The famous old restaurateur Toots Shor once told the famous old columnist Bob Considine that he really liked one of his columns. Considine’s response: Who read it to you?
I tend to be a bit more gracious about the bags of complimentary notes that I get about this column – except when the compliments are lewd.
I get quite a bit of that. Ever since my picture starting appearing with the column, the compliments have doubled – some about the content, but some about the cute guy who harbors the compelling ideas.
In other words, to use the language of the Banker & Tradesman crowd, my ideas have “curb appeal.” My opinions tend to coast along on my good looks. It’s not that I’m just another pretty face, but it sure doesn’t hurt.
The long-standing tradition of running advertising photos of property for sale is based more on instinct than research. There is that sense that even two-dimensional “curb appeal” is, well, appealing, whether potential clients are on the prowl for a starter home, a fixer-upper or an upgrade to something quite grand.
Of course, in the age of cool computers, the potential buyer can now prowl the outside and inside of the home without actually visiting, if the Realtor is in the mood to commission a little photo shoot.
Even rather unattractive (on the order of newspaper editors) commercial properties – think warehouse or abandoned mill – are often photographed for advertising, prior to some kind of sad auction or another.
The least talked about, but most common photo strategy in the residential real estate game is to publish the photo of the listing agent – or to publish the photos of the entire army of agents at a given agency.
The implication is that whatever the curb appeal of a particular property, it wouldn’t hurt to show off the curb appeal of the agents as well. The photo doesn’t tell you whether he or she is aggressive, laid-back, informed or a rookie – but for reasons spoken and unspoken, we wouldn’t mind a look at the team in the field.
Naked Aggression
In most research assessing the value of tall, blond, lanky, Cohen-like good looks, the laboratory is a corporate setting. The taller, good-looking folks tend to prosper in the corporate jungle – but how does that translate on the mean streets of the city, for a Realtor?
University of Texas researchers this summer reported that the best-looking one third of the population makes 5 percent more money than the average-looking folks – and 10 to 12 percent more than the editors and other worst-looking population segment.
But if I’m looking for a Realtor, am I looking for cute? Am I looking for my racial or ethnic group? Do I have a sense that men or women are better at the game?
The “appearance” issue pops up in all sorts of odd places. Even as we speak, the U.S. Army is embroiled in a quiet, below-the-radar internal squabble about how the average soldier should look – not necessarily on the battlefield, but out in public, on a stroll down Main Street.
The Army is fairly forgiving about the “tattoo” thing, but that might well change. Can female soldiers wear earrings? That’s under discussion, too. Male soldiers wearing earrings? Whew.
In the Real Estate Wars, is there a uniform that works best in battle, or one that signals victory in an advertising photo? If your best selling agent has a Mohawk haircut and your best listing agent wears three-piece suits, is there a “policy” anyone is willing to risk that might upset the status quo?
And what about the real estate financing side of the transaction? Should the loan officer wear a Hawaiian shirt, if the clients are financing a vacation home? If you’re servicing folks who want to refinance a house that’s underwater, should you wear black, to signify mourning – or should you wear white, to reflect what virgins they must be in the difficult market of today?
I’m going to strip down to my loin cloth and finish editing this column. Naked aggression works best when you’re a bad typist.
