Long shot, but anyone know why real estate listings in some areas have more photos than others? Google is not helping me here. The limit in WA (or King County, at least) seems to be 15 photos. Other areas clearly allow far more than that (like when Miso and Auberge would post listings, they'd have 30+ photos). I assume it's an MLS regulation. Anyone know? If it is an MLS rule, what's the reasoning?
Depends on how go getter the RE is. I think 30 photos is probably overkill for the average size house. Also, with most listing sites you pay extra for pictures, so they aren't going to go crazy and pay for a ton extra pictures if that's not the norm there.
Any place I've searched I get typically 4 (the basic that realtor.com offers), max I've seen is 10.
Thanks for the responses! I still wonder why the limit varies. I agree that most homes do not need 30 photos, but some homes could definitely use more than 15. Sometimes for fun I search Redfin for the most expensive home on the market in Seattle, and these gigantic estates will pop up... with only 15 photos. I want to see the hobby room and the stables, damn it! ;-D
I work for a real estate board in Canada and we've found it's really arbitrary - in most cases here it's a limitation of the MLS system supplier. Our supplier allows up to 30 pictures per listing but I know that the Toronto board only allows 9 per listing.
I work for a real estate board in Canada and we've found it's really arbitrary - in most cases here it's a limitation of the MLS system supplier. Our supplier allows up to 30 pictures per listing but I know that the Toronto board only allows 9 per listing.
Yeah my market can use 30, but some neighbouring boards can only use 10-15.