Aerial on a lakefront listing versus the same footage on a landlocked lot with a view, and whether the premium makes sense on both
A lakefront parcel at 340k and a ridge-lot parcel at 290k both got full aerial packages at around $400 each. The lakefront shoot almost writes itself: water line, dock, setback from the neighbor, the shape of the cove. A buyer across the country can place the property in its environment without a site visit. The aerial is doing real due diligence work, not just marketing. The ridge lot is harder to judge. The view is the asset, and a drone at 200 feet can show it, but a buyer still cannot tell from footage whether the view survives the next subdivision application on the hill to the north. So one shoot answers a question a buyer is actually asking, and the other shoot produces an impressive video of a problem nobody can resolve from the air. The assumption doing the most work in both cases is whether aerial compresses time to offer or just widens the audience of lookers. On water, the evidence for compression is stronger because the asset is verifiable from above. On a view lot, I suspect the footage attracts interest and the site visit closes it, which means aerial is a lead-generation cost, not a sales tool, and you would price it differently. What is the terrain situation on your current listing, and does the aerial answer a buyer question or raise one?
