nytimes.com real estate dead as a dinosaur-- street easy is now #1
Started by susiegrey123
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 1
Member since: Jan 2009
Discussion about
No I don't work for streeteasy. The irony is that the front page of the nytimes RE section today is all about the web. Stick with street easy for your searches. Here's a secret: NYTIMES.com recently redid their online real estate search section. Ever heard the saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?" They must have had an old, out of touch, ego-centric person who thinks everyone should study our... [more]
No I don't work for streeteasy. The irony is that the front page of the nytimes RE section today is all about the web. Stick with street easy for your searches. Here's a secret: NYTIMES.com recently redid their online real estate search section. Ever heard the saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?" They must have had an old, out of touch, ego-centric person who thinks everyone should study our zip codes in order to use nytimes.com redo their site. SO if you are moving from Manhattan to Brooklyn and you don't know the zip code you're out of luck. Forget about if you are from California and really don't care to look up the zip codes. Aren't we supposed to be the "Obama-Nation" where we are inclusive and not excluding people who are not "in the know"? Even more absurd is the way street boundaries have been redefined. Obviously someone who only knows northern Manhattan created the new site. For example: they misplaced where the park is in Gramercy Park; they misplaced the East Village; they obliterated East Harlem from the map altogether and they moved Manhattan valley and half the Upper West Side. For a paper that is trying to be Web 2.0 savvy it is sad they have written their own epitaph. Over night they are so UN user-friendly. Even though we LOVE street easy, curbed and all the other fun fabulous hip 2009 web sites, it is sad for sentimental reasons that NYTIMES.com has in essence buried itself. PLEASE resurrect yourself and go back FAST to your old search system, since no one searches by zip code and the neighborhoods are all wrong. This is 2009, a Web 2.0 nation. Street easy makes it EASIER.
[less]
Response by alanhart
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 12397
Member since: Feb 2007
What on earth are you talking about? I just checked out the NYT site, and it lets you search by neighborhood name (as well as zip code or town), and its map then shows East Harlem and the East Village exactly where they should be (given that there will always be some disputes about exact boundaries). Gramercy Park is shown exactly where it is. Manhattan Valley is wrong, but then it's really just a tiny sub-neighborhood and shouldn't be included at all.
The Upper West Side is wrong, but then 59th-110th is such a huge area that it should be broken down in some way so as to be meaningful in a search. 72nd and 96th are not unreasonable breakpoints.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by austin
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 5
Member since: Jan 2009
You don't need to type the zip code, you can just type the name of the neighborhood.
Manhattan Valley is definitely a neighborhood that runs above 96th to 110th. StreetEasy also has Manhattan Valley although it's a different boundary to the Times. There's a lively discussion on Curbed about this right now. The general consensus seems to be that naming it Manhatten Valley and not the Upper West Side is the right thing.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by wishhouse
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 417
Member since: Jan 2008
The nytimes.com re search is, at best, painful to use. That is why I switched to streeteasy.com in the first place. I don't even check nytimes.com anymore.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by reddog2669
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 121
Member since: May 2007
I still use both. NY Times still gets business from some smaller realtors that Street Easy doesn't pick up. I know up in Inwood/WH that New Heights Realty and AN Shell are in the Times and not SE.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by tandare
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 459
Member since: Jun 2008
NYTimes real estate listings have become more difficult and prone to glitches. And lots of click throughs to get info. I like the recent update's layout but I don't think it works as well. Hard to change a search or expand parameters after it's done, necessitating an entirely new search.
Why more brokers don't list on streeteasy is beyond me, but many Queens brokers and as pointed out earlier, Washington Hts, Inwood brokers don't list on streeteasy, only on their own sites, NYTimes and craigslist.
My dream is a listing format wherein the brokers cannot put up a listing without including pertinent info - e.g., pets (and what types), amenities, laundry, whether it is HDFC or otherwise income restricted, maintenance / condo fees, tax abatement and type/length, et cetera. So in order for a listing to appear each category would have been checked=off one way or another. I have probably used hours upon hours looking at listings only to find after digging or contacting the broker that the building has no laundry. That and MLS - wouldn't that be grand.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by w67thstreet
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 9003
Member since: Dec 2008
tandare... i'd just like a sq ft...
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by 407PAS
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 1289
Member since: Sep 2008
The Times has the largest readership, no doubt about it. I am sure that the traffic on StreetEasy cannot compare in any way. It is all about eyeballs. The Times also allows FSBO ads, something that is missing from StreetEasy. While the search engine has been going through some difficulties, I think it has stabilized a bit in the last week. I love the new map feature.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by kittensonwheelz
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 59
Member since: Apr 2007
If it's not on StreetEasy I don't want to know about it.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by 407PAS
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 1289
Member since: Sep 2008
"If it's not on StreetEasy I don't want to know about it."
Haha, hilarious. Are you an actual buyer or an agent?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by tandare
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 459
Member since: Jun 2008
w67 -- I'd have mentioned sq ft but, as experience has shown those figures are so frequently wrong that I find it hard to go by those figures. And the errors are in both directions, places that are smaller or larger than the stated footage.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by hejiranyc
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 255
Member since: Jan 2009
What's the difference- it's the same fictitious broker bullsh*t on SE and the NYT. The NYT just made it more difficult to find the bullsh*t.
What on earth are you talking about? I just checked out the NYT site, and it lets you search by neighborhood name (as well as zip code or town), and its map then shows East Harlem and the East Village exactly where they should be (given that there will always be some disputes about exact boundaries). Gramercy Park is shown exactly where it is. Manhattan Valley is wrong, but then it's really just a tiny sub-neighborhood and shouldn't be included at all.
The Upper West Side is wrong, but then 59th-110th is such a huge area that it should be broken down in some way so as to be meaningful in a search. 72nd and 96th are not unreasonable breakpoints.
You don't need to type the zip code, you can just type the name of the neighborhood.
I typed in Gramercy Park and it brings me right to this which looks accurate.
http://realestate.nytimes.com/sales/gramercy-park-new-york-ny-usa
East Harlem is definitely in there. I typed East Harlem and I find:
http://realestate.nytimes.com/sales/east-harlem-new-york-ny-usa
Manhattan Valley is definitely a neighborhood that runs above 96th to 110th. StreetEasy also has Manhattan Valley although it's a different boundary to the Times. There's a lively discussion on Curbed about this right now. The general consensus seems to be that naming it Manhatten Valley and not the Upper West Side is the right thing.
The nytimes.com re search is, at best, painful to use. That is why I switched to streeteasy.com in the first place. I don't even check nytimes.com anymore.
I still use both. NY Times still gets business from some smaller realtors that Street Easy doesn't pick up. I know up in Inwood/WH that New Heights Realty and AN Shell are in the Times and not SE.
NYTimes real estate listings have become more difficult and prone to glitches. And lots of click throughs to get info. I like the recent update's layout but I don't think it works as well. Hard to change a search or expand parameters after it's done, necessitating an entirely new search.
Why more brokers don't list on streeteasy is beyond me, but many Queens brokers and as pointed out earlier, Washington Hts, Inwood brokers don't list on streeteasy, only on their own sites, NYTimes and craigslist.
My dream is a listing format wherein the brokers cannot put up a listing without including pertinent info - e.g., pets (and what types), amenities, laundry, whether it is HDFC or otherwise income restricted, maintenance / condo fees, tax abatement and type/length, et cetera. So in order for a listing to appear each category would have been checked=off one way or another. I have probably used hours upon hours looking at listings only to find after digging or contacting the broker that the building has no laundry. That and MLS - wouldn't that be grand.
tandare... i'd just like a sq ft...
The Times has the largest readership, no doubt about it. I am sure that the traffic on StreetEasy cannot compare in any way. It is all about eyeballs. The Times also allows FSBO ads, something that is missing from StreetEasy. While the search engine has been going through some difficulties, I think it has stabilized a bit in the last week. I love the new map feature.
If it's not on StreetEasy I don't want to know about it.
"If it's not on StreetEasy I don't want to know about it."
Haha, hilarious. Are you an actual buyer or an agent?
w67 -- I'd have mentioned sq ft but, as experience has shown those figures are so frequently wrong that I find it hard to go by those figures. And the errors are in both directions, places that are smaller or larger than the stated footage.
What's the difference- it's the same fictitious broker bullsh*t on SE and the NYT. The NYT just made it more difficult to find the bullsh*t.