Estate agents must become completely up-front about what they do and what they charge – and openly advertise their fees.
They also need to communicate their services far more positively if they are to win the PR war against online-only operations.
And the main reputational message, for both estate and letting agents, has to be about trust.
The advice has come from a public relations team which has worked with both large and small traditional high street agents, as well as online agents, including handling the launch of easyProperty.
David Martin and Becca Dwyer told Eye that online agents have set out their stall as the ‘people’s champion’, in a way that the high street has not.
The pair said they agree with Eye’s call to action this week and that it is time for full-service agents to hit back and put their messages across.
They said: “Our belief is that Eye is right, but at the moment most of the traditional agents are going the wrong way about it, favouring negativity over positive messaging.
“One of the main issues consumers have with estate agents is lack of transparency. There is so much distrust in what estate agents do and why they charge what they do, because agents do not communicate it to the public effectively.
“For example, the word ‘expertise’ is frequently used on this forum to justify why traditional agents remain the future of estate agency and why higher fees are justified. But what does ‘expertise’ even mean? Does it refer to an agent’s ability to secure the best sale price for a vendor?
“Perhaps it relates to finding the right tenant for a landlord? Or does it refer to an agent’s ability to pull the wool over an unsuspecting client’s eyes and charge thousands of pounds in unnecessary fees?
“Many consumers would feel the latter is perhaps more truthful than the agent community would like to admit. Having said that, it does not mean that it is true. Yet the average consumer won’t ever change her opinion if agents do not take the time to honestly communicate their worth.
“This is something that online agents are doing well: outlining the exact fees and services they provide and the methodology behind lowering their costs. They are becoming the people’s champion by utilising transparent messaging with the guidance of PR and marketing teams to reach their target audiences directly.
“Now, there is room for both online and traditional agents to take their share of column inches, but in order for traditional agents to take an even greater share, they will need to remodel their behaviour and practices to meet the expectations of a savvy modern day consumer.
“Traditional estate agency needs a makeover. Be honest and transparent about what you do and charge, and importantly, reinvigorate your marketing and communications to reflect this.
“If traditional estate agents are serious about defending their patch both in terms of market share and in the mainstream press and digital media, they need to tell their real story.
“They need to show why they matter.
“They should also provide a balanced viewpoint. That means accepting that online agents will take some share of the market and have a model that appeals to many of today’s consumers.
“At the moment, the popular reaction from traditional agents to their online cousins is to bitch and take snide swipes with very little to justify their stance. To the consumers this smacks of sour grapes and strengthens the stereotypes.
“Instead of complaining about online competitors, high street agents need to look within themselves and communicate in a positive manner what makes them an essential part of the marketplace and what they can offer that many of the online agents don’t.”
Martin and Drywer, of 26 Letters PR, have this final piece of advice for full-service agents: “Be brave, be open and be constructive.”
Comments (45)
To be frank I’m getting a tad wazzed off about this whole “war” shenanigans.
You can’t “fight” if you’re not face-to-face. It is make-believe fisticuffs – cyberscrapping, for want of a better word.
This whole debacle is turning into one of those stupid computer games where thanks to “the power of the internet” you can send your ‘troops’ (read “pixels”) into action from the comfort of your bedroom with another set of ‘troops’ controlled by some other saddo sitting in their bedroom… on the other side of the planet.
The Onlinies have the jump on the High Street – they have worked out all the cheats first and are chucking them in like grenades. Their tack – rush in, cause some bother and then withdraw to a safe distance. They do it by stealth; under camouflage, and relentless propaganda. They don’t fight clean so it is foolish to expect Queensbury Rules.
ALL they have to offer is Price Differential. ALL they have to justify it is that “(pick any number over 90)% of buyers/tenants start their search for property on t’interweb”. ALL they then do is list… and wait… and, in the main, bank the money regardless of outcome.
They rely on “reviews”. Here’s an excerpt from the latest I found for one of the onlinies on one of the review sites:
“We reently bought a house via… and were completely happy with the service. Having had 2 recent purchases fall through when using traditional estate agents it was refreshing to have such proactive and efficient service…”
REALLY? I’d be the first to tip my hat in their direction if such a review was Kosher but the stench of ******** is making my eyes sting on this occasion.
Now it’s well documented here on EYE what my thoughts are on the subject of rating sites for Agents so the above won’t come as a surprise to many – but will ASA take the view that false reviews are nothing more than false advertising?
Yeah, right they will! They can’t even get their heads around what is or isn’t “local”…
Great post PeeBee and right on all accounts. No queensbury rules in this battle, it’s being thought with subterfuge, dodgy figures and using the fact that estate agents can’t be trusted. You have to take your hats off, it’s so simple yet so clever.
There really is NO differentiator whatsoever, none, you list, then employ someone/a company to sort out/manage the review sites. simples.
We really could all do it, all of us, in fact i’m just off to have lunch with a tech investor!
Sadly a lot of people believe what they see on the TV and that is where the onliners are gaining momentum.
I vividly remember valuing properties in the weeks after a program on TV by Trevor McDonut which in effect told people to sell their property, go into rental and buy their own property back for much less after a few years. Many believed the TV ‘expert.’
I am now watching Purplebricks adverts, which appear cheezy and unprofessional to me, but which are obviously hitting home to some as all of a sudden I am seeing their boards appear.
And yes I am being asked more about fees.
We have to accept that the online boys will get a certain percentage of the market on fee alone. However TV advertising is not cheap and I wonder how deep the pockets of the onliners can be to sustain these campaigns. Conversely charging such low fees whilst running TV campaigns is a very dangerous business ploy and could see a lot of online businesses fail quickly.
I believe we will all be tightening our belts in order to adapt to survive. We’ve done it before.
TV advertising isn’t cheap that’s true but the agents are all doing rev share deals with the broadcasters who seem happy with the logic that online is only going to get more and more market share
Above, iThe Truth why we do not advertise fee is we don’t want to be brought into a fee war, and have a vendor solely choose us on fee.”, ‘Harree’ responded with “… If a lower fee agent is chosen solely on fee that means you have not been able to persuade them that your higher fee is justified.”
Oh, come on, Harree – the plot has clearly whizzed past you at Light Speed in respect of reality on yet another occasion here. If a vendor makes a decision based purely upon an ADVERTISED Fee, then how can any Agent expect to have the ability to “persuade” them anything without having the opportunity to communicate on some level?
I absolutely don’t for one second think, as you suggest, that I “know it all” – but I DO know that if you can’t communicate with someone you can’t tell them what you want them to know.
Maybe you need to reflect on your own communication skills – I would suggest starting with engaging the common sense area of your brain before pressing ‘Post Comment’…
Interesting the way so many “press releases” get torn to shreds, right here on Eye.
It isn’t a surprise, all these are super smart people who hope to flog stuff to agents but don’t have a clue that as a service supplier to a service industry there is no lower rung on the ladder. Being intelligent people, ego doesn’t allow them to respect agents or accept their place in the great scheme of things.
”Hmmm… am I the only one that smells the rodent here?”
Nope. Its stinks
Just about anyone could have written this article and pull it apart on the other side of the coin. However the comment ….
“One of the main issues consumers have with estate agents is lack of transparency. There is so much distrust in what estate agents do and why they charge what they do, because agents do not communicate it to the public effectively”.
For me that is it in a nutshell.
But don’t publish upfront, it requires that personal touch to explain and gain confidence.
Hmmm… am I the only one that smells the rodent here?
These people work with the orange “agent” – with their cheap-as-chips Fee structure starting at bot all plastered everywhere for the world to see – and then tell us all that the best thing we can possibly do is to advertise our (higher) fees.
Best thing? Best for who, I wonder…
Nice try. Not.
Yep PeeBee its spin with an alternative motive? Agents fees will be seen to be higher, as they provide a better service and the overheads to go with it. On-liners would have field day misrepresenting!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It’s just an assumption that consumers want this. Very, very rarely does a potential vendor ask what our fee’s are at the first point of contact, which leads me to think that they are happy with discussing such things on the valuation.
I, like most here would be happy to change the way we do things, should there be a call for for it but there is certainly no evidence that I’m losing out at the moment. If potential vendors want our fee’s disclosed up front then they would be asking for it. It’s the conversations we have with people on a day to day basis that should determine how you go about your business, not because a PR firm says so.
I agree with Wardy. It is very rare for me to be asked what are your charges before I go to a valuation, that always seems to be second agenda for vendors. May also explain why agents don’t get called out to some properties that others do and often charge higher fee’s …. always amazes me, if only they knew which leads to the argument about this story in the first place.
Ask a plumber or any other tradesman for a quote without seeing what is involved, asking about timescales, finish required, possible extras etc and you will be told the same story. “We don’t quote without seeing the job”.
We are not selling a commodity, we are selling a service. Fixed pricing has a place in many markets but, only if the service is clearly defined in advance.
Since when was our business marketed on fees?
By & large someone’s home is their most valuable financial possession.
So, when they invite me to have a chat with them about my company, me, my company’s estate agency service, fees/costs etc…. that forgive me that is exactly what I do….. then I confirm it in writing….. before they decide to go ahead.
I am not dealing with Apples!….I am dealing with peoples homes! I take my business seriously, I deal with people respectfully, I deliver the service that I said I would, and very often much more!…. I want to, and do!… provide a FULL ESTATE AGENCY Service.
The advantage for all my homesellers is that I am NOT an ONLINE ONLY PROPERTY LISTER!…. I am NOT interested in making a fast buck…. I am…. and here’s the difference!…. an E S T A T E A G E N T!
So, no need to hide behind a fee veil….. me, my business, my service is as transparent as a shiney clear glass window…. unlike many of the faceless, fast buck Online Only Property Listers!
That will be why my reputation remains intact almost 30 Years on and I am consistently busy! I have earned my reputation and I don’t need to compromise it to accommodate Non-Estate Agents!… my clients know me and I know them…. that’s the difference…. it’s about more than just the sale, just the fee, just the next house! I am so grateful to have a like-minded team of estate agency people around me that share and get my vision of what an estate agent is and does!
So, when self-promoting PR Companies spray “most estate agents…..” lines about…. I turn to the example of a certain M Clifford….. don’t throw stones in your glasshouse just for self-promotion!
Somebody best tell the on-line agents this as well!
This article is mainly nonsense. If sellers wanted “transparency” in high street agent fees they would have stopped using high street agents long ago and the onlinies would have the majority of the business now.
Reminds me of that Mary Portis programme recently where she was convinced that the public wanted agents to write more frank and honest property details…she, in short, was wrong .Only us experts know what the public want, not outsiders or third parties.
I have searched high and low for that Mary Portis show, seems to have been deleted from the entire internet, Just goes to show even she admits it was a mistake.
Hi, it’s Mary Portas, not Portis … 🙂
Not quite the entire internet Smile Please, No problem for the rainman and his system (27 seconds and I don’t type fast)
http://trakt.tv/shows/mary-portas-secret-shopper/seasons/1/episodes/4
It seems C4 have had all the rest taken down and may have missed that one, it might not play (I didn’t try) Big copywrite infringement notices all over the shop.
smile please , yet another unbelievable comment … ‘The Truth why we do not advertise fee is we don’t want to be brought into a fee war, and have a vendor solely choose us on fee.’ … If a lower fee agent is chosen solely on fee that means you have not been able to persuade them that your higher fee is justified. It’s exactly the same for Sainsbury’s Taste The Difference range over the Co-op’s basics range. If you think the same analogy doesn’t apply to EA fees you don’t understand Joe Public.
smile please … so it’s ‘professional’ not to advertise fees?? That’s a new take on it 🙂 So presumably you think Ryanair and Easyjet are ‘unprofessional’ for advertising fees? not advertising fees has nothing at all to do with professionalism and everything to do with generating valuations by disguising from the public what they will actually pay. If you smile please, or any other agent, was so confident in the quality of their service that it justified your fee (whatever that is) … then why not just advertise it? Your response, and that of others on here, is yet another indicator that some EA’s think that our profession stands alone and above normal business advertising practices.
Are you serious Harree???
Why would i advertise my fee? i am one of the most expensive agents (and successful) within my patch. If i go round advertising my fee at 1.5% and others are advertising theirs at 0.5% do you really think they will call me and i can pitch my business!?
Comparing estate agency to supermarkets is ridiculous. You may see yourself as a cheap supermarket but i see estate agency as a profession which has added value in service and obtaining the vendor the best price. All of which is explained to the vendor inside an hour at their home, free of charge and with no obligation to use us.
I think i understand the public very well as my track record shows. I think you do not understand estate agency you are a “Lister” not a property professional.
smile please … I am a high street agent with a fee over 1%. A ‘lister’ I am not.
“I am a high street agent with a fee over 1%.”
Harree – sorry but that says NOTHING. 1.01%? 1.99%? MAJOR difference.
Take VAT OFF both (as you are quoting a Fee I presume that in accordance with Legislation the Fee you are quoting is INCLUSIVE of VAT…) and you come in at 0.84% as a minimum or 1.66% maximum.
EITHER WAY, apply it to a £60k property and you are in deep doo-doo and allowing yourself to be humped for less than a grand!
PeeBee, I have a minimum fee … don’t you? Your crass know it all comments are a feature of amusement for me on this blog. Keep them up.
Know it all? The content – or rather woeful lack of content – of your comment was the basis of mine.
Don’t blame me when you make yourself look a complete numpty, Harree. It just deepens the doo-doo you’ve jumped feet first into.
Duh ….. there is only one of use who is a complete numpty, go look in mirror PeeBee.
I don’t use mirrors, Harree – they scare me.
You only use them in conjunction with smoke.
If we can’t agree who, in this instance, is the numpty, let’s leave it to others to cast the votes, shall we?
Well, Harree… no actual votes – but I would suggest the ‘Likes’ and ‘Dislikes’ for our respective posts speak volumes.
And before you suggest it – NO I HAVEN’T.
You?
Just because an agent is on line, does NOT mean it will take all money up front. There are many charging models, both on and off line.
Yet another “Think group” that does not understand our industry!
Why do we not advertise fee?
1. The public think we do not advertise fees as we want to pluck a number out the air when we are round there, the press echo this sentiment that agents cannot be trusted.
2. The Truth why we do not advertise fee is we don’t want to be brought into a fee war, and have a vendor solely choose us on fee. I dare say a 0.5% agent will not offer what a 1.5% agent does. This is why we do not give fee out on the phone either, we ask for a meeting to assess the property, speak about our marketing and then advise them of our fee. Its called being a professional. I do not see many divorce lawyers advertising a fixed fee on the net!
Whilst I agree that being transparent is a good thing, it can also defeat the object, which for traditional agents is to get a foot in the door and then justify their fees. Online’s business model is based around low (and in most cases) fixed fees.
Traditional agents can never win if the battle is based on fees.
They actually have an incentive NOT to sell it. Once they have been paid for the listing upfront the longer it remains on the market for them the better. More stock will make them look more credible when trying to attract others. Bizarre really.
It’s a very hard call to ask agents to post their fees online as we have to vary our fees depending on the property, price, advertising levels required, saleability, price relative to value, plus many other influencing factors from a commercial point of view. Online agents that charge whether they sell it or not have a much more straightforward job. List it, view it, leave it.
We had a situation recently where a colourful new online agent took instructions on a property at £50.000 over its value so we rang up the location expert and asked him why he’d taken it on. He said that it doesn’t matter to him what price they come on at as “they will get paid anyway once they’ve signed up.”
How does this help the general public when they are now going to pay out £800 for bad advice and an agent whose modus operandi is not to sell but to list?
Once they’ve got it on there is ABSOLUTELY NO INCENTIVE TO SELL IT.
Online agents profess to be cheap but never has the saying ‘Buy cheap, Buy twice’ been truer.
“At the moment, the popular reaction from traditional agents to their online cousins is to ***** and take snide swipes with very little to justify their stance. BUT THEY STARTED IT!!!! Only kidding! (Although actually they did.)
I agree with the article generally, although surprised to read that someone is owning up to being responsible for the launch of easyProperty.
To all those worried about being undercut if they publicise their fees, do you really want clients who seek out nothing but the cheapest fee? I say better to try to attract the more discerning clients…
Look, MF – the smutfilter got you again!
Try ***** next time! ;o)
HA! THAT doesn’t work either!! They’ve turned up the smutsensor a notch!
Hmmm… what about 6!tch or 6itch ?
There you go matey – always a pleasure… never a chore! ;o)
Thanks PeeBee! But hey, that’s not fair. The “female dog” word appeared in the main article; all I did was to copy and paste it….
I know – they’ve obviously turned down the smutfilter on THEIR side of the fence ‘cos it kicked out stopc0ck a couple of days ago…
Martin and Drywer, of 26 Letters PR, have this final piece of advice for full-service agents: “Be brave, be open and be constructive.” And be prepared to go out of business!
i have no doubt that if this week I start promoting/advertising a fee of 1.25% my competitors will immediately undercut me at every opportunity. There would need to be an insistence that all firms must openly quote their fee structure – and there would still be nothing to stop the fee quote being cut at the appointment!
There are corporate firms who quote a much higher fee than anyone else in our area(not publicly). Their market share is inversely proportional to their fees!
This is an advert dressed up as advice, create the problem, offer to fix it– best ignored,