Brandon Donnelly
Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly.
Brandon Donnelly
Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly.
Last month Zillow.com launched a new feature called “Instant Offers.” Press real estate can be found here.
It is:
“…a way for homeowners to sell their homes quickly by providing them with offers from investors and a comparative market analysis (CMA) from a local real estate agent, as an estimate for what the home might fetch on the open market.
Here is a bit more about how it works:
“To participate in Zillow Instant Offers, verified homeowners interested in receiving investor offers confirm information about the home (number of bedrooms, square footage, etc.), highlight any updates and provide several photos of the home. From there, select investors who buy homes in the area can present their offers alongside the CMA from a local real estate agent. Any investor offers and the CMA will include an overview of fees associated with each option, to enable sellers to make an informed apples-to-apples comparison.”
When I first saw the headline, I thought they were copying Opendoor. But it’s not the same model. They aren’t buying the homes, like Opendoor, they are simply working to coordinate an “instant” transaction. Still, I’m sure that Opendoor provided at least some of the impetus for this feature.
Of course, the most interesting question with these online real estate platforms is: Will they disrupt real estate agents? Mike Delprete wrote a great post about this in the wake of Zillow’s announcement.
But ultimately he concludes something that I have felt strongly for years:
“So, while real estate sites are best positioned to disrupt the real estate industry by displacing agents, they’re also the least likely to do so, because agents are their biggest customers and source of revenue.”
The irony.
About 70% of Zillow’s revenue comes from real estate agents. So it seems unlikely that they – at least currently – will be the ones that turn the tables on agents.
Some real estate platforms have started diversifying their revenue streams for probably this exact reason. But who knows, it may be a new entrant, rather than an incumbent, who pulls this off.
Farhad Manjoo of the New York Times published an article this morning about Opendoor – a startup that I have written about multiple times on this blog – called, The Rise of the Fat Start-Up. (His definition of “fat” is that the startup owns lots of hard assets, which considered atypical in tech.)
Below are a couple of interesting tidbits from the article:
Opendoor has raised over $300 million in equity and over $500 million in debt since inception.
Opendoor plans to be in 10 cities by the end of this year.
Average commission charged on Opendoor is 7.5%, which is higher than a traditional real estate agent and higher than what was quoted before in the press. The higher % is because of certainty and convenience.
Opendoor offers a leaseback option if you’d like to stay in your house for a period of time after you’ve sold it.
Their conversion rate (offers made to closings) is about 30%.
Other startups are now in the market with similar models, including Offerpad and Knock. Zillow is working with Offerpad on a pilot. Someone is starting to feel threatened.
The article also quotes a blogger and real estate analyst named Mike Delprete. Heads-up: His blog is called “Adventures in Real Estate Tech.” I’m sure this will appeal to many of you. I obviously just subscribed.
Mike dug into MLS records in order to figure out Opendoor’s transaction volumes, since the company is not releasing this information. Here’s what he found (the chart is up to March 2017):
The trend line is certainly moving in the right direction. But Mike also believes that Opendoor is only netting around $8,320 in profit per home and that much of it is driven by appreciation. There’s also substantial risk in owning so many homes – each one is usually held for a few months.
But you can be sure they’re thinking well beyond where they are at today. Expect many more updates on this blog.
Last month Zillow.com launched a new feature called “Instant Offers.” Press real estate can be found here.
It is:
“…a way for homeowners to sell their homes quickly by providing them with offers from investors and a comparative market analysis (CMA) from a local real estate agent, as an estimate for what the home might fetch on the open market.
Here is a bit more about how it works:
“To participate in Zillow Instant Offers, verified homeowners interested in receiving investor offers confirm information about the home (number of bedrooms, square footage, etc.), highlight any updates and provide several photos of the home. From there, select investors who buy homes in the area can present their offers alongside the CMA from a local real estate agent. Any investor offers and the CMA will include an overview of fees associated with each option, to enable sellers to make an informed apples-to-apples comparison.”
When I first saw the headline, I thought they were copying Opendoor. But it’s not the same model. They aren’t buying the homes, like Opendoor, they are simply working to coordinate an “instant” transaction. Still, I’m sure that Opendoor provided at least some of the impetus for this feature.
Of course, the most interesting question with these online real estate platforms is: Will they disrupt real estate agents? Mike Delprete wrote a great post about this in the wake of Zillow’s announcement.
But ultimately he concludes something that I have felt strongly for years:
“So, while real estate sites are best positioned to disrupt the real estate industry by displacing agents, they’re also the least likely to do so, because agents are their biggest customers and source of revenue.”
The irony.
About 70% of Zillow’s revenue comes from real estate agents. So it seems unlikely that they – at least currently – will be the ones that turn the tables on agents.
Some real estate platforms have started diversifying their revenue streams for probably this exact reason. But who knows, it may be a new entrant, rather than an incumbent, who pulls this off.
Farhad Manjoo of the New York Times published an article this morning about Opendoor – a startup that I have written about multiple times on this blog – called, The Rise of the Fat Start-Up. (His definition of “fat” is that the startup owns lots of hard assets, which considered atypical in tech.)
Below are a couple of interesting tidbits from the article:
Opendoor has raised over $300 million in equity and over $500 million in debt since inception.
Opendoor plans to be in 10 cities by the end of this year.
Average commission charged on Opendoor is 7.5%, which is higher than a traditional real estate agent and higher than what was quoted before in the press. The higher % is because of certainty and convenience.
Opendoor offers a leaseback option if you’d like to stay in your house for a period of time after you’ve sold it.
Their conversion rate (offers made to closings) is about 30%.
Other startups are now in the market with similar models, including Offerpad and Knock. Zillow is working with Offerpad on a pilot. Someone is starting to feel threatened.
The article also quotes a blogger and real estate analyst named Mike Delprete. Heads-up: His blog is called “Adventures in Real Estate Tech.” I’m sure this will appeal to many of you. I obviously just subscribed.
Mike dug into MLS records in order to figure out Opendoor’s transaction volumes, since the company is not releasing this information. Here’s what he found (the chart is up to March 2017):
The trend line is certainly moving in the right direction. But Mike also believes that Opendoor is only netting around $8,320 in profit per home and that much of it is driven by appreciation. There’s also substantial risk in owning so many homes – each one is usually held for a few months.
But you can be sure they’re thinking well beyond where they are at today. Expect many more updates on this blog.
My friend Bruce of getrefm.com (real estate financial modeling) just introduced me to a new real estate startup called Envelope. Basically it’s 3D mapping software that allows you to quickly visualize the zoning envelope for a particular site. It’s similar to what Flux.io was initially trying to do.
Now, I think this is very cool, but my first reaction was: What if the zoning is out of date? What if approvals/entitlements are done a site-specific basis? This isn’t the case in every city, but I’ve heard some people in Toronto argue that this city basically has no zoning code. (We can debate that one in the comments, I’m sure.)
That being said, there are still many design guidelines in this city that shape built form and I could see a tool like this being incredibly useful. They’re still in private beta but I would like to try it out. Hopefully they’ll see this blog post and let me have an early peek.
Image: envelope.city
My friend Bruce of getrefm.com (real estate financial modeling) just introduced me to a new real estate startup called Envelope. Basically it’s 3D mapping software that allows you to quickly visualize the zoning envelope for a particular site. It’s similar to what Flux.io was initially trying to do.
Now, I think this is very cool, but my first reaction was: What if the zoning is out of date? What if approvals/entitlements are done a site-specific basis? This isn’t the case in every city, but I’ve heard some people in Toronto argue that this city basically has no zoning code. (We can debate that one in the comments, I’m sure.)
That being said, there are still many design guidelines in this city that shape built form and I could see a tool like this being incredibly useful. They’re still in private beta but I would like to try it out. Hopefully they’ll see this blog post and let me have an early peek.
Image: envelope.city
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
