Alex Brownstein wanted an advertising job in New York. As you can guess, New York is a tough market and as companies cut back many advertise less. So what’s an ad guy to do? Resumes are nice, friends in good places are important, knocking on doors can work in some fields but why not do what companies do when they have a product or service to sell?

Why not advertise? Online? Using Google’s AdWord program? A proven and hugely successful form of marketing.

What Brownstein did is this. He set up a Google account for free. He then selected “keywords.” When someone searched for his keywords, his ads would come up. Since individual names are not major advertising targets like terms such as “mortgage” or car,” the cost per click was small.

So far, so good. You get the idea that if you sell muffins your ad should come up when someone is looking for, well, muffins. What Brownstein did was to get the names of leading ad agency executives. Those names became his keywords. And, if it happens that an executive searches for himself or herself on Google, or perhaps someone who works for the exec, then guess which ad comes up?

What To Say

One Brownstein ad read this way for an ad exec named Ian Reichenthal:

Hey, Ian Reichanthal: Googling yourself is a lot of fun. Hiring me is fun, too.

The ad, of course, included a link to Brownstein’s website.

Brownstein reports that he posted ads for five executives and the results were that four called for a job interview, two offered him a job and he accepted one of the jobs that was offered.

To use the Brownstein strategy you first need a credible website. It need not be fancy or complex, but it should be a site which is suitable for jobs and employment, something that showcases you in the best possible light. One approach, without cost, would be to set up a free blog with WordPress or Blogger. Search around for a good theme, check your spelling and include your resume.

Or, if you want something unique, build a site such as ChefsOnTheRoad.com.

When you set up your AdWords account with Google pick the names of the executives for companies where you want to work.

Also, if you’re looking for one branch of a company in a particular area it may make sense to localize your ad for a given state, county or city.

A clever, innovative web presence can’t possibly hurt your job efforts. The cost might be about the expense of a fast-food dinner, but somehow the results are likely to be far more satisfying.

How To Get A New Job Using Google AdWords is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: ad, AdWords, Brownstein, employment, Google, job, marketing

• Individuals could work as real estate “salesmen” without any training because the law provided for a six months’ “grace period” before it was necessary to pass the basic real estate exam. In effect, you could be in real estate without a license, at least for enough time to close a sale.
• Brokers, said the regulations, “should not publicly criticize a competitor.”
• Brokers “should respect the schedule of fees established by custom in his community.”
• “Multiple listings are not permitted in the District of Columbia.”

By 1992, when I first established an online real estate center, real estate laws in many if not most states said that except for newspapers a broker’s license was required to publish a real estate ad. Did this mean that a real estate ad could not be posted on the Internet without having a brokerage license? If you needed a broker’s license to accept a real estate ad then how could you have an online classified service? Would you need to be licensed in all states?

Letters were sent to regulators in those states which had the toughest advertising restrictions asking if an online classified service could be permitted because the Internet represented a new technology, something not envisioned when state laws were written.

Each state we contacted accepted our position. Why? Well, it could have been that the “new technology” argument was compelling, but looming in the background were other issues:

First, real estate licensure laws simply do not apply to publications or other communication media. Real estate brokerage laws concern the representation of others for a fee in a real estate transaction. There is no act of representation publishing an ad. No prices are being set, no terms are being negotiated, and no fees result from performance.

Second, as a nation we do not license newspapers, magazines, publishers, news services, reporters, editors or columnists. Requiring a real estate licensee to publish real estate ads conflicts with the First Amendment and all accepted precedent.

Third, allowing some media to carry real estate ads and not others inherently limits owner rights. Home values are effectively reduced because communication is restricted. Less information about a property means fewer people may be interested and a smaller pool of prospective buyers means that owners may not obtain the prices which would otherwise be available had communication not been limited.

Fourth, read literally state laws allow print publications to carry real estate ads — but not Internet sites operated by local newspapers. This makes no sense and potentially limits the ability of newspapers to maximize ad revenues.

Fifth, why should real estate regulators create an advertising monopoly for newspapers?

Given this background it’s no surprise that the Eastern District Court of California and the New Hampshire Real Estate Commission knocked down state rules limiting real estate ads to newspapers. Such rules are absurd, relics of a bygone era that are unjustified today.

What’s really happened is that we have simply ended archaic, unenforced and unenforceable laws, laws with as much relevance today as rules still on the books from 300 years ago that make “blasphemy” a crime.

People have, and have always had, the right to sell their own homes. Every broker knows that some portion of all home sales will not involve their services. Figures from the National Association of Realtors show that 12 percent of existing home sales were made by self-sellers in 2007.

Will we now see more self-sellers because of the advertising decisions? Nope. The new rulings from California and New Hampshire will not create a surge of self-sellers because in practice online ads have been common for a decade.

What will change is this: Real estate regulators are forced to function within rules established by state legislatures — rules which are sometimes outdated and inappropriate, rules which regulators want to replace with modern standards. Regulators can now look at ad publishing requirements and say publicly and with precedence on their side that such rules are indefensible.

The result of the twin state decisions is not a “victory” for self-sellers, buyer brokers, small brokers or single agency. It’s not a “loss” for real estate brokers, big brokers, listing brokers or real estate regulators. Instead, it’s a victory for common sense and constitutional values, things we all share.

————————
Published originally by Realty Times on December 28, 2004 and posted with permission.

The End Of An Abusive Monopoly is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: ads, advertising, agent, allowed, banned, broker, marketing, mortgage, newspapers, online, real estate

What steps should you take? Here’s a baseline list to get you started.

• You Can Do It. Some 5,652,000 existing homes were sold in 2007 according to the National Association of Realtors, more than 15,000 a day. Other owners have done it and so can you.
• Define Your Goal. Do you want the highest sales price — or the biggest check at closing? They’re not necessarily the same. Imagine that two homes sell for $300,000, but one owner pays 2 points and agrees to replace the roof. The owner who sold without such costs got a bigger check at settlement. The bottom line: To have a successful sale you need to look at both price and terms — you must have a strong negotiator in your corner.
• Times Have Changed. Today’s real estate marketplace is radically different when compared with 10 years ago. Purchasers now use the Internet, receive seller disclosure forms, get home inspections, and are routinely represented by buyer brokers. The result is that buyers can be better prepared than in the past.
• Sparkle And Shine. Imagine going to a supermarket and seeing dusty fruit or aisles filled with old shelving and cans. It doesn’t happen because the grocery store knows how to present its goods. Sellers must do the same. Get rid of things you don’t want to move, organize closets and storage areas, and clean everywhere.
• Mechanics Count. Buyers expect everything to work. Home inspections are now entirely common and what buyers miss home inspectors will catch. Fix and paint things now and they won’t be an issue in the future.
• Think Broadway. When buyers see your home, it’s showtime. They want an environment where they can see themselves. Given them a show where everything is painted, arranged, and attractive, a home where the only issue is when to move in.
• How’s The Market? Real estate is local. Your broker can explain current market trends in your community, including what’s selling, what isn’t selling, and why. This information is central to getting the best possible price and terms.
• Know Your Rivals. Your property will be competing with other homes for buyer attention. Ask your broker how to be competitive — and how to have an edge.
• What Time Is It? Markets differ by location and time. When interest rates are low and the local job base is growing, it’s great to be a seller. But when times are slack and mortgage rates are rising, homes also sell. In 1981, when the prime rate topped 20 percent and the population was smaller, 2.4 million existing homes were sold. The trick is to be realistic, to get as much as market conditions will allow.
• Understand The Plan. Real estate marketing involves far more than a sign in the yard and an ad in the paper. Successful brokers use a variety of methods to attract and qualify prospects, including the latest Internet and communication advances. Make sure that brokers explain up front how they will market your home. Once listed, check the plan regularly to see that it’s being carried out and to change it as market conditions require.

————————
Published originally by Realty Times on January 23, 2002 and posted with permission.

10 Tips For First-Time Sellers is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: brokers, marketing, plan, selling, tips

This is a perspective which is both cute and disingenuous, and one that is also wrong. Like arguments favoring a flat earth, there is a certain superficial logic but endless repetition will not make such assertions true, rational or compelling.

When a property is offered for sale through a real estate broker, a performance contract called a listing agreement is created. This means that the broker is not paid until the listing terms, or terms otherwise acceptable to the seller, are met.

If a listing agreement allows a broker to offer a property for sale at $300,000 with a 5 percent deposit, that means an offer of $299,999 has not met the terms of the listing agreement. A $300,000 offer that requires the owner to paint the front door may not make it either if the front door arrangement is something not found in the listing arrangement. In both cases, since the requirements of the listing contract were not met, the broker is not entitled to a fee.

Within a listing agreement a broker is typically authorized to market and advertise the property to prospective buyers and also within an MLS. An MLS allows members to share information and inventory unavailable to non-members and third parties.

Nowhere in a listing agreement is a broker obligated to advertise “everywhere.” In fact, a typical listing agreement provides permission for a broker to advertise but does not obligate him or her to do so.

Seen the other way, a typical listing agreement provides no authorization whatsoever for a third-party to market the owner’s property.

How can this be? Go back to the listing broker’s job. The broker is retained to sell a property under criteria established by the owner through the listing agreement. How the property is sold is the broker’s business — it may be that the broker knows a ready, willing, and able buyer and has no need to advertise. Or, it may be that a buyer broker has a client who wants a specific property, and the listing broker can meet that need.

But let’s say there was an absolute obligation to advertise everywhere. What would this mean?

In an absolute world, the broker would be forced to market in all newspapers, TV stations (including all cable outlets), radio outlets, and magazines. The ad bill for a property might be several times larger than the possible commission, a situation which makes no sense.

The term “all” also makes no sense. In an electronic era where homes in Deluth can be seen in New Dehli, an absolute obligation for brokers to advertise “everywhere” could well be interpreted to mean just that — all media in all locations. And if a broker happens to miss the afternoon paper in Rangoon, then no doubt in an absolute world a trial lawyer would argue that the broker has somehow committed a commercial sin for which the owner — and the lawyer — should be well-compensated.

Now we have the Internet and the claim that brokers “must” advertise on all possible sites. This notion is no different than the idea that brokers “must” advertise in all local media. There is no such obligation, online or off.

But suppose that an online site is willing to provide “free” advertising. Is not the broker now obligated to post listings online? Isn’t this good for sellers?

There are two answers here.

First, a sale is a sale. Brokers sold homes before the Internet, and many continue to market properties without web pages and online ads. This is entirely fair, since the broker’s obligation is not to advertise, it is to sell the home under terms acceptable to the owner.

Second, such ads are not “free.” There may not be a cash expense, but there are real costs. For example, by advertising on many sites a broker may dilute and devalue the worth and effectiveness of his or her home page and other online marketing locations. Or, imagine if a KKK or Nazi site offered “free” web pages for home sellers. Does anyone believe that a broker is required to market from such sites, even if the exposure is available without cost?

The real issue here has little to do with brokers and their advertising requirements. Instead, what we are seeing is still another effort by third-parties to build-up the traffic and value of their online sites without paying brokers for their inventory. This is the equivalent of someone claiming the right to sell chain saws from Sears merely because Sears happens to have a fine supply of such devices.

It’s not hard to figure out — just follow the money.

————————
Published originally by Realty Times on May 9, 2000 and posted with permission.

Must Real Estate Brokers Advertise Everywhere? is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: advertising, brokers, marketing, real estate

The wording here is curious. If this is a “mandatory” refund then how come I “may” receive it? Should it not automatically go to my bank account? Isn’t that what “mandatory” means? And about that $5,100.00 — why is that number in bold if I might receive less? After all, a “refund up to” is hardly the same as a plain old “refund.”

If you read the fine print at the bottom of the letter — and for me that means whipping out a magnifying glass — it says “recipients of this letter do not necessarily have FHA-endorsed mortgages, and may or may not be entitled to a refund.”

But the fact is that you don’t have to depend on a helpful merchant to get an FHA refund. If you’ve ever had an FHA loan you may be entitled to a partial rebate of the mortgage insurance premium. Maybe not much and maybe nothing at all but you can easily find out without sending money to me or anyone else — just go to HUD’s online refund page.

A lot of folks are getting fed up with the mortgage come-ons whether they appear in the mail, the paper or on television. In California, Assembly Member Alberto Torrico has just introduced AB 941, legislation which would require lenders who offer option ARMs and negative amortization loans to plainly spell out important terms. If the Torrico bills passes lender offers would be required to say in big print that the “advertised rate of ____ is not the actual interest rate. It is the payment rate. If the borrower chooses to pay this advertised rate, the principal balance of the loan will increase.”

But while Torrico says there ought to be a law, a federal judge in Wisconsin says there is already such legislation in place.

Susan and Bryan Andrews of Cederburg, WI thought they were getting a good deal when they decided to accept a loan that would be funded by Chevy Chase Bank, a major financial institution in the Washington, DC area.

According to federal district judge Lynn Adelman, the Andrews “believed that the payments and the interest rate were fixed for five years and became variable thereafter. However, although the minimum monthly payment was fixed for five years, the interest rate was not. The loan carried a discounted or “teaser” interest rate of 1.950 percent, but that rate applied only to the first monthly payment, after which the interest rate increased every month according to a formula.”

The question before Judge Adelman was whether the Andrews could begin a class-action suit against the lender under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA). Adelman said yes and now as many as 7,000 borrowers may be involved.

It turns out that under the TILA there are many standards which must be met when mortgage products are advertised and originated. Here are some of the points made by Judge Adelman in her decision.

• “All required disclosures must be clear and conspicuous.” If language can be read in more than one way then under TILA it’s not clear.
• “Information concerning the number, amount and periods of payments must be disclosed clearly and conspicuously.” Lenders must group such information. They must also “conspicuously” segregate it “from all other terms, data, or information provided in connection with a transaction.” Information may be shown conspicuously by using bold print, placing it in a box, etc.
• Small print may not be sufficiently conspicuous to meet TILA requirements.
• Disclosures must be consistent and not contradictory or misleading.

“TILA does not require a lender to disclose a loan’s interest rate,” said Adelman. “Further, in the present case, defendant was most assuredly not required to disclose the 1.950 percent rate, which applied only to the first monthly payment. However, as discussed, defendant included the 1.950 percent rate on its TILDS. Yet the 1.950 percent figure had virtually no relation to any information required to be disclosed on the TILDS, much less a direct relation. The 1.950 percent rate had no significant connection to the cost of the loan. Moreover, a reference to the 1.950 percent rate would not be useful to an ordinary borrower because it would cause the loan to appear more attractive than it actually was and serve no useful purpose.”

While Judge Adelman has placed a stay on her ruling so that it could be appealed, if her initial decision stands it means that the case may be continued in the form of a class action suit. While Adelman said that the Andrews were not entitled to statutory damages, they can seek rescission and attorneys’ fees. If they’re able to obtain a rescission order from a court, borrowers will be able to demand the return of money paid to the lender to date.

“Whether Judge Adelman’s decision goes further in the court system or not, it at least makes two points,” says Jim Saccacio, Chairman and CEO at RealtyTrac.com, the nation’s largest foreclosure resource. “First, borrowers need to understand all terms before entering into a mortgage agreement. Second, lenders need to spell out loan terms with clarity. Meanwhile, you can bet that as a result of the Andrews case a lot of lenders are reviewing marketing materials and loan documents to make sure they meet all required standards.”

————————

Published originally by RealtyTrac.com during March 2007 and posted with permission.

Mortgage Marketing: There Ought To Be A Law…. is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: AB941, Adelman, disclosure, loan, mail, marketing, mortgage, truth in lending