I appreciate all the feedback and am motivated to have both video options available for potential buyers to utilize. Frankly, I'm left with the understanding that it's good to have choices for viewers and it's also a personal challenge to hone the skills with the flip camera to produce more intriguing shots of the various properties we market. Thanks Pat!!

Lu - Sure, the videos aren’t Stephen Spielberg, but yikes! And what's wrong with too much info? With all due respect, that's a real 2005 approach. Back then, inventory was limited, and a couple of bad photos tossed in the MLS had multiple offers in a few days (if not hours).

Now, at least here, we have tens of thousands of listings on the market. According to the NAR, 87% of all buyers start their search on the internet. People skip right past the listings with "too little info" for the ones that are marketed WELL. Who has time? People who are interested in the home. My videos get watched, on average, 4 minutes. Yep – 4 minutes.

When a perspective buyer is hooked by the video, they schedule a showing. After the showing, they go back and watch it over and over and over. They forward the link to everyone they know to watch it. And guess what - when video is done WELL - other potential listing clients see it and say, "I want my house to be marketed like that" and - you guessed it - you pick up more listings.

I would guess that bottom video represents a first attempt at full motion video. The homeowner shot that. But imagine what an agent, with a few homes under their belt could produce. I call it, the future of marketing homes for sale.

Steve, you have my full agreement on the no such thing as "too much info". When someone loves a house, they can't get enough information. I want to keep that momentum going - particularly when they share it with all their friends and family.

Lu, do you have an example and/or contact for one that you do like? Or do you prefer no video at all?

I hated these videos. Both of them. First one: the music, the empty house, the distorted rooms by fish-eye lenses, the length.

Second one: Too long! Who has time for all of that? How about some great still photos? Aren't people giving out too much information up front? Who needs to see the house in person after all that?

Pat - My videos start at $199 with music and voiceover. No plans for franchising at this time, but not limiting myself to any future possibilities :)

Steve - excellent point. What do you charge for a video tour such as what you describe? Are you considering franchising your company?

Pat - I'm not sure if my beloved city can take *that* much credit, but I've seen it happen twice now. Full motion video walk throughs (done well with a stabilizer, proper lighting, nice music, and quality voiceover) are still somewhat of an unknown to the general public. As the general public becomes more aware of full motion video, they will demand it from their agents. The same thing happened years ago when 360 virtual tours became all the rage. It seemed like every listing appt I went on they said, "are you gonna do a virtual tour?". It's coming - I have been advocating for over a year now that agents be ready for it :)

The top one is nice, but don't make the mistake of calling a slide show a "video". When you use the term video, you set up an expectation. More and more, as sellers become aware of what is possible in marketing their homes, "video" means true full motion video. I’ve seen agents promise video in the listing appointment, deliver a slide show, and then find themselves in a bind. That, of course, makes my phone ring - but I’d rather an agent use me because they want to, and not because of a mistake that forced them to call me.

The bottom one is a great START for true full motion video. When shooting full motion, it is essential to get a tripod to steady those shots. Nothing does a better job presenting a home [online] then walking through the home while narrating (just as you would on an actual showing). BUT, if you are going to do this, spend some money on a camera stabilizer, or use stabilizer software in post production. If the camera shakes, people will turn off the video in a second. In short, I like them both but the second one represents the way homes will be marketed in the future, so getting ready now is a great idea.

Steve - thanks for your comments. I agree on the slide vs video tour terminology. When so many companies began creating slide shows and calling them video tours I waited for the backlash. I've seen none. Homeowners accept these slide tours as " a video" without question. Perhaps Charlotte has a more tech savvy clientele?

Thanks for all your points and the time it took to make them!

All were items I had considered, my conclusions were very much in line with Todd's. I agree videos should be shorter, my attention span for video is about 2 minutes, regardless the topic.

I'm thinking the best video is 2 minutes, a combination of well photographed images and a tripod balanced video to provide landscape/room scans where appropriate (neighborhoods or open floor plans that can't be adequately represented by a still photo) with a descriptive voice over.
Personally I find the casual videos quite attractive, but maybe they're not as appealing for formal house tours.

The difficult part about this for most realtors will be writing the descriptive text to use in the video.... good thing I've got writers on my team. :)

I'm in the process of training some one to create the videos so all of the above is fantastic info for me to have. Thank you!

Hey Pat!

I actually did a side by side of just this a few years back. And while the professionally produced, narrated video was gorgeous and had a tight, focused narration, we got a more visceral reaction from buyers on what I call the Quick and Dirty video.

My Q & D narrated walkthroughs ran about 2-4 minutes and allowed folks to hear the squeaks and creaks of the home. In my opinion, the Q&D garnered the reactions it did because the videos made the home real.

Part of the reason they worked better than the professional videos, in my opinion, is that as consumers, we are very inured to highly polished marketing and advertising.

Just my two cents...

Both have pros and cons.

GENERALLY
When looking at a home, I review the text and photos before I look at the video. I find the videos too time consuming when I am browsing a lot of listings in a short span of time.

TOP VIDEO
It is much brighter. The kitchen cabinets look great here where in the second video they almost look like painted wood.

The dormer and rooms are very distorted which could lead to buyers let down when they see the actual home. I know it is because of the type of camera they use.

I don't like the music. It gets to be annoying and if I am in a public place, I need to rush around finding the volume.

There seems to be quite a bit of redundancy to the rooms they show.

I like the video tours with the arrows where you can click which room you want to go to. They are more interactive.

SECOND VIDEO
I love the dialog, however, the videos shakiness makes me a bit seasick after a while. The lighting is poor and does not show the kitchen or dormer off really well.

From a sales stand point of getting people to visit the house, the poor quality of the lighting makes me prefer the first video.

SUGGESTION
What if you had a slideshow with the narration? The slides would have good quality shots that show off the house better than the video.

BTW. I like videos that show a quick view of the surrounding houses.

MY HISTORY
I have purchased 2 homes in the last 5 years and have looked at a lot of photos and videos.

Actually, I think I like a combination. The professional look with Circlepix was excellent and shows that the sellers are serious. I would have preferred narration of the benefits of buying this house over the smooth jazz in the background. The choice of music was more upscale townhouse for a couple with no kids than a welcome to a house you want to raise a family in, which is what this house is.

The second video, good idea needing better exsecusion. The production values were horrible and the script was somewhat rambling. Just needed a more professional look to make me want to buy.