Insights
Outsourced ISA vs Zillow Premier Agent
Zillow vs. ISA.
The age old debate. The David vs. Goliath of real estate lead capture. Unlike the David & Goliath story, however, the two are not combatants. Both approaches are strong and both can generate a significant amount of opportunity for a real estate agent’s business. The question is: which one should you choose?
Well, the simple answer: you should have both. But in the absence of unlimited funds to invest, the choice comes down to systems & priority. Let’s break it down.
Online lead generation is a passive approach to generating clients: you wait for them to come to you. You pay your money and you wait for leads. Nothing wrong with that, but you’re waiting for a homeowner to raise their hand and come to you for your service. All well and good but, as most agents know by now, most leads are non-exlusive. And this isn’t necessarily the company’s fault, but the reality is that you can’t control the homeowners online behaviour. While your Zillow leads may be exclusive because you pay a pretty penny to them, that homeowner can inquire with you on Zillow and your competitor on Realtor.com, as well as three other agents and their cousin. The passive approach waits for the highest intent but highest competition timeline for real estate transactions: the window just before the sale is made. The problem is, that’s where everyone goes to advertise.
That’s where an ISA comes in. A real estate ISA (or any form of outreach) is an active approach to bringing in new real estate leads. Instead of waiting in the wing with everyone else, you’re in the field generating opportunities before they become an opportunity for anyone else. While the majority of agents invest their money and wait for leads, the proactive agents are capitalizing on opportunities before they ever hit the market.
This is the crucial difference between the two approaches: active lead generation that takes control vs. passive lead generation that takes a waiting approach. Both effective. Just a matter of preference.

