Will Home Buyers Find What They Want on Google Real Estate?

A lot of discussion has taken place over the last two days with regards to Google and what they are doing with real estate and their map. On the Mashable site, Stan Schroeder states in his post Google Gets Serious About Real Estate Search…In Australia “It’s a sign of the things to come, as this real estate search seems as good (or better) as any you’ve seen on various real estate sites out there.”

While I agree it may “look” cool, what should be important is not the user interface of the map itself, but the data that goes into it. No one seems to be talking about the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the data so I thought I would provide a little insight.

Just to give a little background, I was the VP of Marketing at Intero Real Estate Services in Cupertino, CA for five years and during my tenure we were one of the first brokerages nationally to feed our listings into Google Base. This seems like ages ago. The Chairman, CFO and I even made a trek over to the Google Mountain View headquarters to talk to some of the higher ups about the inner workings of real estate and some of the roadblocks they might encounter in their trip down real estate lane.

Move ahead about a year. I noticed the issue of duplication of Intero’s listings as Google was taking feeds from not only brokers but newspaper sites, magazine sites, single property listing sites, etc. One of my questions was who was going to trump who in this same property scenario. I never received a satisfactory answer before I left Intero.

Now I’m at Roost.com and we are unique in the way that we approach real estate search. We are a search engine which directs consumers to a hosted network of real estate broker and agent “IDX” websites. We partner with local Multiple Listing Services (MLS), RE brokers, builders, data providers and more to help ensure you’re getting the freshest, most comprehensive data possible. The key to that last sentence is freshest, most comprehensive data possible.

So with what I know about our company and our commitment to data and my background with Google, I decided to do a little test. I took San Francisco (because this is where we are located) and popped it into Google Maps with the real estate search option checked. Below are the results I got for the first 10 pages I looked at. I was even a little shocked by where the data is coming from to fill the “good-looking” map.

Google Data 2

So what I can conclude from my non-scientific San Francisco Google Map real estate test is the following:

  • None of the data is coming from the Multiple Listing Services (MLS), the most accurate source of real estate data today.
  • About 14 percent of the listings were being fed to Google via brokers. Since most broker sites are IDX compliant, these are probably the most accurate. These are highlighted in green. I did not highlight the listing from Weichert because it was a non-San Francisco listing and is mentioned below.
  • 20 percent of the listings were being sent to Google via 3rd party sources like Postlets, CirclePix and Obeo on behalf of Agents. Since these particular listings are not tied to an accurate MLS database, the listings might have already sold or have been pulled off the market and still be on the Google site as an active listing. Unless the agent goes back to inform these 3rd party vendors of the current status of the listing, it will stay up on the Google site.
  • 58 percent of the listings were foreclosures. Now this is great for people that are looking for a foreclosed property, but not everyone is. I know you can choose the listing type as foreclosure or non-foreclosure but this is not typically the way most search engines differentiate between types of real estate. Another note on the foreclosures is that a user must register with the 3rd Party foreclosure site to see all the important detail of the property like address and photos.
  • One of the 100 listings was no longer active and another one was in San Diego, not San Francisco.
  • The same property scenario was still there but handled slightly different than before. Instead of having the same property listed multiple times, the listing had multiple sources listed in the “more info” tab. This is why you see .5’s in the chart above because I wanted to highlight all data sources. I don’t know if this is the best way to handle this because again we don’t know who has the most accurate information.

Now all of this is not intended to say that the Google real estate map service doesn’t have its good qualities.  However, I do want people to realize how important the data is when it comes to real estate search – if it’s not accurate and comprehensive, you could be missing out on the home of your dreams.  No one wants that.

  • I read the mashable article and posted it several times in Twitter trying to spark some discussion. Im glad that someone is looking into this and I appreciate the time and effort you took to analyze it the way you have...Much appreciated.
  • No problem Clint. Like you, I just wanted to spark some discussion because sometimes we just look at the shiny new toy but never look under the hood. Hopefully others will chime in on this very interesting topic.
  • Awesome analysis of the GoogleMaps real estate search capability
  • Thanks Clint. That means a lot coming from you!
  • I have reviewed the real estate listings on GoogleMaps and found it to be flawed. Many listings are not being shown. Appears that most listings are only those from ad subscribers on GoogleMap. If GoogleMaps wish to be accurate, they should include all listings from the MLS (Realtor.com).
  • A quick search of my neighborhood showed lot's of old, outdated information - both listings and prices - most likely due to syndicators sending the data to Google but never refreshing it. This will be very frustrating for both buyers and agents.
  • Great point. As several have mentioned before, a local agent site always has the most complete and up-to-date set of listings.
  • I did a quick search of zip code 94708

    Our listing http://2564buenavista.com was accurate - the data came from a postlet feed I'd done.

    Another listing (not ours, but in the MLS) had a price which was 1/3 lower than that actual list price. I believe that it was the 1st loan amount rather than the purchase price. It also indicated it was a "pre-foreclosure" (probably correct) and came from a 3rd party (I think a foreclosure site) rather than the IDX.

    Great concept, but definitely needs data integrity. Isn't this one of the things that NAR was talking about during the mid-year convention?

    Ira
  • I couldn't agree more Ira! I think it was one of the things they talked about. I'm looking forward to hearing what @tcar might have to say.

    Derek
  • Excellent analysis doverby. My suspicion is that, like any search engine results, people inuitively realize pretty quickly that the quality is lousy and move on elsewhere. There's a reason goog gains search market share every day: it's results are the best. So for real estate results, the traffic will not grow, and the influence will be minor until they figure out a way to get full data.

    That's why roost exists, right?
  • I learned from the best Mr. Simonsen! hee hee I just want people to realize that not everything is what it seems on the surface. You have to dig a little deeper and get past the Google label to see if what you are really getting is the best stuff possible. And yes this is why Roost exists.

    @doverbey
  • For the most part I don't think the general public has any idea what IDX or MLS is. Therefore, I see Google Map search being even more impressionable then Realtor.com. As agents we've been trying to explain the poor results of that site for 10 some odd years. So, I'm not sure the accuracy will be any issue over it's success or affect the struggle anyone with an IDX feed will have when it comes to attracting business. "Google" is still in it's infancy as far as I can see it. Therefore, I see it as an exciting opportunity. I don't think I've every seen Google come out with anything that has really ended up being dominated by anything else other than the terrible terrible Blogger product. I'm buying!
  • I agree this might be the case if we were talking about widgets but we are talking about homes here. I still have to believe that as consumers get more savvy, they will demand better data when it comes to probably the single largest purchase they will ever make. This is why I am trying to bring some attention to it. It might be in vain but I have to try. Thanks for your comment.

    Derek
  • In Washington State, there's some issues with Realtor.com. If an IDX feed at a brokerage is not being used (there was a limit to 2 downloads per broker, now there's 3), then 1 of them can be dedicated to Realtor.com. All 3 MLS data feeds for IDX are taken at my office with preferred IDX providers, so Realtor.com is not an option. I say this because we have a seller that simply insisted his place be on Realtor.com. We just can't do it, but his impression was that it was the largest database of homes. Still after explaining that it's not the largest database and buyers don't limit themselves to just Realtor.com, he just did not understand. Therefore, because of Google's rep, and what's research has shown with Bing, anyone in real estate (sales, web design, whatever) should certainly think about embracing.
  • Oh we do embrace a lot of what Google does. We integrate street view into our site. I just wanted to bring to light that people may not get what they are looking for when searching for homes specifically using the real estate search function on Google Maps. At the end of the day Google will be here for a long, long time but for a company that prides itself on it's search results, I think they have a ways to go in regards to real estate. Just one man's opinion.
  • Agreed, and ditto. I just really want to buy 1 share. Just 1 so I can say I got it. BTW, I love that search tool you have on your homepage. Saw it a few days ago and think it's great! Nice presence you have.
  • Despite some obvious shortcomings - as well documented by many in this thread - Google real estate search is certainly getting better... I believe what one needs to focus on is what Google, in essence is achieving - not only Google I might add- and that is making real estate information more freely available and accessible. Google - and others - are providing both the real estate professional and the consumer with badly needed choices. No one should feel compelled to use any one service! We are all better off thanks to Google!!! Ben the social-m dude @propertychannel
  • I'd like to ad my own personal frustration with the Google service. As a listing agent with a Google Base account I'd like to be able to have my entry for a listing address have priority over my brokerage's automatic feed. My broker's feed comes from the Vancouver MLS -- which has a somewhat severe character limitation in the public remarks field. I can input a lengthier and more conversant description into my Google Base ad however, with the broker's auto-fed listing having priority my ad is rarely seen. Thus, I've stopped using this feature of Google Base. I'd use it again if they'd get the prioritization cured, and I know home shoppers would obtain better information.
blog comments powered by Disqus