Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community

Annoying Advertising

Discussion in 'General Property Chat' started by Big Will, 28th Jul, 2016.

  1. Big Will

    Big Will Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,546
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Just to vent I hate when REA really put a much lower hidden search range compared to advertised price.

    Run a search of 3bed+ up to 700k in Williamstown (VIC) and you get 3 results being;

    upload_2016-7-28_11-24-33.png

    upload_2016-7-28_11-25-0.png Okay not bad, working as intended
    upload_2016-7-28_11-25-25.png Umm?
    upload_2016-7-28_11-26-22.png err WTF nearly 200k over the max search.
     
  2. Jasmine

    Jasmine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    12th May, 2016
    Posts:
    57
    Location:
    Melb
    Yep. Annoying! However, it's the REA's deliberate fault for this. realestate.com.au offers two separate boxes - one for a general title/label, and one box for the price. REA just put whatever they want in the free text title including a listing price. realestate.com.au should better police this.
     
  3. Big Will

    Big Will Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,546
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Yes I understand how it works as I used to work as a REA and I can understand if a vendor wants 900k and the house is only worth 800-850k it makes sense to have the hidden search range at 800k.

    However if you have 895k and the hidden price is 700k you really should change the price to POA.
     
  4. drg86

    drg86 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    273
    Location:
    Newcastle
    Or listing units/townhouses/villas as a house:mad:

    If I search "house" I want house only...:rolleyes:
     
    Pumpkin, bob shovel and joel like this.
  5. Azazel

    Azazel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    8,113
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I've alerted RE.com.au to a couple of dodgy listings, they don't really care.
     
  6. Scott No Mates

    Scott No Mates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,549
    Location:
    Sydney or NSW or Australia
    They still get paid at their contract rate.
     
  7. Azazel

    Azazel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    8,113
    Location:
    Brisbane
    True, but I thought they might at least ask them to make it a bit more factual.
     
  8. Ted Varrick

    Ted Varrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    21st Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    570
    Location:
    No Mans Land
  9. Coota9

    Coota9 Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    970
    Location:
    Melbourne
    yep I think the head of "Johnson' & "Johnson" is the vendor!!:rolleyes::rolleyes:
     
  10. Azazel

    Azazel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    8,113
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Haha, someone was taking the wee wee there!
     
    Ted Varrick likes this.
  11. Ted Varrick

    Ted Varrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    21st Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    570
    Location:
    No Mans Land
    Probably the original designer decided some kind of statement was required...
     
  12. Azazel

    Azazel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    8,113
    Location:
    Brisbane
    They probably wanted to put their stamp on the job...
    Weird stamp.
     
  13. Scott No Mates

    Scott No Mates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,549
    Location:
    Sydney or NSW or Australia
    The architect had both hands on it :oops:
     
  14. Azazel

    Azazel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    8,113
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Spent way too much time on the main shaft.