![\"Laptop](\"https:\/\/www.benhams.com\/press-release\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Laptop-Sales-map-300x156.webp\")
The latest research by London lettings and estate agent, Benham and Reeves, has revealed a stark disparity in asking prices depending on how extensively a property is marketed, with homes listed using four photos or fewer priced almost \u00a380,000 lower on average than those benefiting from five or more images.<\/p>\n
Benham and Reeves analysed current for-sale listings across England, assessing the average asking price of homes based on the number of photographs used in their online advertising listing. <\/p>\n
The research shows that across England, homes marketed with four photos or fewer carry an average asking price of \u00a3200,000, while those featuring five or more images are listed at an average of \u00a3280,000 – a price gap of \u00a380,000 on average. <\/p>\n
Regionally, the disparity is most pronounced in the South West, where homes with limited photography are priced at an average of \u00a3155,495, compared to \u00a3300,000 for properties marketed with five or more images, a difference of almost 93%. <\/p>\n
Similar trends are seen in the South East, North East and West Midlands, where asking prices for more comprehensively marketed homes are between 60% and 83% higher. <\/p>\n
Even in London, where overall values are considerably higher, properties listed with five or more images command an average asking price of \u00a3525,000, compared to \u00a3400,000 for those with four or fewer.<\/p>\n
Marc von Grundherr, Director of Benham and Reeves, commented:<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cMarketing has always been of the utmost importance when it comes to attracting a buyer, but good marketing has grown all the more important, as the market has shifted to a buyer-led dynamic with an over supply of stock over the last year or so. <\/p>\n In the digital age of selling a home, the photographs used to market your property are often the very first thing a buyer will see and, in many cases, they can determine whether a listing is even clicked on in the first place.<\/p>\n However, it seems that not all agents are approaching the importance of marketing with the same dedication and consistency, with a notable gap in asking price between homes marketed with varying levels of photography.<\/p>\n Of course, you could argue that lower priced homes may be smaller in size and provide fewer photo opportunities, however, at Benham and Reeves, we regularly ensure that even the most modest of studio flats still has ample photos taken in order to showcase it to its fullest potential. <\/p>\n Price point and property size simply shouldn\u2019t come into it and there\u2019s a strong argument for lower-priced homes actually needing stronger marketing to stand out in a competitive landscape. <\/p>\n As a seller, it always pays to do your research and ensuring that your potential agent of choice is making the appropriate efforts across the board is key before instructing them.\u201d<\/p>\n Analysis of current for-sale listings across England sourced from Rightmove, Zoopla and OnTheMarket, looking at the average asking price of listings based on those with 4 photos or fewer versus those with five or more. The latest research by London lettings and estate agent, Benham and Reeves, has revealed a stark disparity in asking prices depending on how extensively a property is marketed, with homes listed using four photos or fewer priced almost \u00a380,000 lower on average than those benefiting from five or more images. Benham and Reeves analysed current … <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n \nLocation<\/th>\n Est ave asking
\nprice – sample<\/th>\nEst ave asking price – 4
\nphotos or less only<\/th>\nEst ave asking price – 5
\nphotos or more<\/th>\nEst difference<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n \n South West<\/td>\n \u00a3290,000<\/td>\n \u00a3155,495<\/td>\n \u00a3300,000<\/td>\n 92.9%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n South East<\/td>\n \u00a3365,000<\/td>\n \u00a3205,000<\/td>\n \u00a3375,000<\/td>\n 82.9%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n North East<\/td>\n \u00a3165,000<\/td>\n \u00a399,995<\/td>\n \u00a3170,000<\/td>\n 70%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n West Midlands region<\/td>\n \u00a3264,995<\/td>\n \u00a3167,475<\/td>\n \u00a3275,000<\/td>\n 64.2%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Yorkshire and the Humbe<\/td>\n \u00a3210,000<\/td>\n \u00a3137,250<\/td>\n \u00a3220,000<\/td>\n 60.3%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n East of England<\/td>\n \u00a3325,000<\/td>\n \u00a3212,500<\/td>\n \u00a3330,000<\/td>\n 55.3%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n East Midlands<\/td>\n \u00a3230,000<\/td>\n \u00a3165,000<\/td>\n \u00a3231,000<\/td>\n 40%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n London<\/td>\n \u00a3500,000<\/td>\n \u00a3400,000<\/td>\n \u00a3525,000<\/td>\n 31.3%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n North West<\/td>\n \u00a3230,000<\/td>\n \u00a3197,500<\/td>\n \u00a3230,000<\/td>\n 16.5%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n \tEngland<\/strong><\/td>\n \u00a3275,000<\/strong><\/td>\n \u00a3200,000<\/strong><\/td>\n \u00a3280,000<\/strong><\/td>\n 40%<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table><\/div>\n \n
\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"