Real-estate
Sales Assessment Results by Zak Taylor
26
Needs Improvement
10 questions
Maximum score: 100
Completed in
Let's get real—your performance on this test was a wake-up call. Averaging a score of 2.6 is not just underwhelming; it's a signal that you need to reassess your approach to sales. Your strongest attempted technique seems to be referencing historical data, but even that fell flat because it lacked clarity and a connection to your prospects' immediate concerns. You seem to consistently struggle with engaging emotionally and empathetically with prospects, coming across as dismissive instead of reassuring. Addressing objections is crucial, and right now, you’re missing the mark on how to do that effectively.
To elevate your sales game, I strongly suggest diving into Consultative Selling and Objection Handling Techniques. These will help you learn how to genuinely connect with your prospects and address their concerns more effectively. Remember, it's not about pushing your agenda; it's about understanding theirs.
Here's your coaching moment: Think of sales not as a transaction but as a relationship. Each response is an opportunity to build trust and rapport. If you can shift your mindset to prioritize understanding your prospects' needs and responding to them thoughtfully, you'll start to see a transformation in your results. It's time to step up and truly engage; your future success depends on it.
Question Breakdown
1.
2
/ 10Question:
"I've seen similar properties listed for much lower prices; how does this justify such a premium?"
Answer:
I handpicked the contractor to do this and I can give yiu a roof to foot warranty you're buying g an investment with security
Feedback:
The response fails to directly address the objection regarding the premium pricing compared to similar properties. While mentioning a contractor and a warranty adds some value, it lacks clarity and doesn't effectively justify the higher cost. There is also a typographical error ('yiu' and 'g') that detracts from the professionalism of the communication. It would have been better to explain the unique features or benefits of the property that justify the premium price. Overall, the response lacks depth and fails to engage the prospect meaningfully.
2.
3
/ 10Question:
"The market seems unstable right now; are you sure this is the right time to invest in a luxury property?"
Answer:
Look im not a fortune teller but I can tell you history, historically a house appreciates 6% a year thags why they say the best time to buy a house was 5 years ago the second best time is now
Feedback:
The response does not effectively address the prospect's concerns about the current market instability. While referencing historical appreciation rates is valuable, the lack of clarity and the dismissive tone ('I'm not a fortune teller') may alienate the prospect. The mention of past performance does not directly alleviate fears regarding present instability and could benefit from a focus on current market indicators or expert insights that support the assertion. Additionally, a typographical error ('thags') undermines professionalism. A more solution-focused approach that empathizes with the prospect’s concerns and offers reassurance would improve the response significantly.
3.
2
/ 10Question:
"With the project timeline stretched out, how will that affect my immediate needs for a new home?"
Answer:
You can get quality or quantity i know this has went longer than expected but you want the luxury and it has to be imported which will create more valuefor you
Feedback:
The response fails to effectively address the prospect's immediate needs concerning the stretched project timeline. It does not acknowledge the specific concern about timing, nor does it provide any reassurance or solutions for how the delay might impact their housing situation. Instead, the focus on quality versus quantity and the mention of luxury and imported materials lacks clarity and relevance to the immediate needs of the prospect. There is also a typographical error ('valuefor') that affects professionalism. A more empathetic approach that outlines how the company plans to support the prospect during this delay, or potential alternatives, would improve the response significantly.
4.
2
/ 10Question:
"This option looks great, but can it truly match the quality and amenities of my current property?"
Answer:
Keep your current property. I always recommend buying one house a year use the rental income to increase your wealth
Feedback:
The response does not directly address the prospect's concern about whether the new option matches the quality and amenities of their current property. Instead of engaging with the objection, it dismisses the idea of comparison and focuses on a recommendation for purchasing additional properties. This approach lacks empathy and fails to provide the prospect with the reassurance or information they need to make a decision. A more effective response would involve discussing specific features or benefits of the new option that align with the prospect's current property, thus demonstrating value and addressing their concerns directly.
5.
2
/ 10Question:
"I'm concerned about hidden costs that might not be immediately apparent; how transparent is your pricing?"
Answer:
I'll give yiu the line by line item. I keep people in work everyday if you went to call down the yellow pages you will be spending time and money for a subpar product when I get it to you with better quality at a better price
Feedback:
The response does not adequately address the prospect's concern about hidden costs and lacks clarity regarding pricing transparency. While offering a line-by-line breakdown is a positive step, the mention of 'keeping people in work' and comparisons to yellow pages distract from the primary issue. This response lacks professionalism due to typographical errors ('yiu'), and it fails to engage with the prospect's specific worries. A more effective answer would clearly explain how pricing is structured, highlight any guarantees regarding costs, and reassure the prospect about the absence of hidden fees. Overall, the response is not solution-focused and does not adequately build rapport with the prospect.
6.
2
/ 10Question:
"I've heard mixed reviews about your company's support services; how can you assure me that I'll receive adequate assistance?"
Answer:
We are local if yiu want we can call all negative reviews. I hold up my end of the bargain the problem is sometimes people say they want something later to change when I create a product that they asked for they see the work that was done and want it cheaper. You can't have it both ways.
Feedback:
The response lacks clarity and does not effectively address the prospect's concerns regarding the company's support services. Instead of reassuring the prospect, it comes off as defensive and dismissive, particularly the phrase 'you can't have it both ways.' This could alienate potential clients rather than build trust. Additionally, while mentioning local presence is a positive point, the inclusion of calling negative reviews does not directly answer how the company will ensure adequate support. There are also typographical errors ('yiu') that undermine professionalism. A more effective response would focus on specific support processes, testimonials from satisfied clients, or a commitment to customer satisfaction that directly addresses the prospect's concerns.
7.
3
/ 10Question:
"The current vendor I'm using has been reliable; why should I consider switching to your offering?"
Answer:
I know that vendor hes great at what he does but my products are a niche product that he can't provide
Feedback:
The response acknowledges the reliability of the current vendor but lacks a compelling argument for why the prospect should consider switching. Simply stating that the products offered are niche does not effectively illustrate their unique value or benefits. There is no exploration of how these niche products meet specific needs or solve problems that the current vendor may not address. Additionally, the tone could come off as dismissive towards the competitor, which may alienate the prospect. A more effective approach would involve highlighting the advantages of your offerings in detail, addressing how they align with the prospect's goals, and providing evidence or testimonials to support your claims.
8.
3
/ 10Question:
"I feel like I need more time to compare my options and fully understand the value you're offering; can we discuss this later?"
Answer:
I dont know what the future holds i do know you're looking for a solution now, otherwise you're going to be in the same predicament a year down the road and it will probably cost you more with inflation at that point
Feedback:
The response dismisses the prospect's need for more time to compare options, which can come off as pushy and unempathetic. While it attempts to emphasize urgency by discussing future costs and inflation, it fails to adequately engage with the prospect's request for additional time and consideration. A more effective approach would involve acknowledging their desire to think things over, offering to provide additional information or resources that could help them in their decision-making process, and suggesting a specific time to follow up. The overall tone lacks the necessary sensitivity to the prospect's perspective, which is crucial in the real estate industry where trust and relationship-building are paramount.
9.
4
/ 10Question:
"What kind of documentation can you provide to validate the ROI on this investment in the long run?"
Answer:
I can get you comps of arv of what this will entails on a finished product by sold properties of similar quality
Feedback:
The response attempts to address the prospect's request for ROI documentation by mentioning comps and ARV (After Repair Value), which indicates some understanding of real estate valuation. However, it lacks clarity and does not explicitly explain how these documents will validate ROI. Additionally, the terminology used may not be familiar to all prospects, so simplifying the language and offering a clearer explanation would enhance understanding. A more effective response could involve providing specific examples of reports or data points that directly showcase the potential ROI, addressing the prospect's request more thoroughly. Overall, the response is somewhat solution-focused but needs to be more customer-centric and clear in communication.
10.
3
/ 10Question:
"How do you ensure that the level of customization I need will not exceed the initial budget you've proposed?"
Answer:
I use all local sourced products with the highest quality i can not tell you what happens after we open the walls but the last thing I want to do is come back to you asking for more money
Feedback:
The response attempts to reassure the prospect by mentioning the use of locally sourced products and high quality, but it falls short in addressing their concern about customization exceeding the initial budget. The phrase 'I cannot tell you what happens after we open the walls' introduces uncertainty rather than providing assurance. This lack of clarity can lead to further doubts for the prospect. Additionally, the response should include a clear strategy for managing costs and any mechanisms in place to handle potential budget overruns. A better approach would involve outlining specific processes or guarantees related to customization and budgeting, which would build trust and confidence with the prospect.