After You Read the Listings, Your Agent Reads You

It's a fine article overall. Nothing too unusual or insightful here though.

""Here's a tell," said Jim Foote, who has been in real estate for 38 years and is broker-owner of Greenwich Custom Real Estate Services in Old Greenwich, Conn. "If they linger for a long time in any one room, that's telling you that there is something about this room that's especially interesting to them.""

Really? So people spend LESS time in places they don't want to be in?? Just like how I spend less time in the store when there's nothing I like?? Just like I spend less time reading a menu when theres nothing I like on it? And when I am interested in something, I like to spend MORE time looking at it??? Wow! And the rest of the "tells" seem to be pretty simple human nature observations. I think the best actual "tell" mentioned is the clipboard anecdote mentioned at the beginning.

The clipboard anecdote was a great observation, but I was left wondering what was meant by "never buy". If it's that the same clipboard-carrying person, going to apartment after apartment, never buys, that's an interesting and somewhat surprising phenomenon. If it's that random people who view apartments with clipboards in hand tend not to buy, that could just be because clipboard-carriers are likely to be more analytical and open to viewing more apartments and doing more research before buying, so the chances of any given showing leading to a purchase will be smaller, even if such people eventually do settle on *one* of the many apartments shown to them by many brokers.

My guess is that the super organized start off with a clipboard thinking it is a good idea and then realize how stupid it is and ditch it after seeing their tenth place. Carrying a clipboard not a sign of better analytical skills - more likely is someone who also has very neat handwriting.

I wish they had spent more time considering viewers who ask if they can take pictures. Is this a tell or not? Are these people who have supplanted clip boarders or are they just a generation younger?

"I wish they had spent more time considering viewers who ask if they can take pictures."

I just assumed that being able to take pictures went without saying, though I asked for permission when viewing an apartment that was for sale while being occupied. I took a lot *more* pictures of the unoccupied, open house apartment that I'd seen immediately prior.

now i finally know her name is alison. people always think it's a middle-east male named ali

>""Here's a tell," said Jim Foote, who has been in real estate for 38 years and is broker-owner of Greenwich Custom Real Estate Services in Old Greenwich, Conn. "If they linger for a long time in any one room, that's telling you that there is something about this room that's especially interesting to them.""
Really? So people spend LESS time in places they don't want to be in?? Just like how I spend less time in the store when there's nothing I like?? Just like I spend less time reading a menu when theres nothing I like on it? And when I am interested in something, I like to spend MORE time looking at it??? Wow! And the rest of the "tells" seem to be pretty simple human nature observations."

LOL, I agree. I once spent 5 minutes in a room trying to decide if "those type shades" would look good in my friend's apartment.

All a clipboard means the buyer is going to be a pain in the ass and scrutinize everything, and be an annoying negotiator. You can maybe afford to ignore the clipboarder if you have at least 2 other serious buyers.

Thank you, Sonya_D, at the top of this thread. That's way more insight in a couple of sentences than the entire article achieves.

Lucy & Sonya, grateful if you could post your most recent nytimes article. Good for Ali for putting herself out there and getting it in there.

NWT: That's what you get for posting a nice compliment to ali.:
"Good article by front_porch."
No claim of it being "too unusual or insightful..."

Hah, Lucy, thanks.

Although I do not mean to poo-poo Ali's article. It didn't seem to be meant to an in-depth examination. Rather, IMO, it seemed to give a little bit look into how brokers see things. I'm sure the writing requirements given to her (length, topics, time, etc.) by the NYT editors restricted her to just what the article contained, and nothing more. In this way, it's a perfectly fine bit of reading. Perhaps I was mislead a bit by the title, which seemed to insinuate that a broker is able to know all about a buyer after a just a couple of interactions/showings. And of course, this is not what the article successfully concluded. Still, kudos to Ali for her accomplished article.

Truth, no indeed. This was purely my own personal observation.

Sonya: So,what?
"Hah, Lucy..."?
Very insightful personal observation, to rely on the title -- only to be "mislead a bit."

Oh snap

^and there are always the drunken streeteasy trolls^ to "snap" you at 11:12 pm.

Truth, you're all over the place.

So, I was responding to your "no claim" remark.

"Ha, Lucy" was in response to Isle_of_Lucy's affectionate comment towards me (and, I'll remind you, Isle_of_Lucy said my comment was insightful, I NEVER said my comment was insightful).

Lastly, the personal observations, which now you (sarcasticly) and Isle_of_Lucy said are insightful (not me) are in regard to my first response to the ENTIRE article, not my later response, in which I commented on the title. Please, read these comments in order.

Sonya: "All over" what "place"?
I don't care what you were responding to. Glad to hear that you are getting affection from Isle_of_Lucy.
sarcasticly.

"Sonya: "All over" what "place"?"
It's an expression.

And obviously you cared a at least little... your last response was totally regarding my comments, complete with question marks! ;)

I like affection. :D

And trUth likes affectation. :U

Suck up the affection,Sonya.^trollalanhart is here at 12midnight^ Just for whoever will read his trolling.

NWT: very nice discussion thread you attempted to start here on streeteasy.

I will, thanks! :)
And I concur with your latter comment too :)

Sonya: good for you. Very nice.

Glad we could reach an understanding :)

It's obvious, but this article highlights it, agents are in business for themselves. That's why they have to assess the seriousness of a buyer so they can work with a buyer who will transact and get them paid.

The point about them assessing a property both from a purchase today as well as a sale tomorrow from their client is pretty good PR bullshit - surprising that the Times publishes such biased crap.

NWT: Now, here's an insightful view-point.
What other agents are in business for themselves?

I agree with trUth.

Indeed, bgrfrank. I agree.

But at the same time, this is their job, and they're doing it to get paid. There is no secret about that.What I don't like, however, is the guise that is often established, on purpose, and sometimes disingenuously, that the agent is just on your side, and working foremost for you. Really, they are foremost working for themselves, which any smart person knows, but they don't always like to make it appear that way.

Another interesting take.

It's 1:15am EST 3/27/13 and the trollalanhart is still trolling me.

With so many "interesting takes" on the subject, you should write an article and attempt to get it published,
Sonya.

broker as altruistic, caring human, looking out for the best interests of their client is a complete load of shlt

i find it insulting when people i do business with try to color their motivations this way--

duh we all want a deal, a good deal---and broker's, whose stake in a deal is 1.5 -4%, could give a fork about whether a buyer over/underpays---their only maotivation is to get any deals done that they can---to sense which side of any deal is less attentive to their interests and jam that side---and quickly---buyers vanish all the time--

that brkkers push this sort of heartfelt garbage speaks of their assessment of their client as dumb

brokers: be real--dont waste time and insylt the intelligence of your clients with this type of crap.

Why? Seems to be rather specious logic. Everything with interesting takes should be, or attempted to be, published? Besides, we already have a decent article on the matter, which has spurred reactions from others in this thread (well, except from you, whose reactions don't in fact deal with the article, and seem only to be obsessed with other people's responses in a very petty way). Congrats, Truth, on another post which moves things nowhere! ;)

Yikes, well said, IMO. I think the best type of attitude a broker can have is one that is both helpful towards your goals, but also honest with you about their intentions as well. Unfortunately, they often feel that this second parts needs to be left out, or hid, for some reason.

Actually, if we're speaking the truth, I said Sonya_D's sentences showed "more insight" than the article. I didn't necessarily say the sentences themselves were insightful. ;-)

Sorry, wans't trying to dis front_porch or Ali (or both), it was more the article itself, and I thought Sonya_D hit it right when s/he said "Really? So people spend LESS time in places they don't want to be in??"

That being said, I've walked in and walked out of horrendous places in 10 seconds, yet the agent still badgered me afterwards about my interest. So I guess the obvious could be stated after all. Mea culpa.

Isle_of_Lucy, I think you hit the nail on the head as well. Really, as I said before, the article itself is a good read nonetheless, even if it doesn't delve too deep and points out things that may be a bit obvious to some. Like I said, I believe these to be products of the the constraints the author was working with, rather than her overall knowledge and experience.

And you bring up another good point -- if these brokers, the "veterans" as the article says, are so good at reading "tells," then how come apartment seekers get calls, emails, etc., etc. after plainly showing absolutely no interest at all? And then when it comes to an apartment that an apartment seeker really wants, it takes two phone calls and an email to get the building's financial statement? This of course is just an example, and I know the (good) broker is just doing their job in both scenarios, but it raises the issue of just how observant -- or if it even matters -- these brokers are.

Sonya: Congrats. You aren't petty and your posts move things somewhere.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pg5t2Waui

Thanks! :-)
But, like your last post shows, just like the others you posted here before it, we sadly can't say the same for you :-(

trouche--pls tell us more of your incredible life, surrounded by stars, in all the most beautiful rarified places the world over.

please we are starved for a vicarious serving of your complete horseshlt!

trouche!

Yikes, LOL!

Most industries today are heavily data driven, gut is no longer sufficient by itself.

Sonya likes to read yikes' baby-talk.
yikes, the self-proclaimed 0ne-percenter has a thing about "being surrounded by stars" and "all the most beautiful rarified places the world over." He's a rich big-time money guy yet he can't spend his money to go to places "the world over". He's "starved".

I've never been to a "rarified" place.

Sonya likes yikes. Yikes could take Sonya on a trip to somewhere that's rarified.
They could dine-out on horseshlt together.

Truth, LOL, you have no idea what I like and what I don't like. Provide proof for your assertions. Put up or shut up.

Sonya: you laughed out loud at yikes' comment so you must like it. He could be good company for you.
yikes has the big bucks to move your thing to somewhere. He only needs to put up the money for airfare and hotel.

Shut up being far far preferable to put up.

At least she hasn't started going on about her designer Depends.

Yet.

^^ooh, the trollalanhart is here!
trollalanhart could accompany Sonya and yikes to rarified places.
Most alkies poop their pants so don't forget to pack extra Depends.

What witty repartee.

Check your Depends, trollalanhart. There may be some witty repartee in there.
Could be the highlight of your afternoon.

Truth, I laughed out loud at your comment(s) too. Your point?
Conclusion: your proof falls flat. Again, put up or shut up.

(Also, your attempted "proof" assumes that when someone laughs, they somehow want to have dinner. Feel free to logically prove this as well).

boy, you keep digging yourself deeper and deeper, don't you, Truth? ;-)

Sonya: I didn't attempt to provide you with proof.
I didn't assume that you want to have dinner with yikes -- but he needs somebody to travel and dine with.
yikes is rich, he's a One-percenter!
He could go anywhere in the free world, yet he's upset that I travel to places he hasn't been to.
So,you could just be yikes' travel companion.

"JUST F**KIN' DIG IN!" (quote from G.E. Smith)

Heh, trust me, it's VERY evident that you didn't provide proof. So, again, put up or shut up.

(I have no interest in Yikes' financial situation, or getting together, but feel free to obsess all you want).

Sonya, you will not succeed in discovering anything approaching reason in this exchange. When she is off the meds this is how it goes.

Providing proof isn't important to me.
yikes just needs some company. He's rich, yet he doesn't travel to places that he thinks are rarified.
yikes' obsession about where I travel to and who I'm surrounded with could be quelled by a travel companion.
It could be worth it for a few LOLs, sonya.

Oh, and here's Ottawanyc! He's a medical professional.
Ottawanyc can be part of the yikes travel group. He's so reasonable that he can be put in charge of the travel plans. yikes might even slip him a few bucks for his efforts.

Ottawanyc,
Yes, Truth seems to be of that... "special" breed of people -- stubborn, yet at the same time completely oblivious to relevancies at hand. They babble and foam at the mouth, in a never-ending attempt to make sense within their own brains.

And Truth, no, of course proof isn't important to YOU... in fact, it is never needed for the one making the assertions, but rather, it is needed BY the ones who he's talking to. A judge and jury need to hear proof, not the prosecution. You already believe what you say, but if it's insanity to everyone else, yes, you DO need to provide proof, if you want any credibility. The proof is for other people's sake, not yours.

But hey, if credibility isn't what you're after, feel free to babble on! (you seem well on your way).

Without Sonya-cred, all is babble and foam.
Sonya is now a judge and jury. Her brain is the center of the sense universe.

The yikes travel companion list, so far:

Sonya
alanhart
Ottawanyc

all special and very aware of the relevancies at hand.

LOL, you said it, not me!
But since you said it, let's hear some evidence of this new assertion. Put up or shut up.

Sonya: I'm going out into the real world now, without sonya-cred.
You can stay here on this thread, asking for some evidence of assertions and for me to put up or shut up.
The real world doesn't care about your requirements.

LOL, they ain't my requirements. Things making sense, in fact, is exactly what the world uses. Good luck out there, kiddo! By the looks of it, you'll need it ;-)

Thanks NWT for the shout-out, and others for their comments.

ali

Another good thread completely ruined by front_porch.

;}