Trulia! Zillow! … and now Roost! Where do they come up with these names?

Roost, a new startup in the increasingly crowded real estate search space, launched last week to a cacophony of commentary from the re.net. Joel Burslem covered its feature set, its performance, and noted that Roost has the complete MLS inventory because it gets its listings from MLS’s, albeit indirectly. Greg Swann fawned over its business model and complete inventory.

If I understand Roost’s business model correctly, it intends to make money in a way that’s clever, unique, and possibly illegal non-MLS-compliant.  [1/30/08 update:  I’ve been thinking about my choice of words, and “illegal” is definitely not the word I should have used.  “Illegal” is mugging somebody, or stealing something.  What Roost is doing is 100% legal and above-board.  It may — and I emphasize may — be viewed by some as being non-MLS-compliant.]

The unique aspect of its business plan: it offers brokerages the opportunity to sponsor search results and get the resulting click-throughs to their own site. A search in Sacramento, for instance, reveals that the current sponsor is Sacramento heavyweight Lyon Real Estate.

The first three listings I see are from VM Group, Gold Financial Services, and Prudential CA Realty, all clearly identified in compliance with Sacramento’s Metrolist MLS services.

Here’s the tricky bit…if you want more information, you click on “View Details on Featured Broker’s Site.” When you do that for, say, the Prudential listing, you get information about the Prudential listing on the Lyon Real Estate site:

This sleight-of-hand is accomplished through a too-clever-by-half url manipulation, much to subtle to be noticed by the average consumer, but apparently kosher enough to pass muster from the Sacramento MLS — at least for now. What if Prudential gets upset that the click-through on one of their listings on a public MLS-ish site goes through to one of its competitors?

Here’s how (I believe) Roost and Lyon defend themselves: Look at the url. When you search in Sacramento, you’re not actually using the Roost site at all; you’re actually using the Lyon site (GoLyon.com). For as long as Lyon is the sponsoring broker, the search is being conducted at golyon.roost.com — a (sub)domain under the control of Lyon Real Estate — and hence in compliance with those silly old arcane MLS rules.

Watch what happens when you go back to the site. In my case, I ran another search, and this one was sponsored by Intero. Same results, same look and feel, but the search is now running at InteroRealEstateIDX.com…and sure enough, the click-through goes to Intero’s own site.

Very, very clever. I really like this part of their business model, for reasons I’ve explained before: The current real estate business model heavily favors the listing side of the equation, and I’ve been clamoring to the likes of Zillow and Trulia to think about buy-side advertising offerings. If I’m a small brokerage in Sacramento, and I currently only have, say, 5 listings, I could decide to spend, say, $5000 sponsoring X number of real estate searches in that market. The number one bait that still seems to draw eyeballs in real estate is listings, listings, listings, and if I don’t have many of my own, why not leverage those of my competitors?

Now for the questions of MLS legality compliance …without going into all the details, I tried something like this trick about 2 years ago. It involved subtle manipulation of a url so that searches on a heavily-trafficked site were done — technically — using a url that was under my control. A good lawyer could easily have argued that this was in strict compliance with all the MLS rules. No dice. Within hours I got slapped down — not just by the MLS, but by my own broker!

I certainly wish Roost all the best, but I’m afraid they’d better put a sign on their front door that says, “Couriers please deliver cease and desist letters here.” Any business model that requires MLS compliance involves by definition an order of magnitude more headache. Why do you think Trulia and Zillow decided to get their listing feeds straight from the brokers?

Further commentary:

• TechCrunch, predictably, gets a few facts wrong. It’s not clear they understand the difference between a broker (e.g. Redfin) and a listings site (e.g. Roost.) Also, if I understand this bit of fine print on Roost’s site, they don’t get their data directly from the MLS, but by piggybacking on broker IDX sites. Subtle but important difference.
• Dustin notes that piggybacking off IDX feeds is a great way to scale your listings database quickly, but it puts some pretty onerous restrictions on what you can do with the data.
• Michael Price explains the url sleight-of-hand.
• Jay Thompson notes that, once again, the business model is about brokers providing listings, then paying for traffic.
• Sellsius praises Roost’s comprehensive and accurate results.

And still more commentary:

• Brian Boero* notes the irony that Roost is built on fairly antiquated technology — IDX — but provides a pretty rich user experience.

* At the last Inman, Brian and I finally answered that great conundrum: Did his ancestors add on “o” or did mine drop an “o” at Ellis Island? The answer: neither. His ancestors are Italian, and mine Dutch. So no, we’re not related — except of course, through Lucy.

Share This

Tags: Alternative business models, Industry, MLS, Real estate, Roost, Trulia, Zillow

[Read more →]

The ongoing Active Rain vs. Move.com dustup, our very own ongoing soap opera saga, illustrates one fact above all else: the re.net is maturing. As the traditional players in real estate (finally) begin to appreciate the potential of emerging technology in real estate, it’s inevitable that more acquisitions will take place — hopefully successfully.

Move.com’s overtures to Active Rain were actually not the first in which a traditional player courted one of the new ones. That honor, I believe, rests with our very own Joel Burslem of FOREM, which was acquired by Inman a number of months ago.

Some other possible pairings? Google must be looking with interest at both Zillow and Trulia. Inman, Ris Media, and other real estate industry news sources may be eyeing some re.net blogs.

And who knows…maybe the Bloodhound will make a play for one of the other Phoenix re.net blogs? Or perhaps these guys might be interested in this one?

Share This

Tags: Active Rain, FutureOfRealEstateMarketing.com, Google, Industry, Inman, Joel Burslem, Move.com, Trulia, Zillow

[Read more →]

Market slowdown? What market slowdown? Despite much of the country’s real estate market being in trouble, despite the sub-prime mortgage mess, despite all the gloom and doom in the press, despite speculation that even almighty Google may be affected by the downturn, funding for Seattle-area startups continues strong.

Zillow just landed $30M in funding, bringing its total to just under $90M and suggesting a market value of some $350M. Zillow CFO Spencer Rascoff, quoted in the same article over at the Kelsey Group blog, says that now the market is down,

It’s less fun to Zillow yourself and your neighbors and friends. [But] we’re getting less voyeuristic traffic and more buyer and seller traffic.

Meanwhile, TechCrunch reports that Docusign, my personal favorite e-signature provider, just raised $12.4M. Docusign’s exposure to the real estate downturn is, of course, significantly lower than Zillow’s, since Docusign services numerous industries beyond real estate.

Dave McClure, a “Silicon Valley software developer, entrepreneur, startup advisor, angel investor, and internet marketing nerd“, notes that VC’s and tech attorneys are still stuck in the 80’s, faxing documents back and forth, rather than putting things online and using digital signatures. Hmmm…sounds like the real estate industry!

Share This

Tags: Docusign, Electronic signatures, Industry, Zillow

[Read more →]

With due apologies to my civilian readers, my content over the next few days will be heavy on the geeky-technology-side of real estate — you know, with the Inman conference starting tomorrow and all.

Tonight’s back-to-back pre-conference events were sponsored by Zillow and Trulia at bars only a few blocks apart.  T-shirts, free alcohol, and bloggers were all in abundance.

Personal highlights included…

1) meeting The Incomparable Kris Berg (her new official title)…here pictured with Dan Green.  Despite her travails during the long trip here all the way from San Diego, she appeared in good spirits.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2) Connecting again with David G from Zillow, complete with a t-shirt that read “I’m DavidG from Zillow.  Who the hell are you?”  Here he is shown with special agent Therese Swan of Alain Pinel Realtors.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3) Scoring a t-shirt from Trulia, here modeled by none other than CEO Pete Flint.  First the front (”Find me on Trulia Voices”), then the back (”because I’m too old for Myspace.”)  A rumor was circulating that earlier versions of this t-shirt had the punchline “because I’m not creepy enough for Myspace.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 4) Getting a look at the fabled Sellsius blog mobile, fresh from a cross country trip:

5) Meeting the Sellsius twins again…Joe here pictured with Ardell Dellaloggia and Dan Green…and then with Mark Lesswing from NAR.  (Mark graciously forgave me for asking some tough questions during his presentation a few months ago at an Opes Advisors-sponsored event.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6) Talking with Mike Simonsen of Altos Research (my blogfather), Joel Burslem (Inman and Future of Real Estate Marketing.com), and Scott Sambucci, also of Altos Research.

7) Comedic highlight of the evening was this somewhat futilely-posted sign, missing perhaps at least a zero, judging by the size of the crowd.

 

Share This

Tags: Inman, Mark Lesswing, NAR, Pete Flint, Trulia, Zillow

[Read more →]

Michael Wurzer, the author of the well-written, provocative, up-and-coming FlexMLS blog, offers an MLS software provider's perspective on the recent Zillow developments, which from his point of view are yawn-inducing. Given that he first heard the news in the middle of the night after having been woken up by a puppy, he's probably grateful.

Michael raises the following challenge: Now is the time for brokers, agents, and MLS organizations to realize and increase the value of the MLS data repository.

I couldn't agree more. The unfortunate thing is…it simply ain't gonna happen. Why?  There are many reasons, not the least of which is organizational:  Realtor and MLS boards are designed with certain goals in mind, none of which have anything to do with technological innovation.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, mind you, since excelling in technological innovation is not a prerequisite for excelling in the real raison d’être for Realtor and MLS boards, namely fostering cooperation amongst otherwise fiercely competing brokerages and Realtors.  It really is coopetition in its purest form.

Think about it.  In our local market, the three biggest brokerages are Alain Pinel, Coldwell Banker, and Intero Real Estate.  The rivalry between these three companies, and between their respective agents, is fierce and unrelenting.  A new listing for Alain Pinel often takes place at the expense of the other two, since anybody interviewing multiple agents is likely to pick one from each company.  And yet, despite this intense competition, agents from any company — not just the big three — regularly and gladly show all the listings on the market, without regard to the listing broker.  Similarly, listing agents regularly and gladly listen to all the offers that other agents bring in, no matter which brokerage they come from.

It really is quite impressive, and the structures behind this are the much-maligned Realtor and MLS boards.  They create and enforce rules that enhance cooperation amongst competitors.  They have arbitration committees for settling disputes.  They have codes of conduct that prohibit poaching another Realtor's clients.  They require all members to upload new listings within 48 hours.

The big price they pay for enabling this coopetition, however, is that these boards tend to be consensus-driven (or nearly so), slow-moving, plodding, and methodical.  While this is the only way to get sworn business enemies to agree on anything, it's a terrible way of fostering  innovation.

Want to put sold listings up on the MLS?  Hell, no!  If one key player puts his foot down, perhaps threatening to remove his listings from the MLS, then that ain't gonna happen.

Let's talk about uploading the listings to Trulia, Google, or Zillow?  Absolutely not!  (Unless you're the Houston MLS.)  All it takes is one big broker to feel threatened by this move and it simply won't happen until there's absolutely no choice.

Ok, then, let's discuss creating a snazzy state-wide MLS to compete with these interlopers!  Sure, we'll discuss it, but what we really mean is "let's set up a feasibility steering committee to investigate this and report back to the board in the Spring of 2009."

Zillow and the other 2.0 players have no such restrictions.  Quite the opposite:  they're designed to turn on a dime, to be responsive to competitive pressures, to be creative, to be laser-beam focussed on consumers.  That's why they're so good at constantly turning out great products:  they're designed from the ground up to do precisely that.

Think of the Realtor and MLS boards as being akin to your local PTA.  The PTA is set up to do  extremely well at certain things:  raising money for a school, getting parents to volunteer in the classrooms, fostering interaction between parents and teachers.

But would you choose a PTA-type organizational structure to field a team of world-class baseball players?  No way!  To do that, you'd need to be much more business-oriented.  You'd have to be willing to take chances, to fire players that weren't doing well, and to be a hard-nosed negotiator.  That's now how PTA's are set up.

The next time you get frustrated at our industry's seeming inability to respond to these competitive threats, remember that that's simply the price we pay for having an organizational structure that otherwise suits our needs quite well.  Your local Realtor or MLS board ain't gonna be beating Zillow or Trulia at the technology game any time soon.

Share This

Tags: Alain Pinel Realtors, Coldwell Banker, Intero Real Estate, Real estate, Trulia, Zillow

[Read more →]

If by now you haven’t heard the news of Zillow’s new features, you’ve probably been hiding under a rock.  Here’s what’s been reported so far (cribbed from Bloodhound, which has four articles of its own)
TechCrunch, Drew Meyers, Jay Thompson, More from me: A screen-shot tour, Joel Burslem at tFoREM, Robbie Paplin at RCG, Webware, ClickZ, Brian Brady: Farming Zilliow, Brian Brady: Zillow for mortage lenders, Brian Brady: “Ask Questions, Share Answers”, Jonathan Dalton, Ardell at RCG, Zillow Blog, Seattle Post Intelligencer, Reuters, Inman Blog, TechMeme, Marlow Harris at 360Digest, FBS Blog, Jim Duncan at Real Central VA, Greg Sterling at Screenwerk, Realty Baron, VentureBeat.

Though I haven’t been hiding under a rock, I’ve had a frightfully busy day and have only now had a chance to sit down and look over the new features.

There are five key new features:

1. Home Q&A — users can ask and answer questions about any of the homes in Zillow’s database
2. Free profiles — for any type of user
3. Tell us it’s for sale — anybody, not just the listing agent or the owner, can identify a home as being for sale; this is undoubtedly the most controversial new feature
4. Add unlimited photos — again, anybody can add pictures
5. Zillow EZ ads — self-serve easy-to-use ads; this is key to Zillow chasing the long tail of advertising revenue from the hundreds of thousands of individual agents

We’ll tackle each new feature in a separate post, but for now let’s think about what this all means for the real estate industry.

Some have called me naive, but I’ve long taken Zillow at its word that it’s a media company with real estate content, not (yet another) disintermediation play.  This new feature release provides fodder for both sides of the argument.

Those who are convinced that Zillow is out to Expedia-ize the industry will look at the above — especially feature 3 — and say, “I told you so!  They’re conning us into giving them the listings so that a few months from now they can flip the switch, bring their broker licenses out of cold storage, and begin out-Redfinning Redfin!”  They’ll also say features 1 and 4 are further proof, and that 2 and 5 are simply decoys to make us trust them.

The Bloodhound himself seems to have come over to the “media company” camp, where all the above features provide opportunities for creative web-savvy agents to showcase their knowledge and make themselves as ubiquitous online as many successful agents are offline.

More to come on this interesting news…

Share This

Tags: Real estate, Zillow

[Read more →]

Sufficiently warned by Michael Price about the quality and content of entries submitted to this week’s Carnival of Real Estate, let me dispense with my gratuitous Latin phrase by boldly placing it in the title…and assuring you that my post has absolutely nothing to do with spinach in your dentures.  It’s just that I couldn’t find a Latin translation site that would reliably render the following headline: Creative Internet Advertising Your Broker Never Thought Of.

One of the first things you learn from many of the old-timers in the business is the importance of listings, for at least two reasons:

1. Your “sales force” — the other agents in your area, some of whom may have competed with you for the listing — does much of the legwork of showing the property to prospective buyers.
2. Having a listing gives you an “anchor” from which to further advertise yourself: an ad in the paper, a sign in the front yard, a brochure, a neighborhood mailing, an appearance in the MLS. This may well lead to further business for you…and as a side benefit may even help you sell the home.

The buyer’s agent, alas, has no such anchor. The fact that I represented the most recent buyer of 123 Main Street doesn’t offer a good opportunity to advertise myself. The new owner — my client — is unlikely to allow me to put a “Buyer Proudly Represented by” sign in his front lawn for too long, and if he did, he’d be inviting a host of unwanted guests, thinking the home is still for sale. I could send out a postcard to the neighborhood, trumpeting my success, but postcards are a pretty ineffective marketing mechanism unless you send them out regularly and for a long time. I could take out an ad in the local paper announcing my success, but that’s unlikely to generate any calls since the public has been trained to look in the paper for listings, not recent sales.

The excitement, the story, the marketing value of a transaction has always been quite firmly on the listing side. The buyer’s side is, well, yesterday’s news. While that makes sense, it’s not in sync with the fact that a home spends only a tiny fraction of its life as a listing. During the vast majority of the time in which the home is not on the market, shouldn’t there be some way of getting some marketing around my involvement in the purchase of that home?

The answer, of course, is “Yes.” The Internet does indeed present an opportunity for buyers’ agents to strut their success. At least two examples come to mind.

1. Sites like HomeThinking.com ask clients to rate their agents’ performance. The “anchor” for this rating and the (hopefully!) positive exposure is not only the listing side of the transaction, but also the buying side.
2. Zillow and its AVM brethren potentially present another such opportunity, though those sites don’t currently have such functionality. While most real estate sites concentrate on today’s news — the listings — Zillow’s inventory is all homes, not just homes that are currently for sale, and the history of those homes has some marketing value. If I wanted to highlight my buying agent experience in a particular neighborhood, I could — for a fee, of course, — perhaps add a virtual “Buyer of this home proudly represented by…” sign that would appear next to my past transactions.

Increasing the marketing value of the buying side of a transaction is unlikely to fundamentally shift the balance of power from the listing side, but it certainly does present an interesting new form of online advertising.

—————————————–

* Translation: You have a big piece of spinach in your front teeth.

Share This

Tags: Advertising, Business of real estate, Homethinking.com, Online advertising, Real estate, Zillow

[Read more →]

Realbird, the Bay Area-based MLS search provider, launched a real estate Wiki about the same time that Zillow made its big December 6th announcement, which also included a Wiki.

Industry wikis have yet to take off, at least in real estate, but now that Inman has acquired Realbird’s Wiki, that might change. Real estate professionals have been reluctant to contribute content to Zillow’s wiki for at least two reasons:

1. They remain eternally suspicious of Zillow’s intentions and are skeptical of making a contribution to a site which they believe will turn on them.
2. There’s currently no way of getting attribution for contributing. (”What do we Realtors want? Linkbacks! When do want it? Now!”) We may be happy to add to the body of knowledge out there, but we want some credit for it. The crude and simple way around this is to put a link back to our own site within our post, but the efficient Zillow cops tend to pick that up pretty quickly. (Drew, are you reading this? )

Inman’s foray into the Wiki space may overcome the first, and for the time being the Inman Wiki does allow for author attribution — see, for instance, the post on my broker, Alain Pinel Realtors, which clearly marks yours truly as the author. (Note to self: need to update this entry to reflect the fact that the VP of Marketing has just left. Done.)

From a consumer perspective, the big problem with an industry wiki is neutrality, an illustration of which is another entry on Alain Pinel Realtors. This one is pure marketing bumph, lifted word-for-word from our corporate-speak-ridden 1.0-era brochure-ware web site. Given the article’s attribution of Inman itself, I have to assume this article was simply copied in order to seed the wiki.

Share This

Tags: Inman News, Real estate, Realbird, Zillow

[Read more →]

Ok, class, today’s quiz has two true/false questions. No copying!

1. Zillow is like Cyberhomes
2. Zillow is like NBC

Time’s up…here are the answers:

So, how’d you do?

Much of the criticism of Zillow centers on the fact that its estimates are not the last word in accuracy, and in many cases can be far off. If Zillow were, in fact, strictly a home valuation site a la Fidelity’s Cyberhomes, that would be a pretty damning indictment. Zillow’s only hope would be to consistently have the best, most accurate estimates in the business, and Cyberhomes would arguably have a better platform to achieve that, since its affiliation with Fidelity gives it access to more data, more accurate data, and more timely data.

These criticisms are valid, but they simultaneously miss both a relatively minor and a crucial point, both of which can be illustrated by another analogy, this one between Zillow and Google, arguably the best known online media company.

1. 100% accuracy simply isn’t possible: When you type in a search on Google for, say, “Radish recipes,” what you typically get is a “good enough” set of search results to help you find the content you want. It’s an amazing testament to the brilliance of Google’s search algorithm engineers how often within the first page of results you find what you’re looking for. Sometimes, however, the answer isn’t on the first page…or the second or the third…or it simply isn’t found on Google. Somewhere out there on the Internet is the answer, but Google hasn’t found it or classified it or interpreted it correctly for your particular needs. A computer algorithm, however sophisticated, simply can’t always give the right or best answer. Similarly with Zillow, what you often get is a “good enough” estimate. The home’s true value might be $400,000, but Zillow might say $370,000 or $440,000. For many purposes, that’s a “good enough” answer for people to keep coming back, and when they need a more accurate answer — say, they’re planning on selling their home — they bring in an appraiser or a Realtor to give a more accurate estimate. As with Google’s search, sometimes the Zillow answer is way off. As frustrating as that is, it’s just the nature of the beast: A computer algorithm, however sophisticated, simply can’t always give the right or best answer…no matter how smart the engineers, no matter how many data points, no matter how powerful the computer.
2. Successful media companies are all about content and entertainment Google monetizes its search pages by selling relevant ads — just like NBC monetizes Saturday Night Live by selling ads. Google’s “content”, its “entertainment” is the search result and experience.Zillow’s content is all real-estate focussed. During its first season, there were two shows: “Home Value Estimates” and “Sales Prices and Details of Neighboring Homes.” We’ve just entered the second season with the release of a few more shows: “Make Me Move”, “Homes for Sale”, and “Real Estate Wiki.” Just like NBC, some of Zillow’s shows will be hits, and some will be flops. With any enough hits, Zillow will become successful.Don’t get hung up on the fact that Zillow’s “Home Value Estimates” show has inaccuracies in it. These estimates will improve, but they will never be 100% accurate, not only because they can’t be, but because what Zillow is providing is real estate entertainment, not the be-all and end-all of real estate valuation.

Share This

Tags: Eppraisal.com, Google, Online advertising, Real estate, Zillow

[Read more →]

It just kind of happened this way, but I’ve been fortunate in the last couple of days to meet some of the most interesting folks in online real estate: Marlow Harris (360 Digest), Ardell Dellaloggia (Rain City Guide and Searchingseattle), David Gibbons (Zillow), and Kevin Connor from Docusign. — all of them up in Seattle. Yesterday, back in the Bay Rea, I had the opportunity to meet Travis Chow and Steve Schmidt from Neighboroo, as well as Pete Flint from Trulia.

I have write-ups on both Docusign and Neighboroo in the works, but for now let’s talk about Trulia.

Housed in classic San Francisco start-up open-plan style, Trulia’s ~30 employees definitely enjoy themselves — except when Pete Flint asks for volunteers to don the Trulia mascot. Can’t say I blame them — it does look rather uncomfortable, and I’d certainly rather be building the next refinement to Trulia’s offerings than humoring a curious visiting real estate blogger!

Trulia is really doing an exceptional job of trying to figure out how to improve the online experience for real estate consumers and how to win over real estate professionals to advertise. The latter is a particularly delicate balancing act, since our industry tends to be leery of technologists who stray onto our turf. Trulia has made nice with Realtors by providing neat tools for FREE such as a Trulia search box, home roll, free data upload feeds, and a Trulia Map. Unlike some aggregators, Trulia has built formal relationships with with many brokers across the country. A testament to Trulia’s Realtor PR is that a number of industry power hitters now sit on a recently-created Trulia advisory board.

Though Trulia concentrates on listings, it does have a fairly comprehensive database of other homes, a la Zillow. Unlike Zillow, however, these homes are not front and center; rather, Trulia’s site displays them only in the context of being near and similar to listings of interest, allowing the consumer to draw his own conclusions about value. Trulia does not appear to have a “T-estimate” up its sleeve.

How can Trulia display sold listings when that’s against the longstanding rules of most MLS’s in the country? (Note: our local MLS, and, I believe, the NWMLS, recently changed that policy.) Simple: Trulia is not a member of any MLS, so it’s not bound by the same silly rules. It gets its listing information from its Realtor partners, and its sold homes data from county records, via a third party.

The flip side of the advantage of not being beholden to MLS laws, however, is not having access to all the listing data…and therein lies Trulia’s “chicken and egg” problem, one common to online real estate sites. Trulia doesn’t — and can’t — have all the listings because it’s not an MLS member, and because it doesn’t have all the listings, it’s not as attractive a destination for consumers…which in turn makes it less attractive for Realtors to partner.

Pete’s response on this is that while MLS’s may have all the listings, “they certainly haven’t won the battle for consumer attention. Because Trulia offers consumers a way to understand real estate trends in a way that others don’t, I’d argue that we’re more of an attractive destination [than the traditional MLS], particularly with 80% of consumers looking online in their search.”

Pete notes, however, that though Trulia only has about 50% of the listings nation-wide that Realtor.com has, its inventory is steadily growing as it attracts more Realtor partners. He also points out that “according to Comscore, we are the fastest growing online real estate site in the US with over 25% month-on-month growth over the last 6 months.” If that growth continues, it may reach a tipping point where it has enough inventory to attract the eyeballs to attract the Realtors to contribute more listings.

Pete and I and product manager Megan Kamil brainstormed about what the ultimate real estate mash-up might look like. I’ll save that discussion for a future post.

Trulians — best of luck to you all, and thanks for having me over!

Share This

Tags: Docusign, Neighboroo, Pete Flint, Real estate, Realtor.com, Travis Chow, Trulia, Zillow

[Read more →]