Yep, that’s a porn ad – provided by our very own Realtor.com – in an apparent ad-hijacking.
The above salacious screenshot came from the NAR’s very own Realtor.com. From an extensive conversation at ActiveRain:
Thoughts (as I’m beating a dead horse anyway) –
1. This is yet another example that demonstrates the NAR’s need to take Realtor.com back from Move.
2. Realtors work weekends – why don’t vendors?
3. Todd Carpenter did a commendable job disavowing any responsibility of the NAR. It’s not the NAR’s site, so we (the members) don’t have any responsibility for the ads, even though the site’s name and URL are Realtor.com, and we’re Realtors, so why would we have any control over the “Official Site of the National Association of Realtors”
4. (Most) Realtor members have no idea that Realtor.com doesn’t belong to the Realtors.
5. Lifetime contracts are stupid.
6. My favorite question in the AR conversation: Who’s Todd? Wait, no, this one. Or this one. Or this one.
7. Where is the Move/Realtor.com Social Media Manager?
Get rid of the ads and return the site to the members.
(Why don’t more people use Adblock Plus?)
Jay Thompson
October 6, 2009 at 8:24 am
I’m sick and tired of the excuse “The NAR has no control over Realtor.com”.
As you mention, IT’S THE “OFFICIAL SITE OF THE NAR”. I’m sure it’s true that NAR has no control. Fine. Then modify the damn contract with Move and remove that statement that’s plastered all over the site.
“4. (Most) Realtor members have no idea that Realtor.com doesn’t belong to the Realtors.”
Agreed. And more importantly, how many people in the general population think REALTORS have nothing to do with REALTOR.com??
Crap like this makes us all look like idiots in the public’s eye. And we’ve got enough perception problems already.
It’s ridiculous.
Mack Perry
October 6, 2009 at 8:24 am
Maybe Move will want to follow the FTC ruling and disclose where their income comes from!
Jay Thompson
October 6, 2009 at 8:40 am
Here’s my favorite comment:
https://activerain.com/blogsview/1268298/realtor-com-not-pg-continue-if-you-are-over-18-#5407477
Someone from realtor.com chimes in and blames the author for creating a hoax since she couldn’t find the ad in question (this despite numerous comments to the effect that the ad appeared to be pulled).
Joe Spake
October 6, 2009 at 8:53 am
Remember to advice of “Deep Throat” in All the President’s Men” “Follow the Money!”
Fred Romano
October 6, 2009 at 9:22 am
I agree, pull the ads and make the site more “social” like Trulia. Reduce the crazy expensive fees to “showcase” our own listings and make it more affordable for all Realtors to enhance their listings.
Benn Rosales
October 6, 2009 at 9:28 am
Not a very effective ad with all the stuff blacked out! 🙂 kidding, it happens, we once tried some google ads only to have some gay men site show up, needless to say, it just wasn’t worth the pennies to risk such a thing.
Doug Francis
October 6, 2009 at 9:48 am
Okay, I do find that funny although I do understand that it isn’t real… been modified… right?
Matt Stigliano
October 6, 2009 at 9:54 am
What can I say that already hasn’t been said. I watched this unfold on ActiveRain and am glad to see it mentioned here as well.
I recently had a call from realtor.com in which the salesman tried to sell me the upgraded listings and I told him I wasn’t interested. His only reply was “but you don’t know what it costs.”. My point exactly. And I don’t care. I refuse to pay them for my data. Data I created with my sellers homes.
NAR made a huge mistake when they handed over the reigns and allowed Move to take us for a ride. Shame too when you consider how many talented code monkeys there are out in the RE.net who probably would have jumped at the chance to work on a NAR owned project for the benefit of the membership.
Would we pay more in NAR dues to have the site back and under our control. I’d be interested in seeing the numbers there.
Shame to know that there are those that don’t know who owns it and worst part – the consumer who doesn’t know and lets it reflect on the general membership.
Hijacked or not, an ad like this can destroy the consumer/agent relationship. Realtor.com should at a bare minimum come out and say “oops” rather then the defense posted on ActiveRain. They should also hire a social media manager ala @tcar or @trulia in order to react swiftly to problems. Good luck finding a professional willing to take on that role though. With the feeling about the site and its organization, I don’t think their going to find the right individual that commands the respect they’ll need.
Is there anything that prevents NAR from building a competing site? Sure that’s not the preferred solution, but perhaps it could be the best solution in the long term.
Pam Pugmire
October 6, 2009 at 10:11 am
I’m almost speechless….the ONE comment from someone from Realtor.com was that the author had photoshopped the image! Unbelieveable!!!
NAR absolutely should take control of Realtor.com! What benefits do I (and every other due paying memeber) receive from Move.com? Pray tell!
Joe Spake
October 6, 2009 at 10:20 am
Is the financial arrangement between Move and NAR disclosed anywhere? We (NAR) give Move our listings for free, and in return we get? It would be interesting to see how much of Move’s revenue is shared with NAR for all types of ads (including porn, i guess) and those agent enhancements.
I think the public looks at R.com as just another 3rd party real estate listings website. There is good data in there if you can get past the banner and pop-up ads, but I would not consider paying Realtor.com a penny for agent enhancements. I used to, but for years, I could not attribute any business to it.
Kristen Carr
October 6, 2009 at 11:05 am
I have many years in the MLS business but have never been a Realtor.
Move.com does not get your listings from NAR, they get the from your MLS. Most MLSs do not have a choice as to whether or not they provide all the listings to Move. If you read the Terms of Use for Move.com and Realtor.com (the same ToU) you’ll find that any information you provide Move.com is owned by Move.com “in perpetuity”. Move.com is not required to sign data licensing agreements with the MLS the way other advertising sites would be simply because of the backlash an MLS would receive if they stopped sending the data.
If you don’t like what happens with Move.com or the way the listings and advertising are managed you should contact your MLS. There are now means for brokers to “opt-in” to sending listings to Move.com and many other sites (ListHub, Point2). Once you take the control back into your own hands you’ll have more of a voice. I can promise you your MLSs are probably just as frustrated as you are!
Steve Early
October 6, 2009 at 11:27 am
My wife is going to go nuclear when I show her this. Maybe we should start an alternative.
Steve
Julie Reynolds
October 6, 2009 at 11:48 am
No one was more surprised or concerned to hear about an inappropriate ad being associated with Realtor.com than we were this past weekend.
Our advertising policy strictly prohibits ads like the one blogged about on October 4th. After looking into the situation and confirming the ad was not delivered through Realtor.com or by any of our related Web sites, we believe this isolated instance was caused by “spyware” or a “malware Trojan” infecting an individual user’s computer, thereby “hijacking” their experience.
While viral infections on individual computers do occur from time to time, one of the best ways to avoid this situation is by regularly updating your computer with anti-virus software. We also suggest everyone be especially diligent about not opening suspicious attachments or ads as they may contain viruses that will compromise and overwrite ads by infecting the individual’s system.
We hope this information sheds light on the situation and clears up any confusion that might have occurred.
Thank You
Ben Goheen
October 6, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Julie – true that it may have been caused by spyware, but good job completely avoiding the rest of the conversation here.
Dave Phillips
October 6, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Well, it has been a while since the forces of the social media had Realtor.com in the cross-hairs. Here is some history to help folks understand the R.com deal. Around 1995, when NAR was struggling with what needed to be done with this Internet thing, Move (known as Homestore back then) bailed out NAR by taking on Realtor.com. “Bailed out” because NAR (like almost everyone back then) did not quite understand the Internet and they were in the process of losing $13 million on something called the Realtor Information Network (RIN). Homestore/Move offered millions of dollars in cash and stock and NAR took the money and ran.
In hindsight it is easy for us to criticize the decision to sign a lifetime deal, but you should also understand the vast benefits NAR and Realtors have received because of this deal. It was kind of like the Herschel Walker trade by the Dallas Cowboys many years ago. They traded away a potential superstar and got a bunch of stars in return. Dallas (as much as it kills me to admit) became a dynasty while Herschel never really reached his full potential.
Essentially, NAR traded Realtor.com (the domain name) for millions of dollars that have since been used for MANY things to benefit Realtors. The most high-profile of these benefits include Sentrilock, The Realtor Credit Union, the commercial site called PropertyResource.com, and the soon to be named game changer challenge items. Was it a good trade? Maybe, maybe not, but it was not absolutely a bad deal for Realtors. That, in no way, is meant to defend Realtor.com or their response to the porn ad.
Matthew Rathbun
October 6, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Wait… WTH is your problem? Isn’t that an agent glamor shot? I mean they are trying everything now, aren’t they?!?!?
Geez-o-flip; it’s the only smile I get at work during the day and you want them to pull the ad!
Just Kidding… I just don’t understand why anyone would be surprised.
Matthew Rathbun
October 6, 2009 at 1:05 pm
I bet “Hot and Wet’s” Daddy is proud that she’s now selling real estate, compared to what she used to do…. 😉
Kevin Tomlinson
October 6, 2009 at 1:24 pm
This is Hysterical. I love this. I absolutely love this. I can’t get over this. I’m sending this to everyone.
You know if it is salacious Tomlinson is all over it….with a mini Diet Coke and a bag of popcorn.
Bigeholmz
October 6, 2009 at 1:27 pm
What’s weird is I saw a Realtor.com ad pop up on a porn site I accidentally happened to visit one time and only one time. Just kidding.
Jeremy Linder
October 6, 2009 at 1:40 pm
I’m glad Realtor.com has finally figured out a way to get click thru’s for the poor saps that buy those ads…
Joe Loomer
October 6, 2009 at 2:22 pm
@Kristen – sorry darling – opting out is not an option – can you imagine telling your Sellers you’re not putting their property on the #1 searched real estate site because someone hacked in and put a porn ad up?
Issue here is the outsourcing of a product that should never left home….
Navy Chief, Navy Pride
Jim Duncan
October 6, 2009 at 2:32 pm
@Julie – Thank you for the clarification.
A question – why are no comments allowed on Realtor.com’s blog?
But this really was a post that highlights yet another reason to bring Realtor.com back to the NAR – I’d bet that most Realtors would pay twice as much to the NAR each year (it’s only about $90/year right now – which really is a bargain/value for what we get).
Atlanta Real Estate
October 6, 2009 at 2:45 pm
I swear, I swear!!
I just popped up there.
Braxton Beyer
October 6, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Realtor.com shouldn’t have ads in the first place.
Atlanta Real Estate
October 6, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Matt:
“I bet “Hot and Wet’s” Daddy is proud that she’s now selling real estate, compared to what she used to do…. ”
That’s my laugh of the day thus far.
Thanks!
RM
Paula Bean
October 6, 2009 at 3:24 pm
NAR, imho, who is supposed to be representing those of us who pay hefty dues for their help. should NEVER have allowed a third party to represent us. That is tantamount to giving someone part title to the deed on your house, how very stupid. As for the hijacked issue, I don’t believe for one minute that a site that big doesn’t have the ability to prevent this, it’s simply an excuse.
My thoughts to the resolution of this issue is based on supply and demand. STOP using Realtor.com. Let’s get another domain name that belongs to US and controlled by us. I would gladly pay more money to a site that I had more control over.
Another funny issue, once I pulled my contract from R.com they called several times trying to win me back as a customer…. as a test, I have emailed, and I have called them to enquire as to what their fees are to sign back up and not once have I gotten an answer. No wonder they have to resort to ‘hijacked porno ads”.
The answer is to take our industry back, and if NAR can’t do that, then we can. All it takes is to put our money where our mouth is. Once R.com gets no business, and NAR suffers because of it, then it will be a little like taking on City Hall, but I for one, after 30 years am getting tired of having a bad rap with the public that has been caused by things beyond our control.
NAR SHOULD NEVER HAVE LET R.COM TAKE OVER OUR BUSINESS! Shame on them for doing this to us and we pay dues for what??? We never even got a chance to voice our opinion of the matter? If NAR was the President, the citizens of the U.S would start impeachment proceedings. I am so disapointed in what has transpired that has affected our reputation and livelihood. MAYBE we should all stop paying dues to NAR as well? With what you can do on the internet these days, I hardly find local or state dues worth what I pay for what I get.
Check out other sites you can post your listings on, there are literally thousands, but the biggest draw is still going to be the sign in the yard and agent networking on sites like AR and Real”town.
I think we have an antiquated system that doesn’t work anymore, and I am tired of pouring money down a deep hole only to get excuses like the ‘hijacking statement’ give me a break, if you had a site that purports to be the #1 real estate portal would you not have adequate protection in place so that this does not happen?
Just say NO… stop paying Realtor.com…get postlets, join Active Rain, Trulia and RealTown, network with your local agents and you’ll find out that you will be better off and your roi will be vastly improved.
Benn Rosales
October 6, 2009 at 3:25 pm
@jimduncan we don’t need realtor.com the website back, let’s just refuse use of the term Realtor all together, maybe they could be an adult porn search?
Matt Stigliano
October 6, 2009 at 3:33 pm
@JimDuncan Do you really think that’s a clarification?
Here’s what I don’t get:
taken from Jim Lee’s comment on ActiveRain
Now in all fairness, Jim Lee’s comment was posted a day before, so perhaps the investigation proved otherwise.
I’m not here to say that realtor.com knew about the ad or placed the ad or hoped no one would notice the ad. These sorts of bad ads do and will appear on the internet in places they don’t belong. It happens.
What I am here to do is point out that there’s little doubt as to why people would jump to these conclusions. Realtors are fed up and distrustful of something their own organization put into someone else’s hands. Was it a good move as Dave alludes to? As he said, maybe…maybe not.
Let’s look beyond the blame game of Photoshop, viruses, mistake, accident, and burn-witch-burn and look at it as:
What can we do about it? What does move.com need to do to connect with agents again (look, we’re angry with you, but maybe if you’d open the doors of communication we might be willing to work together)? How do we help agents understand the past, present, and future of decisions from NAR like the realtor.com decision? How does NAR gain the trust to do things like this without everyone crying foul? (Let’s be realistic, we know they can’t please everyone, but how can they do things like this with the most support from their membership.)
Although I know these are all lofty questions, perhaps they’re the direction we should be heading instead of pointing fingers (which I’m great at when it comes down to these issues, so don’t think I’m not counted amongst that group).
Dan O'Halloran
October 6, 2009 at 5:06 pm
I stopped using realtor.com a long time ago and haven’t looked at it much until I heard about all of this. It absolutely amazes me how anti-listing realtor they are. If you don’t pay them boat loads of money they don’t even mention your name or any links. Honestly we shouldn’t have to pay for at least that much as we are providing all of the content.
Jay Thompson
October 6, 2009 at 5:24 pm
So the original comment from someone at Realtor.com on the AR post gets deleted, presumably by the author of said comment (Heather Riggio). In this comment, she basically accused the AR poster of photoshopping the ad and creating a hoax.
This person’s blog is here:
https://heatherriggio.featuredblog.com/
Read some of those posts. This is the kind of person R.com hires???
Matt Stigliano
October 6, 2009 at 8:29 pm
@PhxREguy – I am completely in shock after reading Heather’s blog. I truly don’t even know what to think. How long before that disappears you think?
Carolyn G-Tu
October 6, 2009 at 8:30 pm
my memory is not the greatest, but I do think something like this popped up last year for either Zillow or Trulia – think it turned out that a spyware program had taken over the users computer and was changing all ads viewed on a site to adult content. I know the post has morphed to an anti realtor.com comments but thought I might comment on the original issue 🙂
Matt Stigliano
October 6, 2009 at 8:31 pm
PS I saved it to my desktop in case anyone wants to question the validity of that website/screen cap. I didn’t even use Photoshop (or in this case, Dreamweaver).
Madison WI real estate
October 6, 2009 at 8:37 pm
Maybe if we could figure out a way to get porn ads to appear on Realtor.com more often, enough Realtors would wake up and stop paying for their useless “enhanced listings”. What a waste of money.
Amanda Hal
October 6, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Dangit, Jay. I clicked the link and fell off into a cosmic bunny hole.
Amanda Hall
October 6, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Dangit Jay, I clicked the link and fell off into a cosmic bunny hole.
Matt Stigliano
October 6, 2009 at 9:01 pm
For anyone who’s trying to view the original at ActiveRain – if you’re not a member there, you will not be able to view it. Of course, you can sign up for free, but I am trying to convince the author to make it public so that everyone can see it and comment.
Lisa Heindel
October 6, 2009 at 9:28 pm
OMG, Jay…that link was unbelievable. Cosmic bunny hole is the very nice version of what I was going to say, and when Amanda is nicer than me, there’s a real problem. Does she write that with the approval of r.com? I’m scared of the answer, no matter what it is.
Jonathan Benya
May 19, 2010 at 8:42 am
Wow, I just wasted 30 minutes of my life, I feel like I want to cry, and the only thing that would make me happy is to have R.com disappear off the planet, all thanks to the cosmic bunny hole
Paula Henry
October 6, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Having followed this for the past few days, that blog has to be the most incredibly irritating thing I have read.
Regardless of how the ad appeared on the site, R.com has proven they have no interest in the interest of Realtors. A nice, we don’t know what happened here would have sufficed.
Besides all the great puns and jokes, it was great to hear from Paula Bean.
Time to start a new crusade 🙂
Shar Rundio
October 6, 2009 at 10:34 pm
There are no words. And I thought the only thing “enhanced” on R.com were the listings.
Missy Caulk
October 6, 2009 at 10:43 pm
I was not happy about the ad, I contacted Todd on Sunday and also Jim as I wanted them to know.
I was really upset when they blamed the blogger of photo shopping the photo. She also had a new computer and there was no spam.
It was a clitch…but I don’t think on the bloggers computer.
Joe Spake
October 6, 2009 at 10:46 pm
The search term “realtor porn” returns 52,500 results in Google. Have we missed an SEO angle here? I’m working on a comprehensive analysis. 🙂
Matt Stigliano
October 6, 2009 at 11:28 pm
@indyagent (Paula) – You know I’m a big fan of yours. This quote explains why:
Thanks for summing up my feelings.
Bob Wilson
October 7, 2009 at 1:30 am
This sucks. I’m sitting here lmao at the ad, and laughing even harder at the title of this post (hands down THE. BEST. TITLE. EVER), but scratching my head at the comments on both sides. I hate it when I’m forced to defend NAR or Realtor.com.
The NAR response was pathetic and indefensible, but I’ll tell you that I have agents who leverage Realtor.com and bank pretty decent coin as a result, and are thrilled to hear that more agents are going to surrender that advertising platform to the listing mongers that know how to work it.
Dave Phillips is right. They made the best deal they could at the time. No one aside from Al Gore could have forseen how the online dimension would go into warp drive like it did. Remember way back when MySpace was cutting edge?
The code monkeys of the RE.net didnt exist back in the dark ages of the 90s when this went down. Heck, when I got my license in 1990, my first office was next to some fly by night company called Quality Communications, more commonly known now as Qualcomm. Could’ve bought the stock for 25 cents a share and sold at the peak for $800. Who knew it would take off since a cell phone at the time would set you back $2500 and the portable unit weighed 8 pounds (not to mention that 40 cents a minute for airtime was considered cheap)?
Bottom line – this was funny, but no big deal because it happens more often than many realize – just not on R.com.
You wont win the battle of “We want our Realtor.com back”. That ship sailed, so dont waste time using a hacked ad as a clarion call. If you want to put your efforts into a fight about R.com that you can win, then fight your broker for the leads that go to them when you dont pay the fee for enhanced listings.
Love it or hate it, it is an unbelievably powerful tool. Dismiss it at your own risk.
For those who could use a history lesson and a little perspective, read this:
https://www.realtown.com/saul/blog/realtorcom/early-history-of-realtorcom-a-chronology-of-events
Danilo Bogdanovic
October 7, 2009 at 12:29 pm
They’re saying that the ad was hijacked. Maybe. Maybe not. Either way, it’s an embarrassment. Just like it’s an embarrassment for NAR to hold the “Realtor” term so dear to them yet, R.com is not even owned by them.
And for R.com to say that the image was photoshopped is the worst response I’ve heard from a company in a long time – shame on you R.com!
Dave – Sentrilock, The Realtor Credit Union, the commercial site called PropertyResource.com, etc., are revenue streams for NAR – that’s all their intended to be. In fact, Sentrilock is quite the opposite of a “benefit” – the system is horrible and plagued with technical and security issues for Realtors, as well as sellers. NAR has hid under their “benefit” Ghillie suit and taken cheap shots at its members for way too long, but we’ve now spotted them and there’s no more hiding.
E. Hill
October 7, 2009 at 1:25 pm
I received a range of responses from realtor.com. I don’t want to play the blame game and I would own up to a possible hijack if that is what it is, but my computers were checked and I have no viruses. Even if I did, I don’t understand why I wouldn’t have seen the ad(or similar content) elsewhere when browsing the web. Are virus’s picky like that: October 3, 8:30PM- 10:30PM only on realtor(dot)com? Still, I think the ad was just a silly mistake(mistakes are okay realtor.com!). I meant for this to be written off in the “funny bloopers” section but they got so defensive. In the order that they were received word for word:
Heather Riggio’s Response: I SEARCHED WHITEFISH, MT FOR LIKE 30 MINUTES SO FAR, AND THAT AREA IS COMPLETELY SOLD OUT WITH REALTOR BANNER ADS… https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-search/Whitefish_MT I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE HAS SEEN THIS ONLINE?
THIS HAS TO BE A HOAX. I BLEW UP THE PICTURE…. AND THE AREA IS WHITEFISH, MT, AND I FOUND NOTHING ONLINE. SIDEBAR: Heather was searching on Monday, Oct 5…so of course she didn’t see it.
Bob Goldberg’s Response: “REALTOR. Com is all over this. It appears one of the ad networks submitted the ad under a different name. Same problem happened w NY Times. Anyway they will get it removed immediately. The key point is that REALTOR. Com did not sell the ad and would never allow it.”
Todd Carpenter’s response:
I’ve received word that the banner placement in question is sold out. That means it never runs anything but those featured agent ads. Since no one has been able to replicate the problem, our best guess at this time is that this has some sort of a hijack/virus to EmMee’s computers or to her ISP.
We may not be able to figure out exactly what happened. It’s really hard to trace something that’s already gone. This sort of ad is not acceptable from either NAR’s or Move’s point of view. I’ll let you all know if we receive further resolution.
realtor(dot)com response: https://www.realtor.com/blogs/2009/10/06/in-response-to-recent-concerns-about-an-inappropriate-ad-on-our-web-site/
My Response: Why couldn’t they just say, “Oops, this happened. Don’t know why but we’ll take care of it.” and let it go. Instead they post a response with no oppurtunity for discussion. Someone else who claimed to have seen a similar ad was immediately silenced and told they have malware without further investigation. Is this the treatment others can expect? The fact that they cannot replicate it does not dispute the fact that it was there. With such a huge company I expect glitches to happen, no harm done. If anything, I would appreciate an apology for releasing a statement that I feel questions my integrity and character. They released that blog without consulting with me on their “findings” and discussing other possibilities. By the way Heather, why would I put my reputation on the line by wasting valuable time on a pointless hoax? You really think I would work 12 hour days, had the time to put this together in my paint program, surprised my companions with a nude shot while searching realtor(dot)com and have to deal with the uncomfortable aftermath?
Right now I think the bad part about blogging is seeing something, posting it, and putting your name out to be critisized by strangers who assume they know you. I’m a good honest person and never intended to critisize the website, only to make others aware of what I saw. Everyone is free to make their own decision as to whether or not they would be offended by the ad. And the ad isn’t even the issue anymore. In the end I’m glad my post has ignited discussion and some really great puns that had me laughing all day. It has also brought to light some grievences by members that need to be fully explored and heard.
Jonathan Dalton
October 7, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Reading the comments on AR made my head throb. Are we in this business collectively THAT stupid?
Lisa Heindel
October 7, 2009 at 4:56 pm
Oh, I don’t know about that…I thought @TBoard hit the nail on the head with her insightful comment.
Jonathan Dalton
October 7, 2009 at 5:54 pm
I blacked out from banging my wireless keyboard against my forehead before I got to it. Now I have to go look.
Kevin Tomlinson
October 7, 2009 at 8:38 pm
Does r.com have an app for that?
Jim Lee
October 8, 2009 at 8:15 am
“Ready, Fire, Aim!”
Does anyone not find it odd that this ad only appeared on one person’s computer and that no one else seemed to be able to replicate that screen shot or the ad (and I’m sure many tried very hard)????
Just curious……
Erika Sanchez
October 8, 2009 at 9:42 am
This is appalling!!!! I am shocked…and I DID not know Realtor.com was not owned by our organization!!! It seems as there is no respect for what we stand for and for the work we do. What can be done?
Geri Doyle
October 12, 2009 at 8:42 pm
This is disgusting! Another reason Realtor.com should be owned by NAR
Boy my sellers would love seeing this!!
Kent Simpson
November 7, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Isn’t that part of the new ad campaign – “Buy A New House & Chicks Will Dig You More” ???