area) providing is the MLS they have access to. The 6% commission, you would think, would be a price subject to market forces, but due to collusion among realtors, its locked in. Why anti-trust isn't investigating? Lobbying, that's why.
- 3JPLW 12y ago
  In my experience, local MLSs are still way ahead of the publicly available online services. Trulia tended to be better than Zillow in my region, but they still lagged weeks behind what my realtor was able to send me. Properties moved so fast that almost everything I sent my realtor from a publicly available data source was already sold. I really hope that this will change.
  - pitnips 12y ago
    I bought my house after seeing it on Zillow. It never showed up on the Keller Williams site my agent set up for me, and he never knew about the place until we asked about it. It was my first home purchase, so he was very helpful throughout the process. I probably won't use an agent the next time I buy, and I definitely won't be using an agent when I sell.
  - jpfielding 12y ago
    realtor's often have 3 days to 'pocket' a listing before they have to put it in the mls. these 'pocketed' listings can be privately shared and thats where realtors keep a little advantage.
- brubaker 12y ago
  They are not going away. I hope they do but they are entrenched. Realtor.com, zillow, trulia, those are jokes.
j10t 12y ago
The real estate market is huge and inefficient, a ripe opportunity for technologists to capitalize on. But I don't understand what Zillow brings to the table. Do they have any plan beyond their current business model (advertising)? As a consumer, I think I should oppose Zillow. They seem to just take public data, present it nicely, and slather it with advertisements. Real estate agents play the same heavy-handed role they always have, except now they have to give some of their profits to Zillow else lose visibility to their competitors. I'm more excited about Redfin. Redfin makes shopping for a home closer to the self-service experience it should be, with agents dealing in higher volume with lower margins playing a lighter role. Unlike Zillow, Redfin seems to make that market more efficient, and I think that's the bigger opportunity for capitalization.
- zyxley 12y ago
  > But I don't understand what Zillow brings to the table. As an end user (albeit a window shopper so far), the map-based searching on both Zillow and Trulia is really nice. Map-based searching on Redfin feels kind of clunky and slow by comparison.
  - jwcooper 12y ago
    Problem is the data is so sketchy on Trulia and Zillow. I'd be interested in a house only to find out it already had a contingent offer accepted. They need to figure out how to get realtime data from the MLS systems. Trulia and Zillow do have the best meta-data on houses though. School info, crime, purchase history, walk scores, etc.
    - davepeck 12y ago
      (A lot of the metadata data is provided through third parties. For example, walk scores are provided via... well, Walk Score, a Seattle startup. http://www.walkscore.com/professional/walk-score-apis.php http://www.walkscore.com/professional/walk-score-apis.php)
    - smackfu 12y ago
      Honestly, this depends totally on whether you are in a hot real estate market or not. If homes tend to be on the market 30 days, scraping MLS data is OK. If homes tend to be on the market 3 days, not so much.
blaincate 12y ago
The way it works is : seller pay 5%-6% of commission to his agent. Seller agent then posts what the buyer agent will get. Buyer agent will get equal or more, as he to do more legwork. now interesting part: a buyer can negotiate with his agent to get some of the commission a buyer agent gets in range of 1.5%-2%. But buyer has to work with smaller agents, not affiliated with big firms : century 21. There is glut of agents, and you can get the deal. (me and some of my friends have) needless to say : you have to do lot of legwork : finding house urself, and just the agent to do the paperwork. Same goes with seller : he has to give 3% for buyer agent, but for his agent (seller agent) he can negotiate to 1% - 1.5% (know of that happening too) while looking for a next house, I just made a aggregator to scrape multiple sites and let me know when new house is available in bay area. (http://www.twikstik.com/ http://www.twikstik.com/ : running on appengine)
oneweirdtrick 12y ago
I never thought of Zillow being the bigger company until I compared their listings to Trulia's. Looks like Zillow has been acquiring other real estate sites like crazy over the past few years to get to where they are now. Pretty impressive. However I feel like the Zestimates are still not very accurate. Not even sure how they get those estimates. Can anyone shed some light on this? Also, I wonder how long it will be until Amazon acquires Zillow and 'homes' will be listed in departments.
- encoderer 12y ago
  As far as number of listings of on-market homes, Zillow and Trulia are certainly very close to one another. Possibly in your local market that wasn't the case, but generally speaking it is. At Trulia, we also calculate Estimates for properties but in most cases we do not show that data. In theory, the estimates work much the same way an appraisal works: Comparing the home on its various attributes to recent sold homes nearby. Obviously it's not possible to capture the essence of an Appraiser in an algorithm, but we display the estimates in cases where we feel it's better than just showing an old, out-dated last sale price.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- wpietri 12y ago
  I expect Amazon will stay the hell away from that market. Note that they haven't even gone after cars, which are a much easier thing to sell. Homes are a mess: novice buyers and sellers, complicated laws, tricky financial deals, and a "product" that is complex, unique, and can have many hidden flaws. Real estate agents frequently get sued when things go wrong [1] [2]. The last thing Amazon needs is to get in the middle of that. [1] http://www.risceo.com/10%20Most%20Frequently%20Made%20Claims.pdf http://www.risceo.com/10%20Most%20Frequently%20Made%20Claims... [2] http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/emerging-trends-in-lawsuits-against-rea-16392/ http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/emerging-trends-in-lawsuits...
  - 12y ago
sharkweek 12y ago
No bias here as I don't have any affiliation with Zillow/Trulia/Redfin but... I feel like the only real disruptor in this market has been Redfin - the only one with actual real estate agents. Zillow and Trulia are, put extremely simply, a map with ads on it. Useful tool, absolutely, but not going to shake up the real estate industry, which is undoubtedly a dinosaur. When you look at a company like Redfin, who is an actual brokerage but with non commissioned agents, and lower commissions across the board, they're actually disrupting a market that has been ripe for change for years, and they now are offering a better service/product at a cheaper price. I'd expect big things out of them, and expect several brokerages will either change gears to match them or more competition to pop up here soon.
- jwcooper 12y ago
  I was originally using Trulia to send me emails on new homes in the market, and it works fairly well. Problem is that the data can be sort of dated fairly quickly as it doesn't get MLS data immediately (at least in my area). This is sort of troublesome in markets where a home can be sold in 48 hours from being listed. Someone on HN mentioned Redfin, and I tried it out. It's incredibly fast (guessing 24-48 hours quicker than Trulia) to get emails on new listings as it's using the MLS data directly. Give it another year, and I feel like the UI will be on par with Trulia on the desktop.
  - chrisgd 12y ago
    I think Trulia and Zillow rely on RE agents to post the information or they take it from other postings. They view it as a great marketing arm for RE agents, while agents (some) view it as a cost that isn't worth it. With this announcement[1], if I am a broker in NY, why would I post to Zillow if this other agency's listings are always going to be higher than my listings. 1 - http://zillow.mediaroom.com/2014-06-24-Zillow-and-Douglas-Elliman-Real-Estate-Company-Launch-Strategic-Marketing-Partnership http://zillow.mediaroom.com/2014-06-24-Zillow-and-Douglas-El...
- z3ugma 12y ago
  Check out OpenHomes.co - 1 year-old startup. They take 1% commission, list your house on the NMLS, and give you the tools to take care of boilerplate legal etc.
jpfielding 12y ago
and the most important truth in all of this.... the agent/brokers make peanuts compared to the mortgage companies.
tspike 12y ago
I'm currently hunting for a home and the only two sites I've found relevant are Zillow and Redfin. Can someone explain to me why I'd use Trulia?
- brubaker 12y ago
  They all get their info from the same source so it doesnt really matter.
- blaincate 12y ago
  which areas are you hunting? i wrote a aggregator for some cities at http://twikstik.com http://twikstik.com, and can add cities for you.
  - tspike 12y ago
    I'm looking in Portland, Oregon. Looks like your site is Bay Area-only? Looks like a fun side project!
- genwin 12y ago
  Redfin is pretty good but is in only select cities. IMO Trulia's interface is superior to Zillow's. One small example, on Trulia you can wrap around when cycling through pix. On Zillow you have to go backwards through all pix to get back to the first one. Trulia is more fine tuned like that. On mobile, the gap between Trulia and Zillow is even wider in Trulia's favor. Zillow shows lot lines, which is nice. Zillow has better price history. I use Trulia for finding a house initially, and then Redfin or Zillow to get deeper info. Redfin has the deepest data.
clairity 12y ago
even if zillow & trulia merge, none of the potential disruptors in the real estate listings space (zillow, trulia, redfin, fsbo, etc.) have any real chance until the MLS system is dismantled... and brokers have a massive disincentive against that--brokers have exclusive access to property data via their local MLS before anyone else. the MLS's allow some access to this data to zillow & trulia, but will never let them have instant & complete info since it's the MLS's core competitive advantage. agent commissions will remain at 5-7% as long as the MLS system is in place. but MLS's are not going away any time soon. even the DOJ looked into breaking them up via legal action and gave up. interestingly, new york city does not have a strong MLS presence, but is basically an oligopoly of 6 major brokers, so the effect is the same. figure out a way to dismantle the MLS system and you're looking at a >billion dollar business (just note that zillow & trulia have been trying for ~decade, so it's not an easy problem).
loganfrederick 12y ago
It's relevant to link to Citron Research's scathing report that Zillow is among the most egregiously overvalued public tech companies, with large insider selling and video footage from management admitting to its partners that it does not have profits with which to pay them. http://www.citronresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/zillow-final.pdf http://www.citronresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/zil...
- EverSF 12y ago
  Keep in mind that Citron Research is known for providing info for short-sellers. So it's somewhat in their interest to see the stock go down for companies they review and, in turn, suggest their readers short. Note: they've recently been doing lots of reviews on Z
  - loganfrederick 12y ago
    Largely true, but they've also put out Long reports, namely Blackberry recently which they highlighted about a year ago and have reiterated their positive stance, which has played out in the market. I add this not to toot their own but even out the message that although they're known for their shorts, that's not all they research and pick.
graham1776 12y ago
As a real estate broker, I think the major problem isn't Zillow, Trulia, or any other repackager of information. The problem is the MLS. There is still one source/database of legit listings that is bought into by every other broker. Other site (ForSaleByOwner, etc) do not appear legit and nobody trusts a listing put there. Democratizing the listing information is where disruption needs to happen. What do you think about me as a broker charging a small fee ($100-$200) to post your listing to the MLS, managing in/out calls, but letting the Seller keep the vast majority of the commission and letting a lawyer/broker service to handle the close/escrow process. Selling a home shouldn't be wasted on 15k to a broker who doesn't do anything. (Yes I realize CA has some laws that would make this tricky) Another idea: How about having homeowners list their properties on a reverse-bidding listing site, where brokers bid for the listing in exchange for the lowest commission? Ideas?
- rhc2104 12y ago
  Redfin is the site that has tried harder to disrupt the space, although it hasn't been as successful. They still use the traditional model, but with lower commission. https://www.redfin.com/sell-a-home/how-you-save https://www.redfin.com/sell-a-home/how-you-save http://www.redfin.com/buy-a-home/refund http://www.redfin.com/buy-a-home/refund
- johnsonmkj 12y ago
  I like where you are thinking with the real estate ideas, but here are my thoughts: As long as we have the concept of buyer's agents, then the system will continue. Real estate agents take any buyer and tell them that their service is free to them. As a seller, that's 2.8% that I don't even have a chance to get away from, which is no good.
willholloway 12y ago
With 10 years experience in the real estate brokerage business I have witnessed the value of a good agent in the home buying/selling process. The number of things that can and do go wrong on the eve of a sale, are often things that a good agent with good vendor/contractor/mortgage relationships can fix so the deal can close. With tight lending standards post-2009 an agent with good mortgage broker relationships can get loans approved that would have otherwise fallen through. I have seen this a hundred times. 90% of agents are useless middlemen/women that want to collect a few commissions a year to supplement their income. A full time, capable agent/broker is like having a good lawyer on your side. Being a real estate agent/broker is not an easy job. It's extremely competitive, the margins on a brokerage are often very thin. It's a demanding 7 day per week job, and putting in a lot of work to get no payment is an ordinary occurrence. The MLS and the mandatory broker councils that one must belong to are another story. I have found them to be petty dictatorships at least 10 years behind technology wise. One MLS I have worked with has for over ten years had an internet explorer only web interface. The MLS API is a giant XML beast that is the most confusing API I have ever worked with. The MLS has great value, and the freshness and integrity of the data come at a large cost. I am not surprised that brokers and associations protect it the way that they do.

68 points by chrisaycock 12y ago

Good. When I have a problem, I can get a hold of a human at Zillow and they're nice to work with. As far as I know Trulia is just a very complicated cron job.

uptown 12y ago

If this deal were to go-through, it'd be a massive consolidation of the online real estate industry. Zillow keeps saying otherwise, but local MLSs are going away.

bellerocky 12y ago
What's an MLS?
- tptacek 12y ago
  Multiple Listing Services, run by real estate agents, which can't die soon enough.
  - spacehome 12y ago
    Good riddance.
- uptown 12y ago
  It stands for Multiple Listing Service. Essentially, it's the database used to manage listing information about a property which has been entered by the realtor handling the sale of a property. In the "old days" you could really only find out about properties for sale by looking in the newspapers, or speaking with a realtor who could search for-sale properties in these databases. There are thousands of them in the United States, and you generally need to have a realtor's license to gain access to your local MLS. MLS's can choose to syndicate their data to third-parties using services like ListHub or Point2 - but usually stipulate that the data must always point back to the listing agent so they stay part of the selling process. Companies like Zillow and Trulia have challenged this model. Increasingly, they've become the de-facto starting-point for real estate research. They've built more-user-friendly interfaces, and surfaced public-records information along with property listings in order to present a more-compelling way to buy and sell houses. Furthermore, they've done this while positioning themselves as advertising companies so as not to upset realtors or make them feel as-if they're being cut out of the process. The big complaint realtors have had with Zillow and Trulia usually centers around two concepts. One is "stale" data. The typical claim is that once data is syndicated from an MLS through a syndicator like ListHub to a site like Zillow things may have changed on-the-ground and the data may be stale. Another complaint is that Zillow's business model is built on the backs of the work realtors have done. They source all the information, and Zillow earns money from redistributing that data. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_listing_service http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_listing_service
kumarm 12y ago
And they should go away. Local MLS's are fraud and add very little value to either buyer or seller collecting 6% of total value. When I bought the house, My agent spent total of less than ten hours showing the houses and made 30K with 3% he collects. (He was even absent at final walk through vacationing) I believe Real Estate Agents even got a law passed where you can't be a real estate agent unless you work for someone for year in California. Really? You can be a doctor and do surgery on Patients on your day 1 as a Doctor but you apparently being real estate agent requires some unknown skills.
- smackfu 12y ago
  Isn't that the fundamental problem with percentage based compensation? It doesn't take that much more work to buy / sell a million dollar home vs. a $300k one, but the agent's income is vastly different.
  - ceejayoz 12y ago
    I'm not a realtor but I'm not sure "It doesn't take that much more work to buy / sell a million dollar home vs. a $300k one" is true. I wouldn't be surprised if it involved pickier clientele with more difficult to accommodate hours, for one.
    - smackfu 12y ago
      My issue is that you can also have picky clientele at $300k, but you don't get paid any more. Or for instance, compare a client who spends every night checking Zillow for the latest listings vs. one who relies on the agent for new listings. There may be some correlation between home price and effort, but there are other factors that often dwarf that, and those aren't priced in at all.
- JPKab 12y ago
  It is a fucking sham! I'm about to make a big move, and it is absurd that the only value the agents I'm talking to are (that a user on Reddit can't provide by telling me about the area) providing is the MLS they have access to. The 6% commission, you would think, would be a price subject to market forces, but due to collusion among realtors, its locked in. Why anti-trust isn't investigating? Lobbying, that's why.
3JPLW 12y ago
In my experience, local MLSs are still way ahead of the publicly available online services. Trulia tended to be better than Zillow in my region, but they still lagged weeks behind what my realtor was able to send me. Properties moved so fast that almost everything I sent my realtor from a publicly available data source was already sold. I really hope that this will change.
- pitnips 12y ago
  I bought my house after seeing it on Zillow. It never showed up on the Keller Williams site my agent set up for me, and he never knew about the place until we asked about it. It was my first home purchase, so he was very helpful throughout the process. I probably won't use an agent the next time I buy, and I definitely won't be using an agent when I sell.
- jpfielding 12y ago
  realtor's often have 3 days to 'pocket' a listing before they have to put it in the mls. these 'pocketed' listings can be privately shared and thats where realtors keep a little advantage.
brubaker 12y ago
They are not going away. I hope they do but they are entrenched. Realtor.com, zillow, trulia, those are jokes.

j10t 12y ago

The real estate market is huge and inefficient, a ripe opportunity for technologists to capitalize on. But I don't understand what Zillow brings to the table. Do they have any plan beyond their current business model (advertising)? As a consumer, I think I should oppose Zillow. They seem to just take public data, present it nicely, and slather it with advertisements. Real estate agents play the same heavy-handed role they always have, except now they have to give some of their profits to Zillow else lose visibility to their competitors. I'm more excited about Redfin. Redfin makes shopping for a home closer to the self-service experience it should be, with agents dealing in higher volume with lower margins playing a lighter role. Unlike Zillow, Redfin seems to make that market more efficient, and I think that's the bigger opportunity for capitalization.

zyxley 12y ago
> But I don't understand what Zillow brings to the table. As an end user (albeit a window shopper so far), the map-based searching on both Zillow and Trulia is really nice. Map-based searching on Redfin feels kind of clunky and slow by comparison.
- jwcooper 12y ago
  Problem is the data is so sketchy on Trulia and Zillow. I'd be interested in a house only to find out it already had a contingent offer accepted. They need to figure out how to get realtime data from the MLS systems. Trulia and Zillow do have the best meta-data on houses though. School info, crime, purchase history, walk scores, etc.
  - davepeck 12y ago
    (A lot of the metadata data is provided through third parties. For example, walk scores are provided via... well, Walk Score, a Seattle startup. http://www.walkscore.com/professional/walk-score-apis.php http://www.walkscore.com/professional/walk-score-apis.php)
  - smackfu 12y ago
    Honestly, this depends totally on whether you are in a hot real estate market or not. If homes tend to be on the market 30 days, scraping MLS data is OK. If homes tend to be on the market 3 days, not so much.

blaincate 12y ago

The way it works is : seller pay 5%-6% of commission to his agent. Seller agent then posts what the buyer agent will get. Buyer agent will get equal or more, as he to do more legwork. now interesting part: a buyer can negotiate with his agent to get some of the commission a buyer agent gets in range of 1.5%-2%. But buyer has to work with smaller agents, not affiliated with big firms : century 21. There is glut of agents, and you can get the deal. (me and some of my friends have) needless to say : you have to do lot of legwork : finding house urself, and just the agent to do the paperwork. Same goes with seller : he has to give 3% for buyer agent, but for his agent (seller agent) he can negotiate to 1% - 1.5% (know of that happening too) while looking for a next house, I just made a aggregator to scrape multiple sites and let me know when new house is available in bay area. (http://www.twikstik.com/ http://www.twikstik.com/ : running on appengine)

oneweirdtrick 12y ago

I never thought of Zillow being the bigger company until I compared their listings to Trulia's. Looks like Zillow has been acquiring other real estate sites like crazy over the past few years to get to where they are now. Pretty impressive. However I feel like the Zestimates are still not very accurate. Not even sure how they get those estimates. Can anyone shed some light on this? Also, I wonder how long it will be until Amazon acquires Zillow and 'homes' will be listed in departments.

encoderer 12y ago
As far as number of listings of on-market homes, Zillow and Trulia are certainly very close to one another. Possibly in your local market that wasn't the case, but generally speaking it is. At Trulia, we also calculate Estimates for properties but in most cases we do not show that data. In theory, the estimates work much the same way an appraisal works: Comparing the home on its various attributes to recent sold homes nearby. Obviously it's not possible to capture the essence of an Appraiser in an algorithm, but we display the estimates in cases where we feel it's better than just showing an old, out-dated last sale price.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
wpietri 12y ago
I expect Amazon will stay the hell away from that market. Note that they haven't even gone after cars, which are a much easier thing to sell. Homes are a mess: novice buyers and sellers, complicated laws, tricky financial deals, and a "product" that is complex, unique, and can have many hidden flaws. Real estate agents frequently get sued when things go wrong [1] [2]. The last thing Amazon needs is to get in the middle of that. [1] http://www.risceo.com/10%20Most%20Frequently%20Made%20Claims.pdf http://www.risceo.com/10%20Most%20Frequently%20Made%20Claims... [2] http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/emerging-trends-in-lawsuits-against-rea-16392/ http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/emerging-trends-in-lawsuits...
- 12y ago

sharkweek 12y ago

No bias here as I don't have any affiliation with Zillow/Trulia/Redfin but... I feel like the only real disruptor in this market has been Redfin - the only one with actual real estate agents. Zillow and Trulia are, put extremely simply, a map with ads on it. Useful tool, absolutely, but not going to shake up the real estate industry, which is undoubtedly a dinosaur. When you look at a company like Redfin, who is an actual brokerage but with non commissioned agents, and lower commissions across the board, they're actually disrupting a market that has been ripe for change for years, and they now are offering a better service/product at a cheaper price. I'd expect big things out of them, and expect several brokerages will either change gears to match them or more competition to pop up here soon.

jwcooper 12y ago
I was originally using Trulia to send me emails on new homes in the market, and it works fairly well. Problem is that the data can be sort of dated fairly quickly as it doesn't get MLS data immediately (at least in my area). This is sort of troublesome in markets where a home can be sold in 48 hours from being listed. Someone on HN mentioned Redfin, and I tried it out. It's incredibly fast (guessing 24-48 hours quicker than Trulia) to get emails on new listings as it's using the MLS data directly. Give it another year, and I feel like the UI will be on par with Trulia on the desktop.
- chrisgd 12y ago
  I think Trulia and Zillow rely on RE agents to post the information or they take it from other postings. They view it as a great marketing arm for RE agents, while agents (some) view it as a cost that isn't worth it. With this announcement[1], if I am a broker in NY, why would I post to Zillow if this other agency's listings are always going to be higher than my listings. 1 - http://zillow.mediaroom.com/2014-06-24-Zillow-and-Douglas-Elliman-Real-Estate-Company-Launch-Strategic-Marketing-Partnership http://zillow.mediaroom.com/2014-06-24-Zillow-and-Douglas-El...
z3ugma 12y ago
Check out OpenHomes.co - 1 year-old startup. They take 1% commission, list your house on the NMLS, and give you the tools to take care of boilerplate legal etc.

jpfielding 12y ago

and the most important truth in all of this.... the agent/brokers make peanuts compared to the mortgage companies.

tspike 12y ago

I'm currently hunting for a home and the only two sites I've found relevant are Zillow and Redfin. Can someone explain to me why I'd use Trulia?

brubaker 12y ago
They all get their info from the same source so it doesnt really matter.
blaincate 12y ago
which areas are you hunting? i wrote a aggregator for some cities at http://twikstik.com http://twikstik.com, and can add cities for you.
- tspike 12y ago
  I'm looking in Portland, Oregon. Looks like your site is Bay Area-only? Looks like a fun side project!
genwin 12y ago
Redfin is pretty good but is in only select cities. IMO Trulia's interface is superior to Zillow's. One small example, on Trulia you can wrap around when cycling through pix. On Zillow you have to go backwards through all pix to get back to the first one. Trulia is more fine tuned like that. On mobile, the gap between Trulia and Zillow is even wider in Trulia's favor. Zillow shows lot lines, which is nice. Zillow has better price history. I use Trulia for finding a house initially, and then Redfin or Zillow to get deeper info. Redfin has the deepest data.

clairity 12y ago

even if zillow & trulia merge, none of the potential disruptors in the real estate listings space (zillow, trulia, redfin, fsbo, etc.) have any real chance until the MLS system is dismantled... and brokers have a massive disincentive against that--brokers have exclusive access to property data via their local MLS before anyone else. the MLS's allow some access to this data to zillow & trulia, but will never let them have instant & complete info since it's the MLS's core competitive advantage. agent commissions will remain at 5-7% as long as the MLS system is in place. but MLS's are not going away any time soon. even the DOJ looked into breaking them up via legal action and gave up. interestingly, new york city does not have a strong MLS presence, but is basically an oligopoly of 6 major brokers, so the effect is the same. figure out a way to dismantle the MLS system and you're looking at a >billion dollar business (just note that zillow & trulia have been trying for ~decade, so it's not an easy problem).

loganfrederick 12y ago

It's relevant to link to Citron Research's scathing report that Zillow is among the most egregiously overvalued public tech companies, with large insider selling and video footage from management admitting to its partners that it does not have profits with which to pay them. http://www.citronresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/zillow-final.pdf http://www.citronresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/zil...

EverSF 12y ago
Keep in mind that Citron Research is known for providing info for short-sellers. So it's somewhat in their interest to see the stock go down for companies they review and, in turn, suggest their readers short. Note: they've recently been doing lots of reviews on Z
- loganfrederick 12y ago
  Largely true, but they've also put out Long reports, namely Blackberry recently which they highlighted about a year ago and have reiterated their positive stance, which has played out in the market. I add this not to toot their own but even out the message that although they're known for their shorts, that's not all they research and pick.

graham1776 12y ago

As a real estate broker, I think the major problem isn't Zillow, Trulia, or any other repackager of information. The problem is the MLS. There is still one source/database of legit listings that is bought into by every other broker. Other site (ForSaleByOwner, etc) do not appear legit and nobody trusts a listing put there. Democratizing the listing information is where disruption needs to happen. What do you think about me as a broker charging a small fee ($100-$200) to post your listing to the MLS, managing in/out calls, but letting the Seller keep the vast majority of the commission and letting a lawyer/broker service to handle the close/escrow process. Selling a home shouldn't be wasted on 15k to a broker who doesn't do anything. (Yes I realize CA has some laws that would make this tricky) Another idea: How about having homeowners list their properties on a reverse-bidding listing site, where brokers bid for the listing in exchange for the lowest commission? Ideas?

rhc2104 12y ago
Redfin is the site that has tried harder to disrupt the space, although it hasn't been as successful. They still use the traditional model, but with lower commission. https://www.redfin.com/sell-a-home/how-you-save https://www.redfin.com/sell-a-home/how-you-save http://www.redfin.com/buy-a-home/refund http://www.redfin.com/buy-a-home/refund
johnsonmkj 12y ago
I like where you are thinking with the real estate ideas, but here are my thoughts: As long as we have the concept of buyer's agents, then the system will continue. Real estate agents take any buyer and tell them that their service is free to them. As a seller, that's 2.8% that I don't even have a chance to get away from, which is no good.

willholloway 12y ago

With 10 years experience in the real estate brokerage business I have witnessed the value of a good agent in the home buying/selling process. The number of things that can and do go wrong on the eve of a sale, are often things that a good agent with good vendor/contractor/mortgage relationships can fix so the deal can close. With tight lending standards post-2009 an agent with good mortgage broker relationships can get loans approved that would have otherwise fallen through. I have seen this a hundred times. 90% of agents are useless middlemen/women that want to collect a few commissions a year to supplement their income. A full time, capable agent/broker is like having a good lawyer on your side. Being a real estate agent/broker is not an easy job. It's extremely competitive, the margins on a brokerage are often very thin. It's a demanding 7 day per week job, and putting in a lot of work to get no payment is an ordinary occurrence. The MLS and the mandatory broker councils that one must belong to are another story. I have found them to be petty dictatorships at least 10 years behind technology wise. One MLS I have worked with has for over ten years had an internet explorer only web interface. The MLS API is a giant XML beast that is the most confusing API I have ever worked with. The MLS has great value, and the freshness and integrity of the data come at a large cost. I am not surprised that brokers and associations protect it the way that they do.