<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lead Quality Re-defined</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined</link>
	<description>The Home for Lead Industry News &#38; Opinion</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:42:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: LeadGuru</title>
		<link>http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined/comment-page-1#comment-2489</link>
		<dc:creator>LeadGuru</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:02:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.leadcritic.com/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined#comment-2489</guid>
		<description>David I agree that most leads have a home, and that a well run home will have measurable success regardless of the &quot;Quality&quot;.  My post was to point out that many of us have changed our viewpoint on what Quality actually is and price seems to be the overriding factor these days.  I&#039;m looking forward to meeting you at the K - dinner.  See you next week</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David I agree that most leads have a home, and that a well run home will have measurable success regardless of the &#8220;Quality&#8221;.  My post was to point out that many of us have changed our viewpoint on what Quality actually is and price seems to be the overriding factor these days.  I&#8217;m looking forward to meeting you at the K &#8211; dinner.  See you next week</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Schneider</title>
		<link>http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined/comment-page-1#comment-2389</link>
		<dc:creator>David Schneider</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:42:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.leadcritic.com/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined#comment-2389</guid>
		<description>As the founder and CEO of a major tier one mortgage lead provider, I have to say that my sales associates are approached daily by many lead buyers looking for the cheapest deals.  While it&#039;s only natural that pricing is often the first question put on the table, prudent buyers must also forecast their ROI based upon the method, freshness and exclusivity of that particular lead and the business that procured it.  Penny wise and pound foolish?  Perhaps sometimes ... but not all the time.

Stories of success (and failure) float out of the lead buying experience, BUT lead &quot;quality&quot; is only a single, yet very important, factor.  Others include the way in which each lead is worked and by whom, their expertise and mortgage market knowledge they possess.  Are they using a lead management system and using it correctly and consistently?  Do they have the ability to build lasting rapport and  
offer a unique selling proposition that&#039;s truly beneficial to the borrower, etc.? How does the lead buyer perceive the lead and how does the borrower perceive the lead buyer?

Some lead buyers only experience success with old leads that others would consider absolute garbage.  And other lead buyers only experience success with more expensive real-time, display advertising  
generated leads.

A deep objective analysis of a lead buyer&#039;s surrounding business goals, infrastructure, staff, systems, knowledge and training can help determine which leads would yield the highest ROI.  In my  
opinion, substantial tests with multiple lead providers is the ultimate determinant.  Numbers don&#039;t lie.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As the founder and CEO of a major tier one mortgage lead provider, I have to say that my sales associates are approached daily by many lead buyers looking for the cheapest deals.  While it&#8217;s only natural that pricing is often the first question put on the table, prudent buyers must also forecast their ROI based upon the method, freshness and exclusivity of that particular lead and the business that procured it.  Penny wise and pound foolish?  Perhaps sometimes &#8230; but not all the time.</p>
<p>Stories of success (and failure) float out of the lead buying experience, BUT lead &#8220;quality&#8221; is only a single, yet very important, factor.  Others include the way in which each lead is worked and by whom, their expertise and mortgage market knowledge they possess.  Are they using a lead management system and using it correctly and consistently?  Do they have the ability to build lasting rapport and<br />
offer a unique selling proposition that&#8217;s truly beneficial to the borrower, etc.? How does the lead buyer perceive the lead and how does the borrower perceive the lead buyer?</p>
<p>Some lead buyers only experience success with old leads that others would consider absolute garbage.  And other lead buyers only experience success with more expensive real-time, display advertising<br />
generated leads.</p>
<p>A deep objective analysis of a lead buyer&#8217;s surrounding business goals, infrastructure, staff, systems, knowledge and training can help determine which leads would yield the highest ROI.  In my<br />
opinion, substantial tests with multiple lead providers is the ultimate determinant.  Numbers don&#8217;t lie.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lead Guru</title>
		<link>http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined/comment-page-1#comment-2283</link>
		<dc:creator>Lead Guru</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:38:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.leadcritic.com/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined#comment-2283</guid>
		<description>Owen your numbers are right in line with a quality run shop.  Kudos to you and your team for running a tight ship.  Would like to discuss further.  Can you run your contact info to the Lead Critic Admin, they will forward to me?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Owen your numbers are right in line with a quality run shop.  Kudos to you and your team for running a tight ship.  Would like to discuss further.  Can you run your contact info to the Lead Critic Admin, they will forward to me?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lead Quality Decline or Market Change? &#171; Better Closer Blog</title>
		<link>http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined/comment-page-1#comment-2252</link>
		<dc:creator>Lead Quality Decline or Market Change? &#171; Better Closer Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:59:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.leadcritic.com/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined#comment-2252</guid>
		<description>[...] 16th, 2007 &#183; No Comments  There has been a bit of discussion over &quot;declining&quot; lead quality. Of course, it is easy to lay the blame of declining app and funding rates at the feet of lead [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 16th, 2007 &middot; No Comments  There has been a bit of discussion over &quot;declining&quot; lead quality. Of course, it is easy to lay the blame of declining app and funding rates at the feet of lead [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: owen raun</title>
		<link>http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined/comment-page-1#comment-2208</link>
		<dc:creator>owen raun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 19:18:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.leadcritic.com/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined#comment-2208</guid>
		<description>top line rev for us ytd thru august 07 was 9.6M - total bill same period for leads equals 1.73M - 75% of our vol is from purchased leads - say a ratio of 9.6(.75)/1.73 = 3.8 = 416%.  I looked back at similar analysis for full year 04, 05 and 06 - and those #&#039;s are 513%, 461% and 499% so I guess we are having a bad year - imagine that :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>top line rev for us ytd thru august 07 was 9.6M &#8211; total bill same period for leads equals 1.73M &#8211; 75% of our vol is from purchased leads &#8211; say a ratio of 9.6(.75)/1.73 = 3.8 = 416%.  I looked back at similar analysis for full year 04, 05 and 06 &#8211; and those #&#8217;s are 513%, 461% and 499% so I guess we are having a bad year &#8211; imagine that <img src='http://blog.leadcritic.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lead guru</title>
		<link>http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined/comment-page-1#comment-2190</link>
		<dc:creator>lead guru</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 04:47:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.leadcritic.com/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined#comment-2190</guid>
		<description>Look for 300 percent at least assuming overhead.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Look for 300 percent at least assuming overhead.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ajiny</title>
		<link>http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined/comment-page-1#comment-2185</link>
		<dc:creator>ajiny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 01:18:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.leadcritic.com/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined#comment-2185</guid>
		<description>So what ratio of total revenue to lead costs do people on here experience?  

What would people consider a good ratio?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So what ratio of total revenue to lead costs do people on here experience?  </p>
<p>What would people consider a good ratio?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined/comment-page-1#comment-2135</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 21:24:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.leadcritic.com/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined#comment-2135</guid>
		<description>Source 1 might have acceptable &quot;quality&quot; but at the wrong price.  So, Guru, I agree, &quot;right price&quot; is key for us lead buyers.  The question is, can source 1 deliver at the right price?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Source 1 might have acceptable &#8220;quality&#8221; but at the wrong price.  So, Guru, I agree, &#8220;right price&#8221; is key for us lead buyers.  The question is, can source 1 deliver at the right price?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lead guru</title>
		<link>http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined/comment-page-1#comment-2125</link>
		<dc:creator>lead guru</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 12:33:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.leadcritic.com/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined#comment-2125</guid>
		<description>Well well well I can bet source one is a tier 1 provider and can probably guess accurately which provider.  Lol</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well well well I can bet source one is a tier 1 provider and can probably guess accurately which provider.  Lol</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://blog.leadcritic.com/company-news/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined/comment-page-1#comment-2113</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 01:43:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.leadcritic.com/lead-providers/lead-quality-re-defined#comment-2113</guid>
		<description>After we evaluate everything... we will try to shift resources from less profitable sources (1) to those that have superior performance (2)(3)(4). 


Source 1	
	3 mo avg
Total Leads	1055.00
 Total Amount 	 $41,650.00 
Total Apps	379.00
Total Openings	26.00
Total Closings	13.00
 Total Revenue 	 $108,362.27 
 $/opening 	 $1,601.92 
$/closing	 $3,203.85 
Revenue Ratio	2.60
	
	
Source 2	
	Total
Total Leads	1567.00
 Total Amount 	 $45,128.00 
Total Apps	591.00
Total Openings	58.00
Total Closings	26.00
 Total Revenue 	 $213,023.23 
 $/opening 	 $778.07 
$/closing	 $1,735.69 
Revenue Ratio	4.72
	
	
	
Source 3	
	Total
Total Leads	890.00
 Total Amount 	 $27,488.00 
Total Apps	342.00
Total Openings	26.00
Total Closings	12.00
 Total Revenue 	95461.00
 $/opening 	 $1,057.23 
 $/closing 	 $2,290.67 
Revenue Ratio	3.47
	
	
	
Source 4	
	Total
Total Leads	793.00
 Total Amount 	 $29,323.00 
Total Apps	319.00
Total Openings	27.00
Total Closings	18.00
 Total Revenue 	 $152,848.00 
 $/opening 	 $1,086.04 
$/closing	 $1,629.06 
Revenue Ratio	5.21</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After we evaluate everything&#8230; we will try to shift resources from less profitable sources (1) to those that have superior performance (2)(3)(4). </p>
<p>Source 1<br />
	3 mo avg<br />
Total Leads	1055.00<br />
 Total Amount 	 $41,650.00<br />
Total Apps	379.00<br />
Total Openings	26.00<br />
Total Closings	13.00<br />
 Total Revenue 	 $108,362.27<br />
 $/opening 	 $1,601.92<br />
$/closing	 $3,203.85<br />
Revenue Ratio	2.60</p>
<p>Source 2<br />
	Total<br />
Total Leads	1567.00<br />
 Total Amount 	 $45,128.00<br />
Total Apps	591.00<br />
Total Openings	58.00<br />
Total Closings	26.00<br />
 Total Revenue 	 $213,023.23<br />
 $/opening 	 $778.07<br />
$/closing	 $1,735.69<br />
Revenue Ratio	4.72</p>
<p>Source 3<br />
	Total<br />
Total Leads	890.00<br />
 Total Amount 	 $27,488.00<br />
Total Apps	342.00<br />
Total Openings	26.00<br />
Total Closings	12.00<br />
 Total Revenue 	95461.00<br />
 $/opening 	 $1,057.23<br />
 $/closing 	 $2,290.67<br />
Revenue Ratio	3.47</p>
<p>Source 4<br />
	Total<br />
Total Leads	793.00<br />
 Total Amount 	 $29,323.00<br />
Total Apps	319.00<br />
Total Openings	27.00<br />
Total Closings	18.00<br />
 Total Revenue 	 $152,848.00<br />
 $/opening 	 $1,086.04<br />
$/closing	 $1,629.06<br />
Revenue Ratio	5.21</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
