Lani passed this one along to me today …
The New York Times is eliminating 100 newsroom jobs this year. This goes hand-in-hand with the hiring freeze already in place at other newspapers including our own vainglorious local, the Arizona Republic.
Why post this on a real estate blog? Because sellers still are seduced by the idea of a print advertisement in the weekend real estate section, or the allure of a color photo in a glossy real estate magazine. They’re currently trying to pimp such a magazine in my own office as we speak; it can help secure a listing but doesn’t do much to sell a house.
The logic’s easy to follow. Newspapers are driven by advertising revenues (subscription numbers are far less relevant from a pure income standpoint but rather only as they impact what advertisers will pay). Fewer readers means declining ad income. And that means fewer readers are buying the paper to see the ad for your home.
Real estate agents are the least reactive of all newspaper advertisers. Many will keep on with the same tired techniques long after everyone else placing ads has figured out there’s next to no return on investment.
This also should be a cautionary tale for unrepresented sellers trying to “save” a few bucks on a commission. Few people see the sign in the yard. An increasingly smaller pool are looking in the newspapers to see your print ad. Those websites that offer to advertise have almost no traffic, at least not compared to the big boys.
One quirk of life at RE/MAX is I can enter any listing into the system and it will appear on remax.com. Unrepresented sellers, too. There’s a far better return to go online in a visible location, as all of the big advertisers have discovered.[tags]real estate marketing, Phoenix real estate[/tags]