Bad Photo, No Photo, Good Photo What’s The Difference?
August 6th, 2007 Deeper Thoughts, Photography
My comment here transforms into post…
I think photos for the most part just change the order buyers visit properties. Good photos don’t increase sales “across the market as a whole”. No one buys a home just because the photos are good. But the good photo houses I believe get seen before the bad photo houses.
My own home had godawful photos. But we saw it last, around the 50th home we saw. If it had had good photos, we would have seen it a lot earlier in the picture.
Also if it had good photos there would have been far more interest in it, and we’d likely have had to pay $10-20,000 more to get it.
Bad and no photo homes DO sell, just not as easily or for as much.
August 6th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
[…] Deal of the day: Homes with good photos sell for more and sell sooner because they get seen by more people (I have no statistics to back this one up - anyone?). Here’s Athol, a real estate blogger with a good sense of humor who sometimes goes by “sock puppet,” on the subject: My own home had godawful photos. But we saw it last, around the 50th home we saw. If it had had good photos, we would have seen it a lot earlier in the picture. […]