Trulia.
Zillow. 
Which of the two “real estate sites” is more duplictious and underhanded?  Early this morning I recieved an angry phone call from a gentleman who had been home shopping online and found one of my listings, sold back in September, but still carried as “active” on one of the aformentioned sites.   He claimed that most of the properties he found listed as available were, in fact, sold or cancelled.  I worked hard today to calm him down and, hopefully, gain his business.
The gentleman and I share something in common.  Our lack of trust in Trulia and Zillow.
Here’s a re-blog from realtor Greg Swan who writes today in his acerbic Bloodhoundblog.com
“My client went shopping for houses on Trulia.com, and only 75% of those she found were bogus listings.”
He goes on.  . . .
“Trulia and Zillow both present inactive listings as though they were active to fool the public into thinking that they have more inventory than the agents they exploit for advertising money, even though their listings come straight from the MLS systems. Mere real estate brokers would be fined out of business for pulling these stunts.”
Despair you nothing, though, hard-working dogs.*  Every time Trulia or Zillow are caught pulling these bait-and-switch stunts, one more active real estate shopper is turned off of their sites forever.  Nice going, suits . . . ”
These lines from Swann’s article jump out at me:
” . . . to fool the public.”
“. . . agents they exploit for advertising money.”
” . . . bait-and-switch stunts.”
” . . . one more active real estate shopper is turned off of their sites forever.”
 
Thanks for the grand slam, Greg.
*By the way, “dogs” refers to realtors who subscribe to the Bloodhound.