Domain Simply Adorable!

4 minute read

Today launched their online real estate site ‘Adore‘ and the site looks fantastic. It loads quite fast for a media rich portal. Each property is given a sexy look and lovely icons appear dotted throughout Sydney.

Apparently there was a major launch tonight and yet again I was not invited…..

It seems an elite group of agents will market this site as a Premium Style listing site to garner attention from the upper end of town and by the looks of it – it will be a massive hit with agencies!

I wonder whether this will be rolled out to other states any time soon or maybe they have a different one planned for each major city.
Each participating agent is listed on the home page (it does not seem to change on refresh of page) but it is not in alphabetical order, so I wonder who gets top billing….. and why?

Going deeper
Now, I do not want to sound too negative, but this offers nothing really new for consumers and they are the ones who will ultimately decide its fate. Now I get the idea, and I am sure Domain and Fairfax are proud of it – but here is the rub.

What does it offer the consumer that is different? Less information, a new way of searching that is different to what they have been doing for years (at least mapping makes it obvious.

Consumers can either go to where all the listings are or just go to where there are a select few, where a few agents and vendors pay more money to be listed. You also have to guess what to do when you make a selection, there is some information on how to do it, but you are making a user work it out for themselves. Then you have to work out via a small email link how you can contact someone. Oh this just keeps getting worse…..

Why didn’t they do an Absolute/Virtual waterfront style site? The site is stunning to look at – but it is the same data that is on other sites, just harder to get to. There is some Flash Video Player stuff…..but again REA or PBL could offer this in a week….but it is up to agents to shoot the information and send it through.

Am I going mad? Am I supposed to get excited? What is it about these companies that think that by just making something look good that it will be popular. Geez I want to like this site, I want Domain to be competitive and I really want REA to be pushed, but this is just eye candy….

I am informed that this took six months to build, all it is is re-positioning of data around a pretty design……about 4 weeks work and by the sounds of it 4 months of focus groups.

One day, one sunny day!
I really really really want Domain to do something great, but if this is the fruits of six months of non thinking then I really only have PBL’s launch to look forward to.

Pretty yes…..something new…..yes….anything new for consumers…..nope? Or have I missed something….

Fairfax Digital – Fix this immediately…….
1. Have a form to email on each of the property pages so users can actually contact an agent easily….
2. Make logo link back to home page……
3. Make “View Selection” Flash or Pulse after a selection is made so that the users eyes are attracted to it…
4. Make drop down selection automatically load for suburb profiles………..
5. Have agents on home page reload to different positions or at least make them in alphabetical order….
6. Create RSS Feeds (cannot believe you missed out on this one)….

Tell us if you liked this content.
Show CommentsClose Comments


  • Sam
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:23 am 0Likes

    That’s excellent, congrats to Fairfax. Above all it’s good to see some new ideas, inovation, I can’t remember when I last saw something new and I didn’t even realise it till I saw this site.
    Seems Fairfax have a policy of multiple sites whereas REA is all about one site only. both sound strategies, nice to see there’s a difference out there and not everyone the same. This will make it hard for Myhome, odds on it will be a crummy copy of the others ensuring failure unless they take REA’s spot on NineMSN but wait and see.

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:41 am 0Likes

    A simple dare to be different !!

    A vision to take property marketing where it has never before even contemplated !!

    More importantly this release will have agents scratching their heads as against shaking their heads. And, no banks with flash media advertising – you have to love that.

    I am told that the embryo will mature very quickly in coming weeks. From an agent perspective I really like the concept as it offers the best ever concept of camera, lights – action !!

    The YouTube version of looking at real estate.

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:47 am 0Likes

    I hope so Robert, I know you are keen on them doing well. I still do not get it though….

    I understand the concept but why will consumers go there? It seems to be more about the agents than the vendors…

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:57 am 0Likes


    What I am actually “keen” about seeing is new marketing concepts evolve, as against year in and year out marketing concepts that revolve.

    With this release Fairfax Digital have moved to left field. As I see it this is a progression from virtual tours that provides consumers an avalanche of information as now they are enabled to gather much more information about each property.

    The birth of digital property that is now a reality and for agents a realty !!

  • Elizabeth
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 8:28 am 0Likes

    Good Morning Gentlemen

    The first thing I see I like is all the fashion in the Neighbourhoods.

    I like the approach to the top end of the market, but I have trouble with the images, both size (I was squinting at first) and then with it seems only 4 images per property.

    This site has a lot going for it, but also a few disappointments. I just feel the design, whilst being a strength is also a weakness. I have to scroll the page just to get through the listings which I may want to see – then I need to squint to see some of the basic details under the tiny images.

    Now the question which must be asked: Will I use it?

    My first thought is yes – but it will be a trial.

    I will need to find out costs, and how I can get my logo on the front page (if anyone is looking down there, as I missed it until just now), and also I want to know the planned market reach.

    I hope that the next phase is something to tidy up Peters and my concerns, and is not just replacing the Latin in the Property Forum. That just should not be there when you launch a site!

    Is it innovation? I think not, as the only thing new is the market it is focusing on. Is it a fresh approach, yes most definitely. Although the local franchise chain down the road has had a similar online offering for quite a few years now.

    Now the final question, just who will be the ‘experts’?


  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 8:33 am 0Likes

    That is fine Robert, but there is nothing new, if it evolves that way then great but at the moment it is just a pretty site with less information than you get on the real

    So I can assure you, in my opinion if this is it – then it is a nothing concept…

    Snazzy marketing and words like “YouTube” for property are hollow claims…….It is nothing like a YouTube for Property, or am I missing something…..

    The drive to want something to be different and something that is actually different are two separate things….

    A YouTube for property would be a site where you can go to and set your information (suburbs, property type etc) and see movies and information on listings.

    Where are the property movies??? Where can I do anything like that?

    I might sound harsh but if I am going to assess something I can only say what I feel….

    I know you have been involved in this and I would like to think that I could like it, but it is just a nothing thing for me full of bling….

  • Elizabeth
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 8:35 am 0Likes

    Robert – I think that you may have had too many coffees this morning, and you are clutching onto the press release too much.

    I am still trying to figure out “The birth of digital property that is now a reality and for agents a realty”

    My favourite so far … “A vision to take property marketing where it has never before even contemplated”

    But I have to agree, this site did not just have me scratching my head (when I kept pressing buttons which I thought would take me to a listing) it also had me squinting.

    Jokes and jibes aside, I do welcome this site, and congratulate domain for entering this market.


  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 8:41 am 0Likes

    Elizabeth I agree with you on those points…Domain loving it, agents liking it has to then cross to vendors and then………………. the final hurdle is consumers……..

    This is what many of these companies do not get (Sensis), consumers online are a different beast, they vote yes or no and you don’t even get a chance to say ‘but’…….

    Now if all of these listings are on or REA then what is the point of going there? I can tell you if offer movies, you can bet your bottom dollar REA will as well (Super Super Duper Platinum Anyone?) so then there is no difference…..

    That is why I think a Waterfront Site would work because that is what some people are looking exclusively for, I know a couple of sites under development for this very thing….but they are private sites and do not have the direct marketing punch like the big boys – so in turn will struggle.

    I just wish could give me something to cheer about……..

  • Tom S
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:35 am 0Likes

    I’m with you on this one Peter – It’s a ‘sexy’ site that looks great, but from a pragmatic viewpoint, what does it offer to the consumer that is new?

    If Fairfax Digital use this as a basis for further development, that may generate some ‘fresh’ traffic. It cetainly has merit for the high end of the market.

    But as you mentioned, online consumers are fickle and unforgiving bunch. And this revamp doesn’t cut it as a ‘sticky’ site.

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 10:33 am 0Likes

    Fairfax Digital – were guilty for six years of doing very little in so far as innovations to their portal. In six months they have considerably changed this with some smart releases.

    Adore is just the beginning of where they are taking this form of marketing. I was told last night that there is much much more to come. Time will tell – however no one could argue that they have not been proactive in the last six months. New look – new team might leave a clue.

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 10:38 am 0Likes

    Yes they have been pro active, but Robert 5 photos per listing? They still have not addressed some of the most basic issues…

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 11:13 am 0Likes


    With regard to the photos you have great news coming your way soon. 😉

  • Sam
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 2:56 pm 0Likes

    It’s still the only original idea to come forward in years and it will be a success, wait and see. I see no negatives in this at all, who cares how many photos there are this is new and exciting and Fairfax will push it around and it will be widely accepted.

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 3:19 pm 0Likes

    Can someone tell me what is original about it? I must be missing something. Ok, the look and navigation is different, but the property data is exactly the same as what you see on the main site – less of course more listings….

    If Domain plug the hell out of it then yes it may attract visitors, but if it is the same data that is on domain – then what is the point?

    If there is more (example: movies, tours, inside looks etc) then maybe….

    Yes the top end of town will more than likely want to be on it, but I want to know WHY a buyer would go there, not why an agent would list or how Fairfax can make more money!

  • Craig
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 3:53 pm 0Likes

    I am 100% in agreement with Peter and Elizabeth. There are no similarities between you tube, a site that empowers its online audience to share their own video stories vs. this Domain site, which has a group of journos preaching on high about their take on sydney neighbourhoods. An innovative real estate site would let those in their neighbourhood communicate their views instead of the pretentious dribble presented on this site.

    That aside, basic web design 101 suggests that those visiting a property site may in fact want to view property with some ease. The obstacle course that is this site design is way below the standard you would expect from Fairfax Digital. Their competitors will no doubt be amused at the effort and financial cost they’ve poured into this initiative which is unlikely to cause a ripple in the online real estate market. By all means strike out and do something new in the way of online brochure ware – ten points for effort there. But think twice before you’re spouting about ‘the birth of digital property’ or ‘taking property marketing where it’s never been before’.

    Does make you wonder what PBL has up its sleeve.

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 4:21 pm 0Likes

    I can only assume that they are experiencing some teething problems as all the properties presently listed have videos of the respective properties.

    It is a property video site – just that for some strange reason the videos are not up. For a property to appear it must have a video.

    Now that should explain it 😉

  • Peter
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 6:29 pm 0Likes has done what you have asked Robert, updated the design………………should keep you quiet for a while!

  • Sam
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 6:39 pm 0Likes

    Yes they’ve copied the Google model of changing their logo to match themes, ie: Valentines Day, Christmas etc, how original.

    If you can’t see whats new and different in the new Fairfax site I can’t really help you, perhaps you will praise the REA copy when it comes out.

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:12 pm 0Likes

    Peter, yes earth shattering indeed !! Still to me resembles George Street at lunch hour. Minutes of intensive labour ….. I very much look forward to their next attempt to appease 😉

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:20 pm 0Likes

    Sam, I am talking about content, I know it looks great, I want to know what is new for the consumer – et al, why will they go to that site and not or REA?

    Otherwise what end benefit comes to you the agent?

  • Sam
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:29 pm 0Likes

    To me it looks like this –

    The content may be the same but it’s presented differently, it showcases the locality and what it has to offer. It’s a different way to view properties and I think it really is a great attempt at a fresh approach.

    I like it and I bet a lot of others will too.

    Sure they’ll still go to Domain and REA but not all of them.

    Some will see the property they like on the Adore site and go with it no doubt. I don’t think it’s meant to replace anything just come at it from a different angle and full marks for initiative and lateral thinking.

  • David Slattery
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:31 pm 0Likes

    I have finally found this website (why isn’t domain promoting it?) and yes, I have to agree with Peter and others – I don’t really get it.

    It certainly looks expensive and shiny, but the site has appalling usability issues! It took me quite some time to actually find property listing information.

    But tell me why a vendor would list on this site when there appears to be LESS information than a domain or rea listing. Am I missing something here?

  • Sam
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:31 pm 0Likes

    Sorry, what’s in it for the agent ? Another marketing tool, vendors may like to see their property there if it fits a certain category or flavour as depicted in the themes they offer.

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:38 pm 0Likes


    Let me run this by you so that you can see what I am driving at 😉

    As you know houses are torrens title and townhouses and apartments are in the majority of cases strata title. So if you do a refined search at Domain houses this is what you get – houses !!,S,X,T&ptdes=Houses&searchterm=Mosman

    Now if you do the same search on REA this is what you get strata title marinated with torrens title – where the industry standard is that townhouses are listed with apartments which is not the case at REA as searchers their have to do two searches. Here is what you get at REA houses refined search.

    Now if we venture back to the respective homepages you may wish to do a survey in which homepage is more agent and consumer friendly ? As against property portal third party revenue raiser !!

    REA –

    Domain –

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:45 pm 0Likes

    Guys, not sure what part you keep missing in this !!

    Adore is a property video site aimed at the top – end of the market. REA and Domain do not facilitate videos for properties.

    So Adore allows agents and vendors to present their properties to purchasers in a completely different light.

    Otherwise know as offering different technologies to satisfy the requirements of purchasers and vendors alike. If you take the success of YouTube this is in my opinion mirroring this success with Sydney real estate.

  • Stephen
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 7:57 pm 0Likes

    From a total outsider’s perspective….

    Some guy has posted about a website he openly admits he doesnt get, and then all these people chip and say we dont get it either.

    So either one of the world’s great media companies has produced a new publication that is rubbish, or you guys just arent very smart.

    I looked at this website you’re talking about and it looked cool. So I got my wife to look at it and she said it looked cool too. What part of that don’t you get?


  • Peter
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 8:20 pm 0Likes


    Thank you for your comments. Good to see someone from outside the industry making comments on this. We are delighted to have you on board.

    It is cool and looks good but can you tell me what is in it for the consumer?

    Just remember try to respect other peoples opinions and you will enjoy your stay here….

    Regards Peter

  • Sam
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 8:25 pm 0Likes

    LOL – Stephen, that’s just the point…. it is cool and REA is stale and boring with ads everywhere – end of story.

  • Sam
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 8:28 pm 0Likes

    Umm Peter just because Stephen thinks the Adore site is cool doesn’t mean he isn’t repecting other peoples opinions – whats in it for the consumer ? IT’S COOL

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 8:40 pm 0Likes


    I am somewhat miffed in that do you have a problem with a property video website ?

    Many share the opinion that this is the very next progression in our industry. Simply animating property presentations that simply enables a vendor a better presentation and more features are verbally as against in the previous written form.

    As an agent what I like about it is that “what you – see is actually what you get”.

    I am of the opinion that this is where our industry is heading. In 2007 – we started adding videos and thus far the response has been encouraging to say the least.

    A progression on from virtual tours that then allows the agents to best present the individual properties. I don’t believe that anyone would argue that live is not their preferred method of viewing a property.

    We have the technology so why not use it – afterall as I see it such innovations are simply keeping up with the times.

    The only problem as I see it is that real estate agents will have to learn to be at ease in front of a movie camera. In my case I am told that I have a face for radio LOL

  • Peter
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 8:58 pm 0Likes

    Ok. I read Stephens comment again. What caught my eye was a couple of things…….

    1. “From a total outsider

  • Simon Baker
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:04 pm 0Likes

    A quick question – is this site free or do agents have to pay additional to be on the site?

    Also – on the question of video, Ray White Double Bay have had video on their site for around 12 months – check it out –

    Simon Baker
    MD REA Group

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:09 pm 0Likes

    Welcome back Simon, I also hope that you can address some of my earlier points, especially Houses/Townhouses.

    We pay Domain $600.00 per property for the life of the listing – happy to assist. 😉

  • Peter
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:15 pm 0Likes

    .$600 per listing – obviously not as yet as there are no visitors.

    I am really lost for words…..and that is rare!

  • Simon Baker
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:17 pm 0Likes


    I was never away 😉 Just busy working on new things.

    So if i get this right, you pay to be on domain and also to be on adoreproperty and on adoreproperty, you pay $600 per LISTING.

    To pay for this, are you charging the vendor more, redirecting spend from print to online or are you funding from your own marketing spend?

    Just for a comparison, the average revenue per listing that receives is $15 per month per listing. I sure hope they are driving lots of leads.

    Robert – i have extensively responded to your previous questions at the other blog entry

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:19 pm 0Likes

    Come on Peter, I thought I left you lost for words with all my posts LOL or is that LFW’s 🙂

    I like it that a portal moves to left field – now all we need to hear that “Simon Say’s” that REA will never offer property on REA via video ? No pun intended 🙂

  • Elizabeth
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:24 pm 0Likes

    Good evening,

    I very much like the concept of domainadore, a portal specifically for the premium listings. But as far as innovation goes, I cannot agree.

    It is a kind of Claytons Firsts – the first you have when you are not having a first. This is the dreaded LJHooker site, and they have had a specific website for many years now. I like it (I know this is strange coming from me) because it is easy to read, search, and it has a total glossy magazine approach.

    What domainadore seems to be doing is just an extension of the hooker site, and adding in all the listings from all the agents, then adding in some local business content. But they are not taking the big glossy pictures, nor appealing to the broader luxury market around the country. It seems very Sydney focused.

    It will most likely be a hit with vendors in Sydney, but I am just wondering about purchasers. Four images is just too little, and I am sure that people want to see the photo they want on demand, not have to wait for a streaming video to hit the right spot.

    It is a bit like an upmarket truelocal.

    As I said before, if there is a free trial I will give it a go and see what results I get.

    But to say people will go there because it is cool, or that this is better than domain or realestate so people will go there, I find a little hard to believe given the site I have before me now.


  • Peter
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:24 pm 0Likes

    Note: Why I outed Stephen : Terms of Use ……

    “We collect the IP address of all posts and comments on this site. We do not use them to benefit our company in anyway.

    However if you post an article pretending to be someone from another company or another person – trying to promote or placate, and if our moderators find out – you will be outed.”

    Now if Stephen had of written everything but the first line I would have been fine with it……

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:24 pm 0Likes


    Like Ray White Double Bay we too, have moved to video on our website also. Just that we wanted to find a company that offered us a point of difference.

    We are seeing that vendors are massaging print spends – which in our case results in a cut back at Cumberland. As Fairfax still own the bible – Saturday Domain.

    Running off to read your response 😉

  • Simon Baker
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:27 pm 0Likes


    I will never say never.

    I think video is a great idea – not original – but a great idea. It will happen in time and everyone will offer it.

    However i am keen to have you answer my question – how are you covering your costs at $600 per listing?

    Simon Baker
    MD REA Group

  • Elizabeth
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:30 pm 0Likes


    I have to confess, I am spending valentines night in looking at websites and blogging.

    Who would have thought it would come to this?


  • Simon Baker
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:32 pm 0Likes

    Elizabeth – good point
    I am in another time zone so I had better get a life
    Others – enjoy your evening!

  • Peter
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:37 pm 0Likes

    Simon – The Internet is great for running companies remotely hey! How is Bora Bora this time of year? Or are you in LA claiming to be the father of Anna Nicole’s child…..must say he does look a little like me!

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 9:49 pm 0Likes

    Yes – love is in the online air !!

    The cost of $600.00 for our clients is not a considerable impost given the total advertising spend – which eventually results in a sale.

    What Adore represents is a totally different mindset – yes, it has taken many by surprise which beckons new thought processes.

    What we have seen with property portals is inactive and proactive.

    Yes, many stated that YouTube would not work – obviously they got that wrong.

    What we forget is nothing ventured – nothing gained !! Now, we have a property portal trying something totally different. Some curse others congratulate !!

    I like the mindset of having a go !! At least Adore can never be accused of dying wondering.

  • David Slattery
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 10:04 pm 0Likes

    Do tell – where was Stephen posting from Peter??

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 10:16 pm 0Likes


    In the meantime where are you posting from ?

  • David Slattery
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 10:19 pm 0Likes

    Actually, I am more amazed by the $600 per listing charge you have been quoting Robert.

    My domain rep has not mentioned Adore to me (first I heard about the site was from this post) however it would be quite a hard sell to get $600 from me! I am looking forward to that sales pitch.

    In all, I do agree that Fairfax are trying new things and this should be applauded. I recieve such great feedback from my clients about the domain site, and maybe just maybe this one may generate their interest as well?

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 10:25 pm 0Likes

    Well David,

    It will cost you around $1,000 to have the video shot and produced – which the vendors can keep.

    Adore, has obviously generated great debate, sometimes arriving first at a party can be a short but lonely experience – videos will be music to our ears.

    I then predict that the property portal dance floor will be packed with videos.

  • Robert Anthony
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 10:50 pm 0Likes

    G’Day Pete.

    Top show son. I love it!

    I have to ask who is Sam? I know this is a no, no however Sam could you tell me why you are so passionate to this love hate relationship of real estate portals and agents? No offence intended.

    I also have been talking to the domain people and they have told me it is a shame we have not got a suitable listing for the adore portal. We are a small agent in the outer west. One day we will be up there. They were very nice about it and kindly suggested that when we listed a luxury home to let them know. Who says what is and what makes a luxury home in there eyes and the vendors?

    Robert Anthony

  • Simon Baker
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 11:12 pm 0Likes


    If you are interested, i know folk who do a great job for $500 or less – and yes they are based in Sydney.

    The footage is used on real estate sites.

    Simon Baker
    MD REA Group

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 11:12 pm 0Likes

    David – Take a guess where he was from!

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 11:13 pm 0Likes

    Elizabeth – I will make sure this is included…..

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 11:14 pm 0Likes

    Robert – Drawing comparison with YouTube is a stretch by even the most optimistic of Fairfax marketing!

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 11:18 pm 0Likes

    Robert – As you draw many references to how Google bring in many people to sites such as REA and Domain…..

    How does $600 spent on a Google Adwords Campaign for individual listings for your Vendors.

    Maybe do a few prestige listings on Adore and a few on Google Adwords and compare the results.

    Google Adwords campaign done effectively would cost around 0.50 cents a click – that is 1,200 people looking for that exact type listing……if done effectively….

    Only a thought…..

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 11:22 pm 0Likes

    Another thing…..To shoot a full movie you would need a Camera, Tripod, Microphone (if you want sound) and I would suggest a MAC (I have a PC and MAC) and you could then shoot each one….Post them on YouTube (up to 100 megabytes per movie free) and have the listings play directly from your site…

    I am sure REA and Domain would support playing files like that within listings…..if agents wanted it as it would cost them nothing to do….

    Shooting and compiling a movie can be done by anyone who would care to spend an hour sitting down and working it all out…

    Or you can pay someone $1000.00 bucks a pop to do it for you!!!

  • Robert Anthony
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 11:31 pm 0Likes

    She who must be obeyed asked for chocolate. I said we are out. She says baileys will do. I said fine, there you go and I got myself a tinny a nice cold sleeper. Let the dog out and thought you people shoud be ZZZZZZZZZ. I laughed when I logged back on. And said to myself you guys are unreal. Especially when the MD of REA gives some help which will be kindly accepted. Thanks Boss

  • Robert Anthony
    Posted February 14, 2007 at 11:43 pm 0Likes

    Thank you once again Peter. Well done, will be in touch soon. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZ

  • Tom S
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 12:38 am 0Likes

    Property video websites – I (consumer) still don’t get it!

    $1k for a video that I can keep, of a house that I use to own!?! Can I sneak the family in on a few shots? $600 for the listing – tab happily picked up bt the good ol’ vendor. This is souding better and better.

    Stephen – you ol’ snake in the grass. You wouldn’t be willing to fess up, would you. Or are you as sheepish as ‘Sam’.

  • Peter
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 8:43 am 0Likes


    I hope you slept well.

  • Peter
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 9:47 am 0Likes

    Tom – Shooting a Movie for Production is very very easy – How do tyou think YouTube is so popular, that is because anyone can do it. Many agents do not bother (one because what they do is sell/rent properties)

    The difference between shooting a movie and taking photos is post production. You need about 1 hour to put a movie together. Burning it would then take another hour, but you do not have to be around for that.

    Here is a breakdown of shooting a movie.

    1. Go to House and Shoot the Movie (30 minutes)
    2. Take Movie Back to Office and Plug Camera into Computer and Upload Movie. (10 mins)
    3. Edit front Screen in Movie Maker (FREE with Windows) with company logo and End Screen with Company Contact Information. (10 mins)
    4. Add Sound Effects (Or Commentary) (20 mins)
    5. Final Edit (10 mins)
    6. Compile Movie for a:web and b:DVD.
    7. Burn Movie/Upload Movie (20 mins)

    Simon is right you could get someone to do it for $500, but you could get a staff member to learn to do it in 2 hours (a course) and it will cost you only his and her time!

    I will do one for you on launch of my new site and show you the Steps I have Taken…..

  • Peter
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 9:49 am 0Likes

    I would estimate is take an extra 30 minutes to shoot a movie over a normal photo shoot – that is once the person knows what they are doing….So $1000.00 is a great price….for whoever is shooting it!

    Perhaps $1,600 can be better spent on marketing your own website…..

    That would relate to around an extra 5000 – 7000 visitors to your site!!!

  • Scott
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 1:59 pm 0Likes

    Interesting debate everyone.

    I have one question – is it just me or is the Adore site not working within Firefox, for anyone else?

    I am finding certain links not working – such as the link to the sales agent profile and email from a listing.

    Anyone else having this issue?

  • Simon Baker
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 2:53 pm 0Likes

    If you are interested in getting videos done – try

    I am sure they can do you a deal for volume transactios.

    Their prices start at

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 4:41 pm 0Likes

    Thanks Simon

    I will provide a detailed package on how to do them yourselves (or one of your staff members)

    I really think $500 per property is steep $1000.00 is ridiculous. So if it takes one of your front office staff to do these for you and takes one day to do 5 then obviously it is worth the 2 day course investment, although there are many sources online that will guide you through it….

    My first article with the new site will focus on this……

    That is unless Simon buys this PropVid before then!

    🙂 Elizabeth it takes a : and a ) to make me smile!

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 9:12 pm 0Likes

    I believe with respect that the $1000.00 video is being confused with the $500.00 version. So I have attached a link which identifies a vast difference in quality and professionalism.

    Just click on the video button.

    I very much doubt that this can be completed in 30 minutes.

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 10:25 pm 0Likes

    Hi Robert

    Your site does not work properly in Firefox (menu ) and no plug-in available for Firefox 2 (get your developers to fix this (30 minutes)

    As ofr the video, you obviously have 1 person shooting and one person presenting (good to see your face)

    Very well shot video…..

    Okay to shoot it (obviously camera has sound) and then you have added the music and sound effects and other commentary.

    An experienced person would take around 2-3 hours to complete this….

    There are two parts to the video shooting and assembly, shooting obviously takes two people (you actor )

    Very well done, one of the best I have seen.


    Liked the download property link (13 Megabytes) – job well done….

    But I still maintain this is all easily done and in a professional manner by anyone who has a few hours training….

    Software such as Apples iLife does this and more with ease…..

    Still a great way to showcase a property…….if only there was a site that specialises in Videos for Properties….. 🙂

    Maybe someday someone will make a site like You Tube but for real estate…..

    Yes….winding you up!

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 10:53 pm 0Likes

    ROFLMAO to Peter,

    In all honesty I looked at many companies that are producing property videos, and on a Fairfax recommendation we have now signed an exclusive agreement with this company.

    I have sat back and read with interest the comments about video – and laughed at those who challenge the cost of production. Give or take a whole page in the Wentworth Courier is $3,500.00, the Mosman Daily is $1,800.00 or $1,600.00 used to be over $2,000.00 before Fairfax launched their Domains.

    What a few have missed is that agencies can offer these videos on their own wbsites to prospective purchasers. Plus, on Adore, their vision is taking the property market to a different level.

    It could very well fail, however atleast they have a mindset to encourage and develop progress with online businesses.

    Their launch has encouraged much debate which is fantastic for the property industry. Although, when one considers what it costs to appear on a print page in a newspaper – their new focus is dollars apart for a vendor.

    Yes, adore is way different to what is generally considered as mainstream property advertising. Kudos, to Fairfax for experimenting and challenging the mindset of what is considered standard advertising practices.

    Whilst some will dismiss this culture – I am of the opinion that it is certainly of great interest. I bet in the near future that both REA and Domain allow videos on their respective sites.

    At that time it should be acknowledged that Adore – has made a difference and congratulations to Andrew Chatfield from Fairfax Digital who defined this moment.

    Without a shadow of a doubt – Andrew is one of the smartest online brains in this industry. And a great bloke to meet !!

  • Sam Rogers
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 11:19 pm 0Likes

    Ok Robert

    I have let you have your time…you obviously have been involved in this project…..

    So….here are some facts as I see it.

    1. To replicate the Adore site would not cost a hell of alot.
    2. There isn’t anything different about the site apart from poor usability and good looks. (it does not even work on Firefox)
    3. It isn’t bold because it does not do anything differently…
    4. Frustrating the mindset is more appropriate.
    5. It will not fail if agents like yourselves spend YOUR vendors money on it istead of something worthwhile.
    6. Defined this moment? What moment, it is just re-purposed information… make more money for Fairfax…..
    7. If Andrew is one of the smartest online brains then how come he cannot get it to work on popular browsers? Even my local $35 per hour developer can do that! He may be a great bloke, but he has allot to learn about testing his sites on browsers.
    8. I just read that you were involved in the projects as one of the testers Robert. Why didnt you ask if it worked on other browsers?

    Regards Sam (not the other Sam either)

  • Peter
    Posted February 15, 2007 at 11:39 pm 0Likes

    Hi Guys

    Yes, I do agree with Robert on some points, although I have made it clear in past posts that comparing this or any other online venture to newspapers is old news. Newspapers are expensive to operate, have an un-measurable readership and are well on their way out, people browse newspaper guides for relaxation and fun and go to the web to find listings….

    Roberts made it clear earlier he was involved in this project and yes, he has been over the top in my opinion of his praise. But he is obviously passionate about it – so good luck to him.

    The site is good to look at but nothing really new is here, I hope to see some issues sorted out and I would like to see how this all goes.

    I think a premium property site could work, but not this one – unless it is given a major overhaul and becomes allot more user friendly.

    Yes $1000 per video is expensive, but we are in a market driven industry and if the market goes for it – then good for all of these companies that make the video……

    I still maintain that if an agent sets themselves up well they could do it all themselves and even though Roberts video is excellent, that type of product is fairly easy to do once you know how to do it.

    I don’t think this site reflects as well on Andrew as Robert may suggest.

    and here is why….

    1. I would assume as this project had a six month development cycle is cost allot of money.

    2. If so there is no excuse for things just not working in IE7, Firefox2, Safari or Opera… There are plenty of free compatibility tools out there.

    3. Navigational issues really need to be addressed. To make users guess what to do, really just goes back to the old Splash and Flash days of an Internet we all want to forget.

    Aside from these issues and ones I have raised earlier, I think it does have a place in the market, but is does have a long way to go…..

    The only way this is measured as a long term, success is 1 Agents Participation , 2 Vendors participation and 3 Consumers actually interested in visiting it – and the last one is the only way its successes will be measured long term.

    So I will give it 6 months and write another review….

    PS The issues I have spoken about would take about 2 days to fix…

    Regards Peter

  • Sam
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 8:36 am 0Likes

    I repeat it’s great and I think it will work and fill a niche in the market. What’s in it for the consumer ? I hear you rant ? It’s cool.

  • Peter Ricci
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 9:36 am 0Likes

    Well constructed argument Sam! Sorry just being cool does not cut it on the Internet. It need a major overhaul and then it might find a market. It is only a tiny site so it will not take long to fix the problems and then I might change my mind…

    I wonder what the sentiment would have been if someone else released a similar product… was cool! I think 175 million went down the drain on that one!

  • Sam
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 9:56 am 0Likes

    Ok Peter we disagree, give it 3 months and we will all see. Cool doesn’t cut it on the Internet ? Cool is all that cuts it on the Internet.

  • Sam
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 10:23 am 0Likes

    “I wonder what the sentiment would have been if someone else released a similar product

  • Peter
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 10:40 am 0Likes

    Sam That is fine….

    Sorry in my opinion you are wrong, functionality, purpose, usefulness and connectivity is what success on the Internet is all about……, that ois if we are talking about the same thing – looks?

    There are a million things that look cool…and 3 months is not a judge because everyone involved will be sprouting on about how ‘cool’ and great it is…

    This is why I love the Internet because the user are the judge jury and executioner – it helps to have lots of money to pour into things – but it does not guarantee you success, just raises its chances a little bit…

    It is great to want something to success and to cheer for it, but my job is to form an opinion based on the facts as I see it, and I am not sorry for making this felt…

    I respect your opinion and I will reserve my judgement for 12 months.

    Now……this is how I will judge my criteria. I will ask Simon Baker to give me an estimate of the amount of 1.5 million + listings in the greater Sydney Area….and in 12 months time if Adore has 60+% of the prestige market I will be judged as wrong…

    Does this sound fair?

    I hope I lose this one, because I want Domain to really really challenge REA.

  • Peter
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 10:41 am 0Likes

    Sam – True about pull, add PBL or SEnsis to that, or Google, or Yahoo or MSN, I agree it has to be someone that can pull them in…..

  • Peter
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 10:44 am 0Likes

    and yes I rant sometimes!

  • Sam
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 10:51 am 0Likes

    REA and Domain have a track record for real estate online, non of the others do……..yet

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 12:04 pm 0Likes

    Just to clarify a point with the Adore site I did no testing at all. My only involvement was that I was shown some screen shots and given a presentation over a cup of coffee in November last year.

    With regard to Andrew Chatfield I was also referring to the points that his fingerprints were all over the new look of domain and also the functionalities such as taking a visitor back to their last search. Not just adore !!

    One thing that life tells us is that if you are inactive you in the majority of cases are the most reactive to a new concept. A classic example that some are falling to sleep at the wheel – we all know how dangerous that can be !!


  • Peter
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 12:10 pm 0Likes

    Robert, the guy no doubt has talent, I thought you were referring to Adore….The Domain sites functionality with search will be a feature article in comparison to REA on new site which will be launched next Thursday Night.

    The who’s who of my household will be there for the launch (me and some @#&@*@ cockroaches) , I will be supplying a kettle and water…

    I cant wait for all the lovely comments to come through….

    Development time will be 2 weeks and a little experience experience…

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 12:19 pm 0Likes

    What no biscuits – heaven forbid !!

    I think one of the main issues about Adore is that portals in my opinion will allow agents to host videos there too.

    Who knows developers could very well just doing this as we talk ?

    Whether it be REA or Domain or, another portal. The landscapes are being altered and we are being offered a different view. Which then leads us to healthy debate.

    Just imagine if Business2 had just the one blog per month ? How constraining would that be to the “Masters of the Universe.”

  • Tom S
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 5:56 pm 0Likes

    Just imagine if Business2 had one Readers Post a month from Robert. Now THAT would be constraining…………or do I mean straining?

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 6:27 pm 0Likes

    Tom, you should consider becoming an agent as it appears property is more enticing to you than the stock market. 😉

  • David Slattery
    Posted February 16, 2007 at 10:01 pm 0Likes

    Pete – new post please – bored with this!

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 17, 2007 at 12:58 am 0Likes

    David – one can only assume that our resident stockbroker Tom. S placed a buy recommendation on Run Property with a float price of $1.00. The stock today sits at $0.14. The One-tel of property.

    Having met with them with a purpose of buying our property management it was a business plan that could never work. Which is evident in their share price today.

    No doubt Tom – logged on to Business2 to learn more about real estate. 😉

  • Elizabeth
    Posted February 17, 2007 at 8:55 am 0Likes


    Be careful mentioning Onetel to anyone from PBL if they ever come to see you about myhome.

    You would not want to jinx it further.


  • Tom S
    Posted February 17, 2007 at 12:24 pm 0Likes

    You know what they say about assumptions Robert.

    On the subject though, I did buy 25,000 units of REA in 2003 for 32 cents. Given that you are so knowledgeble about most things, maybe you advise as to when a good time to sell would be?

    The only thing running at Run Corp at the moment is their clients. You aren’t on their advisory panel as well, are you Robert (like Adore’s). Oh well, maybe I’ll just ‘assume’ that you are.

    : )

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 17, 2007 at 9:08 pm 0Likes

    Congratulations Tom, an astute acquisition I would recommend that you hold. My understanding is that REA are set for a new release within two weeks.

    No Tom – I have nothing to do with Run. That is John McGrath’s baby. I rejected their business model to acquire our property management portfolio. Must have been a lucky guess !! Given that we saved a few million.

    Obviously I can now understand your biase to REA, given that your 25,000 units constitute a serious proportion to your pending retirement.

    Elizabeth, I am happy to advise that Domain will (or should from early next week) allow you to upload 26/27 photographs for each property on their portal. Also, they now have video uploads for each property which, too is a first for Australian property portals.

    With regard to PBL our Head Office who has been involved with clandestine meetings with PBL, kindly on our behalf (not). Advised us that the soft launch would roll – out in late 2006. Market speculation is that it will happen this Monday – however I would not your breath.

    But then again some would have you believe that I am on their panel also 🙂

    Given that I know absolutely nothing about them – can obviously be most contagious for some. Maybe, this point should be referred to the “Master’s of the Universe.” LOL

  • Peter
    Posted February 17, 2007 at 9:22 pm 0Likes

    RE Run Property – Hi Robert, E and others….

    I actually tried to rent a listing last year from Run….this is how I commented to one of my clients about them…..

    I cannot believe that this specialist agency is just so poor at their job, they rarely have any photos with the listings I looked at – and if they did it was only one or two and mainly just road shots…… I left three messages with them and got one response – telling me I would only be able to look at the listing on available open homes and not at my convenience.

    Now, if you are going to specialise – please do so, but show you are better than other ‘all you can eat’ agencies by actually doing things in a more professional manner.

    PS: Just goes to show a good idea not executed well – is a bad idea!

    PPS: Is McGrath agency doing ok still? It must be the most expensive agency in Australia to run! I know they had been losing allot of money, but wondered how the last few years have gone?

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 17, 2007 at 9:53 pm 0Likes

    Hi Peter,

    Run Property has been fantastic for us as we have increased our property managemnet based on their lost managements. Kind of hoping they remain. They did have problems retaining staff – which resulted in zero service as they simply could not keep up with the day to day management demands. They did subsequently open up pod offices in suburbs from the agencies they acquired managements from. Which was a huge back track from their earlier business model – which I rejected as being feasible.

    In my opinion it is a basket case as it continues to move back to the business principles that initially they stated were the “achilles heel” of smart property practices.

    Not exactly sure where they are today, massive resignations and sackings of senior management. Not to mention significant losses of properties from the portfolio’s they acquired. Their share price (stepping into Tom’s domain) is sitting around $0.15. Well down from the $1.00 float price.

    As for McGrath he got the “F” word confused as he chased float – only to later learn that franchise was his next option. My understanding is that he has franchised Manly, Wamberal and Neutral Bay – neither of which would have been huge money spinners.

    I hear that the North Shore agencies are soon to be franchised also.

    Many share an opinion that John backed the wrong horse with Run Corp – the share price reflects this.

    Even more interesting is to see who they used to employ and where they are now !!

    The loss of the Christies franchise hurt them.

    He will bounce back in some shape or form. His influence to our industry years ago was huge. Just that in recent years he has made some huge errors of judgement(s).

  • Simon Baker
    Posted February 19, 2007 at 1:16 am 0Likes


    Your understanding is not correct. While there continues to be incremental changes to, there will be no new release of in the new 2 weeks.

    When we launch new things, I will be sure to let you all know.

    Also – with reference to domain allowing 26 photos – has been allowing that many for ~10 years – since launch.

    Simon Baker
    MD REA Group

  • Robert Simeon
    Posted February 19, 2007 at 7:20 pm 0Likes


    Maybe I misunderstood Janelle when we caught up last Friday. During the course of our conversation I was told that REA had an exciting release that will be launched within two weeks time. Janelle told me that she would not tell me exactly what it was – and that I would have to wait until it is released.

    The number of photos that agents could upload on Domain being just five has caused much debate over the last ten years. Elizabeth even raised this very issue here last week. The “new” management team at Domain addressed this very issue and now agents can upload as many as 27 photographs. Yes – they have copied the REA initiative.

    Domain now (or soon will) allow agents to upload property videos to their portal. I would then be surprised if REA did not copy that initiative. Given that at the end of the day it is about satisfying the agents requests for better services to both them and their clients.

Leave a comment