一般大眾常將不動產代銷業與仲介業聯想在一起，事實上，代銷業與仲介業區別是代銷業者以賣預售屋及新成屋為主，仲介業則是賣中古屋為主。而代銷業一年大約承攬1兆金額案量，如以廣告媒體預算費用2%計算，要花掉近200億廣告預算。如此龐大費用支出，就為了吸引大量的購屋消費者到接待中心看屋並且完成締結，所以如何在最短時間創造最大來人量，是代銷業者努力經營的方針。
本研究依據文獻將購屋大眾接觸的媒體管道區分為(1)個人來源, 包括親友推薦、口碑建議及自我購買經驗；(2)商業來源之傳統媒體，包含電視、報紙、雜誌等；(3)商業來源之網際網路智慧型手機，包含關鍵字搜尋、入口網站、影音平台等。在研究對象方面，則區分為有經驗及無購屋經驗者，投資及自住的購屋動機，以及首購與換屋的購屋目的，分別探討不同購屋族群對於媒體管道偏好之差異。 研究問卷設計主要項目包括: (1)購屋經驗和購屋意願、購屋動機、購屋目的；(2)購屋資訊管道搜尋行為；(3)在不同狀況下的管道選擇及使用經驗與信賴程度；(4).家庭基本資料人口變數包括年齡、性別等。問卷調查對象設定在20歲以上，居住在大台北地區未購屋、已購屋及欲購屋的消費者；調查過程主要透過北北基桃的在地代銷業者針對該區域之看屋消費者名單，以及已購買房屋的客群進行發放；本調查係以google表單做問卷設計，並利用LINE即時通訊軟體為工具發送；回收的有效問卷則以SPSS統計套裝軟體進行相關統計分析。
本研究發現三大資訊來源偏好顯示，在個人來源偏好上，以市場口碑建議最為優先；在傳統媒體偏好上，以DM傳單最為優先；在網路手機偏好上，則以關鍵字搜尋廣告google、 yahoo最為優先。在與購屋動機有關的交叉分析顯示無差異，而在與購屋目的與性別的交叉分析則顯示有差異；本研究同時亦加入人口變數的年齡，教育程度進行交叉分析，其結果亦顯示有差異。
此外，分析結果顯示在購屋資訊管道中網路搜尋關鍵字優先選項，以Google佔比79.7%最多；而經常看過的手機房地產廣告管道者，研究顯示以Google第一，Facebook第二，yahoo第三。調查結果顯示雖有37.5%購屋者不會因為廣告業者提供誘因而留下聯絡方式，卻也有62.5%購屋者會留下聯絡方式；其中以提供購屋折扣及提供專人服務最為購屋者所偏好。另一方面，調查結果顯示有91.9%購屋者會到有實價登錄的網站查詢房屋成交行情，也顯示有57.0%購屋者會到部落客論壇網站上搜尋有關房地產訊息。同時，調查顯示有51.6%購屋者下載過有關房地產類的APP，而隨著年齡越大越有差異。在性別方面，男性購屋者有下載過有關房地產類APP的比例大於女性。
代銷業者可從本研究結果尋求合適的媒體管道，以更貼近消費者需求，在最短時間發揮聚焦效果，創造最大來人量達到順利銷售，以節省可觀廣告預算支出，本研究結果可為代銷業者在尋找有效媒體方向之參考。

In the point of the public, the real estate underwriter is often mixed with the real estate agency. In fact, the difference between both of them is that underwriting businesses sell the pre-sold and new properties while agencies mainly focus on pre-owned homes. The real estate underwriting sector almost contracts 1 trillion in value annually. If we calculated the media advertisement costs as 2%, it equates to around 20 billion in advertisement budgets. The purpose of this substantial expenditure is to attract vast amounts of real estate buyers to reception halls, and close in on deals. Thus, using the shortest time to attract the largest amount of buyers is the operating policy which underwriter of real estate should work toward.
According to the literature the study separates the media channels that real estate buyers come in contact with in to (1)individual sources, including recommended by family and friends, reputation recommended and purchasing experience, (2)traditional media commercial sources, including television, newspaper and magazine etc., (3)internet based smart phone commercial sources, including SEO, Web portal, video & audio platforms. The study subjects are differentiated into experienced or inexperienced buyers, investment or residential in purchase motive, and the first buy or residence change in purchase purposes. These categorizations are used to study the differences of media channel preferences of different real estate buying groups. The main items of the study’s survey included as follows, (1) experience, willingness, motive and purpose, (2) Searching through real estate information channels, (3) choice and usage experience as well as trust of different channels under different situations, (4) basic information on the family members – including age, sex. The target of the survey are consumers who have never purchased real estate, consumers who have already purchased real estate, consumers who want to purchase real estate and are over the age of 20 that live in the Greater Taipei area. The underwriting businesses located in Keelung, Taipei City, New Taipei City and Taoyuan were asked to hand out surveys to consumers who arranged appointments to look at real estate and local clients who already purchased real estate within the aforementioned area. “Google forms” was used to design the survey, which was send via the LINE communication applications. The valid questionnaires were analyzed in statistics by using the SPSS statistic software.
Furthermore, the study reveals that for the three main information sources, market reputation is preferred for individual sources, DM brochure is preferred for traditional media sources, keyword search on google and yahoo is preferred for smart phone internet. In addition, no differences were discovered for cross-analysis of purchase motive while significant differences were discovered for cross-analysis of purchase purpose and sexes. The study also engages in cross-analysis of population variables, including age and education level, and the significant differences were also noted.
The analysis also reveals that in terms of the choices of keyword internet real estate information, Google have the most proportion accounted for 79.7%. For smart phone real estate advertisement channels, Google was first, followed by Facebook and Yahoo. Furthermore, the survey results reveal that 37.5% real estate buyers will not leave contact information even after being provided with incentives by advertisement businesses. However, 62.5% will leave contact information, among which purchasing discounts and providing specialized services as favored by buyers. The Study shows that 91.9% of the buyers will enter purchase price registration sites to check on the current market price. Research also shows that 57.0% of buyers will go on to blogs and forums to search for real estate information. 51.6% will download real estate category application, with differences being more significant as age rises. In terms of sexes, male buyers tend to download the real estate related apps more than female buyers.
Through this research, underwriting businesses can seek optimal media channels to more accurately fulfill the consumer’s needs with focused efficiency in the shortest time possible and attracting the largest amount of crowd, boosting sales, in order to save the advertisement budget. This research consequences can be referred to the underwriting businesses for adopting the most efficient type of media.

中文文獻
1.潘正安1989，「資訊類型、產品複雜程度與產品知識對資訊處理行為之影響」，中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
2.林祖嘉1994，「價格分散與搜尋均衡：在台灣地區住宅市場上之驗證 」，經濟論文叢刊，第 22 卷第 2 期， 頁 237-269 。
3.廖咸興、李阿乙、梅建平1995， 不動產投資概論。台北：華泰書局。
4.白金安、張金鶚1996，「預期景氣變動對預售屋與成屋價格差異影響之研究」，中國財務學刊，3卷2 期: 頁99-114。
4.李春長、張金鶚1996 〈房地產仲介市場賣方訂價與成交價和銷售期間關係之研究〉《經濟論文》24：591-616。
5.張金鶚1996，房地產投資與決策分析－理論與實務。台北：華泰書局。
6.花敬群、張金鶚1999，「成屋市場與預售屋市場價量關係—住宅存量-流量模型的檢討與修正」國科會人文與社會科學研究彙刊，9 卷3 期: 頁494-504。
7.鍾佑德1999，網站特性對網路購物風險與資訊搜尋策略影響之研究，國立中央大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
8.李春長2001 ， 不動產仲介市場分析。台北：文笙書局。
9.經濟部技術處、資策會ACI-FIND2003 《產業電子化指標與標準研究計畫》 廖仲仁。
10.黃凌玲2004，消費者決策模式之探討-規避決策對消費者選擇之影響，國立中央大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
11.經濟部工業局、資策會ACI-IDEA-FIND2005 《電信平台應用發展推動計畫》。
12.周美伶2005a，先前租買經驗對自住者購屋搜尋行爲之影響-存活分析之應用住宅學報第14卷第1期第21頁-40頁學術論著。
13.周美伶2005b，購屋者外部資訊搜尋管道選擇行為與搜尋期間之探討
住宅學報第14卷第2期第1頁-25頁學術論著。
14.周美伶、張金鶚 2005，購屋搜尋期間影響因素之研究《管理評論》24：133-150。
15.傅豐玲，周逸衡，游聖瑾2006，網路購物動機類型對資訊搜尋決策之影響”《管理評論》，25（4），73-96。
16.2013-2016年內政部不動產資訊平台-住宅需求動向調查報告
網址:https://pip.moi.gov.tw/V2/E/SCRE0101.aspx。
17.周美伶與陳文意2014，住宅市場訊息開放對搜尋效率之影響—資料包絡分析法之應用，住宅學報第23卷第1期學術論著。
18.陳淑美 2014，住宅市場資訊對購屋決策影響之研究—兼論購屋動機與購屋經驗之調節-科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告2017年7月31日。
19.財團法人台灣網路資訊中心（Taiwan Network Information Center, TWNIC）「2016年台灣寬頻網路使用調查」TWNIC 網站http://stat.twnic.net.tw。
20.資策會FIND/經濟部技術處「資策會FIND（2016）服務系統體系驅動新興事業研發計畫（2/4）」。
英文文獻
1.Alba, J.; Lynch, J., Weitz, B., Janiszewski, C., Lutz, C., Sawyer, A., and Wood S. 1997, “Interactive Home Shopping: Consumer, Retailer, and Manufacture Incentives to Participate in Electronic Marketplace,” Journal of Marketing (61:July), pp. 38-53.
2.Assael, H. 1998, Consumer Behavior and Marketing Actions, 6th ed., South-western College Publishing, Cincinnati.,
3.Assael, H.1992Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action. Boston: PWS-KENT Publishing Company.
4.Bansal, H. S. & P. A. Voyer 2000“Word-of-Mouth Process Within a Services Purchase Decision Context,” Journal of Service Research. 3(2):166-177.
5.Bettmen, E., J. Johnson & L. W. Payne 1990“A Componential Analysis of Cognitive Effort in Choice,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 45(2): 111-139.
6.Boulding. W. and A. Kirmani. 1993“A Consumer-Side Experimental Examination of SignalingTheory.” Journal of Consumer Research, 20（1）：111-123.
7.Buchanan, J. and Kock, N. 2001, ”Information Overload: A Decision Making Perspective,” Fifteenth International Conference on Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Ankara,49-58.
8.Duhan, D. G., S. D. Johnson, B. James & G. D. Harrell 1997 “Influences on Consumer Use of Word-of-Mouth Recommendation Sources,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 25:283-295.
9.Engel J F. Blackwell, R. D & Miniard PW 1995Consumer Behavior (8th ed, p 6), Fort Worth: Dryden.
10.Engel, J. E., R. D. Blackwell and P. W. Miniard.1993 Consumer Behavior, Chicago: Dryden Press..
11.Fiske, C. A., L. A. Luebbehusen, A. D. Miyazaki, and J. E. Urbany1994 "The Relationship Between Knowledge and Search: It Depends," In Allen, C.T. and John,D.R.(Eds), Advances In Consumer Research, 21: 43-50.
12.Garretson，Judith A. and Kenneth E. Clow 1999“The Influence of Coupon Face Value on Service Quality Expectation，Risk Perceptions and Purchase Intentions in the Dental Industry，”The Journal o / Service Marketing·13（1）：59-70。
13.Gilly, M. C., J. L. Graham, M. F. Wolfinbarger & L. J. Yale 1998 “A Dyadic Study of Interpersonal Information Search,” Journal of Academy of Marketing Science. 26(2): 83-100.
14.Hahn, M., Robert Lawson and Young G. Lee 1992, “The Effects of Time Pressure and Information Load on Decision Quality,” Psychology & Marketing, 9(5):365-378.
15.Havlena, W. J. & W. S. DeSarbo1991 “On the Measurement of Perceived Consumer Risk,” Decision Sciences. 22(4): 927-939.
16.Henricks, M. 1998“Spread the Word,” Entrepreneur. 26(2): 120-125.
17.Herr, P. M., F. R. Kardes & J. Kim 1991 “Effect of Word of Mouth and Product-Attributes Information on Persuasion: An Accessibility-Diagnosticity Perspective,” Journal of Consumer Research. 17(3): 454-462.
18.Hoffman & Novak, 1996 “Marketing in hypermedia computer- mediated environments: conceptual foundations”, Journal of Marketing, 60, pp.50-68,
19.Kolter, P. & K. Keller 2011Marketing Management. 14th ed. NJ: Prentice Hall.
20.Kolter, Philip 2003 Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation. and Control. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
21.Lin, C. C. and S. J. Lin 1999, “An Estimation of Elasticities of Consumption Demand and Investment Demand for Owner-Occupied Housing in Taiwan: A Two-Period Model,” International Real Estate Review. 2(1): 110-125.
22.Marney, J. 1995“Selling in Tongues”, Marketing Magazine. 100(38):14.
23.McGaughey, R.E., and Mason, K.H. 1998 “The Internet as a Marketing Tool,” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice (6:3), ,pp. 1-11.
24.Mourali, M., Laroche, M. & Frank P. 2005“Antecedents of Consumer Relative Preference for Interpersonal Information Sources in Pre-purchase Search,” Journal of Consumer Behavior. 4(5): 307-318.
25.Murray，K. B. 1991“A Test of Services Marketing Theory：Consumer Information Acquisition Activities，”Journal of Marketin，55（1）：10-25.
26.Peterson, R. A. and Merino, M. C. 2003 “Consumer Information Search Behavior and the Internet’ Psychology & Marketing (20:2), pp. 99-121.
27.Ravi D. 1999, ”Comparison Effects on Preference Construction”; Journal of Consumer Research,
28.Salant, S. W. 1991 , “For Sale by Owner: When to Use a Broker and How to Price the House,” Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 4, pp.157 -173.
29.Savolainen, R.2009“The information needs of prospective homebuyers： an exploratory studyof apartment purchases in Finland.” International Journal of Consumer Studies , 33（5）：566-571.
30.Schiffman, L. G. & L. L. Kanuk 1997 Consumer Behavior. 6th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
31.Schmidt, J. B. & R. A. Spreng 1996 “A Proposed Model of External Consumer Information Search,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 24(3): 246-256.
32.Silverman, G. 1997 “How to Harness the Awesome Power of Word of Mouth,” Direct Marketing-Internet Marketing. 60(7): 32-37.
33.Stone, R. N. & K. Gronhaug1993 “Perceived Risk: Further Considerations for the Marketing Discipline,” European Journal of Marketing. 27(3): 39-50.
34.Tan, S. J.1999 “Strategies for Reducing Consumers: Risk Aversion in Internet Shopping,” Journal of Consumer Marketing. 16(2): 163-180.
35.Turnbull, G. & C.F. Sirmans 1993 "Information, Search, and House Prices," Regional Science and Urban Economics. 23(4): 545-557.
36.Writz, J. & P. Chew 2002 “The Effects of Incentives, Deal Proneness, Satisfaction and Tie Strength on Word- of-mouth Behavior,” International Journal of Service Industry Management. 13(2): 141-162.