Are there benefits in advertising?

It would be hard to argue against the concept that if you wanted to sell a product you would need to advertise it.  Of course if you are a large store with hundreds of items, you wouldn’t advertise every single one, just the ones that appear attractive so that when customers came in to buy the advertised article, they may well purchase something else.

Advertising a house for sale is different.   But, from the seller’s point of view, do the costs justify the result?  In the jargon of the industry, it is known as VPA – Vendor Paid Advertising.  And why not?  There is no financial risk to the agent and if the property fails to sell, the agent can shrug his shoulders and blame the market.

However, a common problem is that vendors are often left feeling ‘ripped off’ or ‘taken advantage of’ with large amounts for advertising charged as part of their compulsory marketing package, which in general does not endear agents to sellers when trying to persuade them to entrust their house to them.  

With the advent of the internet, the need to pay exorbitant sums for newspaper advertising seems to have, thankfully, fallen away, yet there are still agents able to seduce sellers into believing an expensive advertising campaign is necessary to sell their property.

I have long contended that, as agents, we are well paid for our services, so that carrying an advertising expense should be included in the commission charged.   Hopefully this practice would see the agent expend his own money, price the property accurately and make his sellers happy.

In addition, the truth of the matter is that only by pricing a property correctly, will it sell.  After all, if a property is worth $600,000 but the seller wants $700,000, no amount of advertising, hot air balloon marketing or dancing girls will achieve the deserved outcome.

We don’t charge sellers for advertising – it’s as simple as that!

Jaimie Juriansz, Principal