
So I received this week a note from my colleague who represented the buyers, "sent me an email regarding the blog, he stated that the blog was instrumental in them getting the many items taken care of in their unit". So I've removed the original blog post. When the builder saw that his $$$$$ and reputation were being hit hard by the power of real estate 2.0 and the leverage it brings consumers he changed his positions and behavior accordingly. Isn't it beautiful?

Good job. I think it would have been better to have left the post, but removed the builder's name, for posterity's sake.
Either way, congrats on keeping them honest.
Thanks guys.
Jim, you may be right. I just didn't want to impact the condo itself anymore as the owner were concerned over their property values, etc. I'm assuming once Google indexes that page again it will be removed from its cache altogether?????
Do you or Brian know? Or will I have to contact Google directly to request the little blurb they have cached still when one searches those keywords?
Brian, your name came up yesterday in my chat with Ben Martin of VAR Buzz. It's a do follow blog now thanks to my influence. It seemed right to me that it should all be slanted in our direction such as having links occasionally that actually are followed by google to our respective pages.
And for you other readers who are not familiar with my colleagues, Brian and Jim are 2 of my fellow practitioners of Real Estate 2.0 who are also excellent realtors.
Jay Seville
Not being an expert, I generally assume that once Google has something, they never relinquish it.
Jim, we'll see. I figure that once google crawls it again it will lose all of its rankings as the URL contains no content anymore--google doesn't like that. So even in the worst case scenario that the snippet stays active, it will be completely irrelevant as it won't be found by anybody when it loses its relevance/rankings.
Brian Block
Jay,
Kudos to you for getting the builder to own up to their obligations.