More Technology Doesn’t Automatically Mean Better Real Estate Marketing
One of the questions I sometimes get from sellers is whether we should include a Matterport or 3D virtual tour when marketing their Vermont home.
My answer? It depends.
I’m a big believer in professional photography, thoughtful marketing, and using technology to help buyers understand a property. But I don’t believe every marketing tool is necessary for every home, and I certainly don’t believe that adding more technology automatically produces a better result.
Matterport and similar 3D tour platforms allow prospective buyers to virtually navigate a property, move between rooms, and get a sense of the layout without physically being there. Depending on the technology and package, they may also include measurements, floor plans, or a dollhouse-style view of the home.
That can be incredibly useful.
But there are also limitations worth considering, particularly when it comes to how buyers make decisions about which homes they want to see.
I’m Erin McCormick, a Realtor with Keller Williams Vermont, and my approach to marketing has always been to consider the property, the likely buyer audience, and the goals of the seller before deciding which tools to use.
Here’s how I think about the advantages and disadvantages of 3D home tours in Vermont.
Pro: 3D Tours Are Especially Helpful for Out-of-State Vermont Buyers
One of the biggest advantages of a 3D tour is accessibility.
Vermont attracts buyers from across New England and beyond, including people relocating for lifestyle reasons, purchasing second homes, or looking for a place to spend more time outdoors.
During COVID, I gained significant experience working with buyers who were purchasing Vermont properties remotely. Demand was high, travel wasn’t always practical, and buyers often needed to make decisions without the opportunity to visit every property in person.
That experience reinforced how valuable detailed visual information can be.
A 3D tour allows someone in Boston, New York, or across the country to spend time exploring a home before committing to a trip to Vermont.
They can revisit rooms, study the layout, and get a better understanding of how the spaces connect.
For buyers who may need to drive several hours to see a property, that’s a meaningful convenience.
And for sellers hoping to reach a broader audience, removing some of the barriers to evaluating a home can be an advantage.
Pro: Buyers Can Better Understand the Floor Plan
Professional real estate photographs are important, but they don’t always communicate how a house flows.
A listing might have beautiful photographs of the kitchen, living room, and bedrooms, but buyers may still struggle to understand how those spaces connect.
Is the primary bedroom on the first floor?
Does the kitchen open directly into the living room?
How far is the home office from the main living areas?
Is the laundry room conveniently located?
These details matter.
A 3D tour can help buyers understand the home’s layout and whether it works for their needs.
This can be particularly useful for Vermont properties that have evolved over time.
An older farmhouse may have additions, unexpected transitions between rooms, multiple staircases, or a layout that isn’t immediately obvious from photographs.
A 3D tour can help buyers visualize those relationships before they visit.
That said, I also believe a clear, accurate floor plan can accomplish some of the same goals at a lower cost and with less complexity.
The right choice depends on the property.
Pro: Virtual Tours Can Help Qualify Buyers Before a Showing
I don’t believe the number of showings is necessarily the best measure of a successful listing.
What matters is attracting buyers who are genuinely interested in the property and have a realistic understanding of what they’re considering.
A 3D tour can help with that.
If someone needs a first-floor bedroom and the virtual tour makes it clear that all the bedrooms are upstairs, they may decide not to schedule a showing.
If a buyer realizes the kitchen is more separated from the living space than they expected, they can make that determination before visiting.
That may mean fewer showings.
But those showings may be more purposeful.
For sellers who are living in the property, have pets, work from home, or need significant notice before appointments, reducing unnecessary showings can be valuable.
I’d rather have five well-qualified, genuinely interested buyers tour a property than fifteen people who could have ruled it out with better information beforehand.
Of course, a 3D tour doesn’t guarantee that everyone who schedules a showing is a serious buyer. But it can help people make more informed decisions about whether to visit.
Pro: Buyers Can Revisit the Property After a Showing
Another advantage is that a 3D tour remains available after someone has physically visited the home.
Buyers often tour multiple properties, sometimes within the same afternoon.
And details can start to blur together.
Was that the house with the large pantry?
How did the upstairs bedrooms connect?
Would our dining table fit in that room?
A virtual tour gives buyers an opportunity to revisit the property and answer some of those questions.
This can be particularly helpful when two people are purchasing together and one couldn’t attend the showing.
It may also help buyers discuss the home with family members or other people involved in their decision-making process.
I like marketing tools that help buyers feel informed and confident.
And a well-executed 3D tour can serve that purpose.
Pro: Some Vermont Properties Benefit More Than Others
I think 3D tours can be particularly valuable for properties with unusual layouts, extensive square footage, multiple living areas, or architectural features that are difficult to communicate through photographs alone.
A large Vermont estate with several levels and connected living spaces may be a good candidate.
So might a distinctive contemporary home, a historic property with multiple additions, or a house with an attached guest suite.
For these properties, the ability to virtually move through the rooms can help buyers understand the relationship between different spaces.
A 3D tour may also make sense for a property that’s likely to attract significant out-of-state interest.
But that doesn’t mean every home benefits equally.
A straightforward two-bedroom condominium with an easy-to-understand floor plan may not need the same level of digital presentation as a sprawling property with several buildings and an unconventional layout.
The marketing should fit the home, not the other way around.
Con: Buyers May Rule Out a Property Without Ever Experiencing It
Here’s where I think the conversation becomes more interesting.
One of the advantages of a 3D tour is that buyers can determine whether a property meets their needs before scheduling a showing.
But that can also be a disadvantage.
Sometimes a home feels completely different in person than it appears online.
A room that looks small in a photograph or virtual tour may feel comfortable when you’re standing in it.
An older home with an unusual layout may have a warmth and character that doesn’t translate particularly well through a screen.
And a property with spectacular natural light, mountain views, or a beautiful setting may be difficult to fully appreciate virtually.
I’ve toured plenty of Vermont homes where the experience of being there is a significant part of what makes the property appealing.
There’s something to be said for walking into a house, looking out the windows, and understanding how the home feels within its surroundings.
A 3D tour can’t fully recreate that.
So while it can help buyers eliminate properties that don’t meet their needs, it may also lead some to dismiss homes they would have appreciated in person.
I don’t think that’s a reason to avoid virtual tours altogether.
But it’s a tradeoff worth understanding.
Con: 3D Tours Don’t Always Make a Home Look Its Best
Real estate photography and 3D tours serve different purposes.
Professional photography is about accurately presenting a property’s strongest features through thoughtful composition, lighting, and perspective.
A 3D tour is more about documentation and navigation.
And those aren’t always the same thing.
Depending on the capture technology, lighting conditions, and quality of the scan, rooms can appear distorted, awkward, or less appealing than they do in person.
An older Vermont home with small rooms, unusual angles, or limited natural light may be especially challenging to capture attractively.
And while I believe real estate marketing should always represent a property accurately, I also think there’s value in presenting a home thoughtfully.
Not every room needs to be viewed from every possible angle to communicate what makes the property special.
Sometimes excellent photographs, a floor plan, and a well-produced video do a better job of telling the property’s story.
Con: Buyers Still Can’t Experience the Property’s Setting
This is one of the biggest limitations of 3D tours for Vermont real estate.
A virtual tour can help you understand the interior of a home.
But what about the land?
The mountain views?
The sound of the stream behind the property?
The way the sunlight moves across the backyard?
The privacy of the setting?
For many Vermont buyers, those features are just as important as the house itself.
A home on ten acres in the Northeast Kingdom is a very different experience from a village property in Woodstock or a condominium near Burlington.
And a 3D tour focused primarily on the interior may not communicate those differences particularly well.
For properties where the setting is a major selling point, I may place greater emphasis on exterior photography, aerial images when appropriate, video, or other marketing that helps buyers understand the land and surroundings.
A virtual tour can complement those elements, but it shouldn’t replace them.
Con: Not Every Buyer Wants to Navigate a 3D Tour
We sometimes assume that more interactive technology creates a better experience for everyone.
But buyers have different preferences.
Some enjoy navigating a property virtually, moving between rooms, and studying the details.
Others would rather watch a short video, review a floor plan, and scroll through professional photographs.
A 3D tour also requires the buyer to take an active role in exploring the property.
That can be useful, but it may not be the most effective way to communicate the home’s best features to someone who’s casually browsing listings.
A thoughtfully produced video, on the other hand, can guide viewers through the property in a deliberate sequence.
Neither format is inherently better.
They simply serve different purposes.
I want the marketing to be accessible and useful to the people most likely to consider the home.
Con: There’s an Additional Cost, and It Should Have a Purpose
Professional 3D tours require equipment, capture time, processing, and sometimes ongoing hosting fees.
Depending on the property and the provider, that can represent an additional marketing expense.
And I don’t believe in spending money simply to check another box on a listing presentation.
If we’re investing in a 3D tour, I want to understand what it adds.
Will it help buyers navigate a complicated layout?
Will it make the property more accessible to a meaningful out-of-state audience?
Will it reduce unnecessary showings for an occupied home?
Or are we adding it because it looks impressive on a list of marketing services?
I’d rather invest thoughtfully in the tools that will best support the property than use every available option without considering its value.
And importantly, I don’t think sellers should assume a 3D tour will automatically increase their sale price or shorten the time their home spends on the market.
Those outcomes depend on many factors, including pricing, condition, location, competition, and market demand.
Matterport Isn’t the Same as a Video Tour
This is a distinction I think is worth explaining.
Matterport is a well-known platform for creating interactive 3D property tours, but it’s not the same thing as a traditional real estate video.
A Matterport-style tour generally allows the viewer to control where they go and what they look at.
A video tour is a guided experience.
And when I’m representing buyers remotely, I take a different approach from either of those marketing formats.
I record detailed, candid walkthroughs where I show buyers the things they can’t necessarily see in the listing photos.
I’m opening closets, looking at unfinished areas, pointing out defects, and sharing my observations in real time.
If a basement smells musty, I say so.
If there’s an overwhelming amount of air freshener, I mention it.
If something looks different from the listing photos, I want the buyer to understand that.
Those videos aren’t designed to market the home.
They’re designed to help my buyer evaluate it.
And that’s an important distinction.
A seller’s marketing tour and a buyer’s due diligence tour serve very different purposes.
What About Privacy and Security?
This is another consideration that deserves attention, especially when a property is occupied.
A highly detailed virtual tour may reveal more than sellers realize.
Personal photographs, valuables, security equipment, the location of certain entrances, or other sensitive details could potentially be visible.
Before publishing a 3D tour, I want to make sure the property has been appropriately prepared and that we’re comfortable with what’s being displayed publicly.
The same considerations apply to photography and video, but the ability to navigate through an entire home can make certain details easier to examine.
For some sellers, particularly those with privacy or security concerns, a fully interactive tour may not be the best choice.
When Would I Recommend a 3D Tour for a Vermont Listing?
There are certainly properties where I think a Matterport or similar tour could be a worthwhile investment.
I’d be particularly inclined to consider one for a large or architecturally complex home, a property with multiple interior living areas, or a listing expected to attract a significant number of remote buyers.
I might also recommend one when the seller would benefit from buyers being able to evaluate the layout before scheduling a showing.
On the other hand, I may prioritize other marketing tools for a smaller home with a straightforward layout or a property where the land, setting, and outdoor experience are the primary attractions.
And sometimes, the right strategy is to use several formats together.
Professional photography to make a strong first impression.
A floor plan to communicate layout.
Video to highlight the property’s features and setting.
And a 3D tour to allow buyers to explore the interior in greater detail.
The key is understanding what each tool contributes.
My Philosophy: Use the Technology That Helps Sell the Home
My background in marketing has shaped how I think about real estate listings.
I don’t believe good marketing is about using the most tools, creating the longest property description, or producing the flashiest video.
It’s about understanding what makes a property appealing and communicating that value clearly to prospective buyers.
Sometimes a 3D tour is an excellent addition to that strategy.
Sometimes it isn’t.
And I’m comfortable recommending against a particular marketing expense if I don’t believe it adds meaningful value.
What I don’t want is to confuse a long list of marketing features with an effective marketing plan.
Because ultimately, the goal isn’t to impress sellers with technology.
It’s to help qualified buyers understand the property, encourage meaningful interest, and position the home effectively in the market.
So, Are 3D Tours Worth It for Vermont Homes?
My answer is that they can be, but they’re not universally necessary.
For out-of-state buyers, complicated layouts, and certain higher-end or distinctive properties, interactive tours can provide useful information and make the home easier to evaluate remotely.
But they also have limitations.
They can’t fully communicate how a property feels, they don’t always present every space attractively, and they may encourage some buyers to rule out a home without visiting.
That’s why I evaluate the decision on a property-by-property basis.
The best real estate marketing strategy isn’t the one with the most technology. It’s the one that uses the right tools to tell the property’s story.
If you’re thinking about selling your Vermont home, I’d love to help you develop a marketing strategy that makes sense for your property, your goals, and the buyers we’re trying to reach.
Let’s Talk About Selling Your Vermont Home.
Erin McCormick | Realtor, Keller Williams Vermont
Founder, Travel Like a Local® Vermont | Live Local Vermont