Using SeLoger from Abu Dhabi for a Santiago serviced-apartment search

A

AlbaSnow

Real estate agent
Established
Searching from Abu Dhabi means I cannot easily check each address or advertiser in person. I have been using SeLoger to look for a serviced apartment around Santiago, and it is convenient for finding possibilities, especially on mobile, but I am less confident about using it to build a final shortlist.

The same apartment can appear more than once, availability is not always current, and floor areas are difficult to compare. I also cannot always tell whether a map pin marks the building or only the neighbourhood. Are sold-record links or update dates available enough to verify freshness, or should every detail be confirmed directly after contact?
 
Given those gaps, I’d use it for discovery and verify each candidate directly with the advertiser before putting it on a shortlist. One important distinction: are the duplicates identical adverts, or the same apartment presented by different advertisers? The second case can also produce conflicting prices, areas and map pins, so simple duplicate removal would not fully solve it.
 
The floor-area issue would concern me more than the duplicates. Are listings merely missing the field, or are they using different definitions of area? For a serviced apartment, I’d record the stated area exactly as shown rather than normalising it yourself. I’d also ask whether the map pin identifies the actual building or only the surrounding area before comparing location.
 
I wouldn’t dismiss the portal as shortlist material solely because of duplicates. Broad coverage can still be valuable when searching remotely from the UAE. Stale status is the bigger limitation because it wastes time after contact. Saved-search alerts may not help much if they repeatedly surface copied or unchanged listings; a visible freshness indicator would be more useful.
 
A simple comparison sheet could keep this manageable: listing reference, advertiser, stated floor area, price, map location, date first seen, date contacted and response. Group possible duplicates instead of deleting them, since one version may contain better information. Where price history or sold-record links are absent, don’t infer a trend from repeated adverts—the same unit may simply have been reposted.
 
The mobile point needs separating into browsing and follow-through. Filters can make the initial search accessible while the contact stage remains vague. Rafael, did mobile preserve the filters you actually needed, and was it clear whether contact would stay within the portal or move to the advertiser? Even without sharing outcomes, that would show where the process breaks down.
 
That distinction is helpful. By accessibility, I mainly meant being able to reach and browse a broad set of Santiago listings while searching from Abu Dhabi, not that the mobile process resolved the comparison problems. I’ll treat SeLoger as the discovery layer, group likely duplicates, preserve each stated area rather than trying to reconcile it, and confirm availability, exact location and the next transaction step directly before creating a final shortlist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top