I think there is SOOOO much that we learn AFTER we have our first websites made.  You don't really know what features you want, need, don't want, don't need until you site is up and running for awhile.  Thank you for sharing.  A whole post could be made for the newbie, "i wanna website" crowd! our site is only 1 month old and I know so many things NOW that I didn't know then!

Sexy websites are a great presentation of the company/agent... I've found that basic sites drive the traffic and are very inexpensive.  GeorgiaHomeInsurance.com is an example of the 100+ sites I have.. No flash and great results.

I've had one of my new sites up for about a year and am getting ready to go with something different so as to get better SEO.  I initially just wanted to make sure I had something there for my clients, now I'm ready to take it to the next level and create massive lead generation from it.  Thanks for the tips.

Great post. When you order something and not even know what's important, you are bound to fall in the trap! Thanks for this very informative post!

Dave Kosmecki - AmStar Mortgage

http://www.americanstar.com

Out of sincere curiosity (I popped you a few points for the post):

Did your client press for the design above SEO performance?

Was your client promised SEO?

Did your client push the designer to do something he/she didn't recommend?

Just wondering, since I am pushing a feller to design to my desire, and we are talking SEO

Thanks for the tips, I am in the process of having a new web site built and these are great tips to save me some redesign. Thanks!

Janie:  completely agree.  Thanks for stopping by.

Matt:  Good luck with your web design biz...I'll check out your sites.

Jared:  You are welcome for the tips.  As others have said, there is just so much to know.

David: We are all learning...hopefully, we can make this work for the client. 

Mike: The client is a smart and pragmatic guy. What he isnt is an internet guy. That said, I sincerely believe that had the original designer explained the pros and cons of his approach, the client would have chosen a different approach.  I dont think that conversation ever happened nor do I think that the client would have pushed for such poor design criteria.

I agree, your first time is a learning experence.  I am still working with my main site to try to get it where I want it to be.  The budget would not allow doing what I wanted to do, so I hired a independent developer in India who came recomended.  very complex interactin and much more work than antisipated and a product that is not exactly what I wanted, but at least I have the sorce code, and the site is basically ok, just needs to be played with for a while to get it to the point where it is usefull. 

After a year with this site,  I will likely go to www.realestatewebmasters.com which is what I should have done in the first place.

A.

Thanks for the reply.  I like to think I'm smart, pragmatic, and all that.  I guess I'll see.  I'm using your post as a little cautionary whisper.

We have had conversation.

And we agree on little or no flash.  I want to show them the goods ASAP. 

Click.  Load.  Read.

With SEO.

And... You can tell your web designer you want the Flash to be updated from an XML page.  This allows you easy access to changes either manually or from a database.  The beauty is that an XML file can be as simple as

Site name="blah blah blah"

This makes it real easy fro the non web oriented agents to take full advantage of their own site.

Leo:  You are welcome

James:  Just keep learning and everything will be fine.

Mike:  sounds like the right approach. A little caution and a few questions ca often make all of the difference between success and "not so much success"

Mark: I'm not sure that adding complexity is what people not so familiar with the web need.  Unless you have some sort of interface that can easily incorporate your XML changes, I would think that teaching someone non-technical to parse through an XML document and make changes would involve a huge learning curve.  For instance, I'm sure that a lot of people reading this have no idea what they just read - sites need to fit the owner.  Sometimes that means "not so sexy".  Also, the Flash XML approach does little to fix the most important SEO problem, right? 

In my experience many agents are looking for the wrong things on their  websites and unfortunately way too many website companies are more than willing to aid and abet them to their own detriment. There are some basic tenets that agents must understand and accept. Agent training does not include a website usability class which it should in my opinion. I get requests for many things that for the most part are completely contrary to generally accepted conventions. This includes an over usage of flash and other moving elements, marquee scrolling text, and the use of 10 different colors and font sizes on their homepage. Our company is in the midst of building a new website for itself and for its agents and we are focusing our attention on the following goals:

• produce a site that is useful and fun for consumers to use, while not disregarding the need for the site to meet the business goals of the company and its individual agents
• clean, intuitive design - something that will make sense to my grandmother.
• concise messaging - making sure we are consistent and efficient in our use of images and text - less is more (e.g.google)
• use of appropriate new technologies - identifying new "web 2.0" technologies and thoughfully applying them

To keep to the thread, we contemplated flashing it up on the new site and decided against it. It didn't add and in fact unless used in precisely the right way (haven't seen it often), really can detract from the user experience. Smart agents and companies must be aware of the need for sites that appeals well to search engines, and the best way to do this is have sound W3C compliant code and architecture and fresh relevant content. Unfortunately it is not as easy as it sounds.

Also: using actionscripting to call XML files is nice way to dynamically change elements (text,images,etc) within flash on your website, but it does not improve flash's SEO friendliness.

You mentioned something taht people need to understand and that is the fact that is a fact that serach engines as Google or others are not to friendly with those that think that flash is the solution.

I'll leave you with some thought.... "You can buy the most expensive cell phone in the market, but, what good is it if nobody calls you??"

Websites became a tool that any agent must have, but you need to let yourself be advised by an expert. 

Carlos and Scott:  both of you are right on mark. Thanks for the useful contributions to the discussion.

...the web is primarily a visual experience - if the visual experience is a bad one, people won't even stick 30 seconds.

..digital photography and VT are NOT simple stupid and real eastate web video is far from being simple-stupid and cost effective.

...web RE video lacks effective , unique aggregation.

...and also, the downward pressure on cost for content creation will keep web real esate video out of the market for most agents and brokerages except at a very limited level until it is so cheap-and simple stupid- they are forced to do it for themselves...then, web RE video just beomes content: what is your stated marketing program? Hogpiling on YouTube and Google doesn't count.

 this isn't ripping on video, just observations. Let's all debate!

That's why it sometimes pays to hire a professional to get your site off the ground right the first time.  If you are looking for a knock out site, there is so much involved in getting it right that unless you want to dedicate all of your waking hours to researching what works and what doesn't, it pays to hire those who already know.

Obeoman: your comment is clearly off topic..this thread has nothing to do with real estate video. Until I let you know that you have not yet earned the right to hijack threads on any of my blogs, please confine your comments to the topic at hand.  Others may be willing to argue across multiple threads on their blogs...but I am not.  Next time, I will delete any of your comments that are off topic.  Thanks for your consideration.

Steven: excellent point.  I am in full agreement.