Virtual Tour versus Video3803
Pages:
1
 iGuide CIOand Co-Founder Kitchener CAN |
Kevin_iGuide private msg quote post Address this user | |
| As members of the virtual tour community, do you find yourself defending virtual tours against video? Does anyone know how to find quantitative research or statistics on the average viewer duration for real estate videos? At iGuide we believe that virtual content and video offer different value for property shoppers however, we compete for the same dollar and therefore must present a value comparison. I would be interested in what research is available.  |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
|
PANOPTICMOTION private msg quote post Address this user | |
| We utilise both video and virtual tours. They both have different roles and offer different things. Our video service is on average 100% more expensive than we charge for Matterport tours as the work that goes into virtual tours is minimal comparatively . Check out www.panopticmotion.co.uk for a look at how we market both side by side . | ||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
|
UserName private msg quote post Address this user | |
| That's probably one of the top topics I search for out of all possible topics. I haven't found many hard facts when it comes to VR tours in general. We do find stats showing how long users might stay on a page that has a VR tour on it. That's something servers can measure. I do see video professionals who cite the benefits of video's benefits OVER VR tours. I've seen compelling realtor tours that resemble movies. On the other side, we hear some VR tour creators citing the benefits of VR tours. This morning I was watching another one of RealTourVision's tours where they blend video, slide shows and 360 panos into some tours. Video in those types of tours stand out because a video can show real people speaking to you and personlizing a tour. I wonder how many tour creators have shopped for a home in the VR tour age. We may come up with dazzling technology but what does a real home buyer think and want? A virtual tour often puts you into a virtual home where you're left to wander around. You may not even know the name of a room you're in. In REAL life, there's probably a realtor with you pointing out features and talking to you. A video, even a very short one like we find on RealTourVision, can provide that human touch. GeorgeK has lots of videos and he also provides insight into the benefits of using video. I'm in favor of mixing video and 360 images (VR Tours) when it comes to selling a home. If I'm exploring a Space Shuttle or museum, I may not need the video because I'm not shopping for homes. Matterport seems to cover every possible VR scenerio need. Thanks for the link PANOOPTICMOTION. I just bookmarked that site and I don't even know what it's about yet. It looks impressive. I'll find out later. |
||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
jfantin private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by UserName You can use mattertags for this purpose, so I don´t see a real disadvantage here. I mean, you can create some sort of guided tour with Matterport if you will. In my opinion, a virtual tour allows interactivity. The possibility of wandering around, going back and forth and staying in a fixed point all the time you want. This is something that you cannot get with a movie. The possibility of having 360 views gives you the opportunity of seeing each and every detail, while the video can be designed to hide those very same details. There is no place to hide in a virtual tour. It is more real. So, in a single word: interactivity. This is the key advantage factor that virtual tours offer. |
||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
|
iGuide CIO and Co-Founder Kitchener CAN |
Kevin_iGuide private msg quote post Address this user | |
| A year ago I read a study that addressed video user abandonment rates but 'alas' did not save it and therefore feel reluctant to quote the stats I remember. The study talked extensively about the correlation between content and abandonment. Commercial content (and I believe it cited real estate) - where there is low level engagement has high levels of early abandonment. The number I remember is 82% of viewers will click off in the first 17 seconds. This may not be a fair comparison because both video and VT have different utility however, when we are told that 'users' prefer video, this would be a great statistic to challenge these sweeping assumptions. |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
|
Rootsyloops private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I think a video is a great way to tease a buyer in - same with photos. You can really capture the best of a property with both of those. The Matterport tour is a bit more "revealing" showing the beauty and the faults of a home, and a little more of a commitment on the buyer's part. I almost see it as being similar to a marketing funnel, where the photos are at the top, leading buyers to the video, and finally leading buyers to the Matterport Tour. Each one takes a greater level of commitment (from breezing through a few photos, to watching a 30 second video, to the learning curve of taking a Matterport tour and committing 5 minutes to really exploring a space). | ||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
UserName private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @jfantin - Great point there about the tags. Let's hope that Showcase 2.0 incorporates all of MatterPlus's features. You may not see a human realtor in your tour but at least you might hear one. One thing that I see many video enthusiasts cite is video’s ability to elicit emotion, especially when there's music. And since buying can be an emotional experience, there’s a benefit to creating an emotional experience. Last year I think I found one of video’s strongest supporters. After blasting typical VR tours, the author says, “A video tour flows naturally, just as if you were walking the property in person. You can see the exact layout, how the rooms connect to one another, and feel as if you were actually in the home walking up and down the hallways, the stairs, and drive through the neighborhood. It is like you are watching the home on television.” All realtor videos don’t provide that but I have seen some that make it seem like you really are touring a home. One key seems to be having the video camera move through open doors so it seems like you’re walking into a room. The first video on the page does show differences between VR tours and professional video tours. HD Video Tour Killed the Virtual Tour - Video in Real Estate http://invizionvideo.com/2014/06/30/video-in-real-estate/ One thing you see in that 60-second video is reality in the form of motion. You see automatic sliding doors open, ceiling fans turn, a TV on the wall plays, fire flickers in a fireplace, water moves in a pool and flames burn on an oven burner. A few humans top it off and it’s all set to music. There’s our emotional connection and that one doesn’t even have a tour guide. The second video attempts to sell an actual home but it’s over 2 minutes. Even if a home realtor video can be more personal and emotional, how many real home buyers will sit through one – even if it is only 60 seconds. You can jump around a Showcase model at will. @Kevin_iGuide – A VR Tour proponent once told people to check YouTube viewer stats to see how many YouTube users watch realtor home tours. That number is low. Of course, all video realtor tours don’t exist on YouTube, but I wonder what the stats are. I think it all boils down to what would WE do if we suddenly had to shop for homes as quickly as possible. If I have a slow Internet connection, those 2D photos might be right up my alley. After I narrow down my choices I might explore homes using tools that require me to think, interact and wait. That's where Rootsyloop's marketing funnel method comes in. |
||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
|
Helen private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I do video as well as Matterport and video is a much easier sell. People like that you can just press play and watch. Many find navigating anything frustrating no matter how easy it is. | ||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
Steve3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| They are 2 separate services. Each have there benefits. Using one to replace another is the wrong way to go about it. Promote them both and you will stand out. Most clients like video and some find 3D confusing. But the buyers love them both! |
||
| Post 9 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
ron0987 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I agree with Steve3D that each service has a benefit, but after viewing the videos listed the videos are also amazing. Helen talked about providing both services and mentioned video was easier to sell. Helen do you have any samples where you provided both Matterport and video so we could see side by side for the same property. Also a question on the video service how much time do you put into editing from start to finish? Last question is your price comparable for both services? Ron |
||
| Post 10 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
Rootsyloops private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I played around with interior video and the investment of time and money to produce something decent were too high for me to offer it at a price that realtors in my area would bite on. Aerial and exterior video are extremely easy to shoot, so now I offer a video/matterport hybrid that I can put together quickly and inexpensively enough to have a solid ROI. It's nowhere near the quality of some of the full production videos some of you have posted (awesome stuff!), but might be something to consider if you're struggling to make it work like I was. You can see an example at: www.510seminole.com. | ||
| Post 11 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
ron0987 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I like what you have done and I think it looks good, I would like to see just a little bit more of the video. Ron |
||
| Post 12 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
Rootsyloops private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Hey ron, Thanks for the feedback. So do you mean you think it would be better to provide more actual video shots on the beginning and end? I'm still tinkering with this, so I appreciate the input! |
||
| Post 13 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
ron0987 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Just a little more video, it is so good it makes you wish there was a little more, but definitely a great teaser. | ||
| Post 14 • IP flag post | ||
|
Dana Point, CA |
RPOceanic private msg quote post Address this user | |
| It's hard to beat the emotional response elicited by a well produced video/soundtrack. Obviously that is a big part of the battle for an Agent- getting a buyer to connect. That said, an informed buyer, once interested/connected, will want to be informed. It's hard to beat a MP walkthrough in informing ones self regarding a homes layout, proportion and relationship/flow between rooms. There is potential down the line for MP to enhance workshop capabilities with (as Metroplex has demoed) to greatly up the game with presentation of a model, I REALY hope that is where they are going. Until then, video+MP are a deadly combo that check most of the boxes. | ||
| Post 15 • IP flag post | ||
 WGAN BasicMember New Brighton, PA |
frstbubble private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @ron0987 here is an example, our demo property, that provides Matterport and HD Video Tour. | ||
| Post 16 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Basic Member New Brighton, PA |
frstbubble private msg quote post Address this user | |
| When I do my marketing presentation I cover the bases of all three digital media marking services we offer. PhotographsTime tested a MUST have for any property. Lets a buyer see the property from the perspective of the seller, real estate agent, and/or photographer. It is the perspective of the person capturing the photos. Available on any web-connected appliance. Will only show the good points of the property. Everyone knows how to view photo slideshow. Good ROI but must do lots of jobs to make money. HD VideoStill perspective of the seller, real estate agent, and/or photographer. If produced correctly can touch the emotions of the person viewing it. They will watch it if they are interested in the property. The highest bandwidth of any of the three solutions. Available on any web-connected appliance. Will only show good points of a property. Can be edited by the producer. Easy for buyer to watch anyone knows how to watch a video. Highest paycheck for a single job but also most time involved in post production and revisions. Virtual Tour (Matterport)Hard to hide anything. Most representative product of the property. An open house 24/7 (without) the snacks. Easiest post production. Highest ROI. Can leisurely explore the property. Cannot edit stuff (make it easy for us to say we cannot fix that) so less time post. Almost need a video tutorial on how to use tour. Confusing for prospective buyers to use. HD Video most expensive to produce 2 times as much as Matterport, and 3 times as much as photos. I prefer to do Matterport but I try to sell all three together as each has a distinct value. The photos get them interested, HD video touches the emotions, and 3D Tour qualifies the buyer and reduces the number of properties a realtor has to take clients to. Just my 2 cents. |
||
| Post 17 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
ron0987 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @frstbubble Funny to talk about this in the format you did, I just saw two different news articles on TV showcasing the same items you just did and they pretty much laid out what you just said. But listing what agents wanted most was video but did not want to pay the high price, but felt that the video was the best marketing tool and brought in the most customers to see the house. Matterport or virtual tour no matter what equipment was used was not as high on the list as attracting buyers as I would have liked. Ron |
||
| Post 18 • IP flag post | ||
|
iGuide CIO and Co-Founder Kitchener CAN |
Kevin_iGuide private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I believe the last 2 posts speak directly to the challenges faced among virtual tour providers. Are we marketing our services to agents or home buyers? The agents are our paying clients but should we be promoting the services agents (think they) want or the service that we know buyers want. I refer to the annual study published by the National Association of Realtors - Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers. For a number of years, the features buyers value the most when searching for a new home are: 1.(TIED) Property Photos and Detailed Property Information (Room Measurements and Area Calculations) 2. Property Maps (Floor Plans) 3. Agent Information 4. Virtual Tours 5. Neighborhood Information *9. Videos I think there are different ways to interrupt these statistics but the findings prove a relevance for virtual tour technology. |
||
| Post 19 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1This topic is archived. Start new topic?