Well, it’s quite a claim.
This online agent says it is “40% more likely” to sell a home than high street agents.
The claim comes from HouseSimple.
It has got estate agency trainer Julian O’Dell wondering as to what the science is behind this ‘rather bold’ statement.
So, we thought we’d put his question to our readership – of both online and high street agents.
We also took a look at the HouseSimple website where you can see the latest TV advertising, which claims to save the average seller £5,000.
Comments (27)
So what about all those vendors who do not have the internet. Yes not everyone has or wants to use it or can afford it. It used to be 40% of the population, haven’t a clue if its gone up or down but makes a mockery of HouseSimple statement when you have to put into the equation those that have the internet still want and prefer to use the high street agent ….. on-liners are still only a fraction of the market.
it’s a good thing other professionals didn’t use misleading campaigns to get their view across the unsuspecting public.
Remind me again how much more money was the government going to give the NHS if we pulled out of Europe ?
if they can do it, we all can !
Snapshot data – subject to an error margin – as advertised on UK portals – This data is probably the most accurate in the UK at present (albeit in BETA form)
All UK agents* Total for sale – 388,694
All UK agents Total SSTC/ Under Offer – 178,701 (marked as sstc/ UO on the portals)
All agents listings to sstc/UO – 45.97%
Listing to completion status – classified
HouseSimple Total for sale – 1,509
Total SSTC/UO – 683 (marked as sstc/ UO on the portals)
Listings to SSTC/ UO – 45.26%
Listing to completion status – classified
*All agents advertising on one or more of the principal UK property portals
Thanks Chris. Thats very telling. Not only for the % sstc stat but also for the fact that they only have 1509 in total. Far too low I would imagine to be anywhere near sustainable. If they cashed in on the apparent pipeline now they would regain £406,385. When you factor in what their costs might be over a rolling 12 month period they will be getting eaten alive. No wonder they have to come up with fanciful stats..
re: HouseSimple Total for sale – 1,509
Can you do these numbers for PB ?
We can do those numbers for every single agent in the UK who advertise on the portals, including how many ‘anomalies’ they have in their systems, and their key performance indicators.
Much of the data is commercially sensitive and valuable however, it has been verified and is now used by independent, highly respected property analysts and data professionals.
The numbers I have for PB do not tally with the numbers that PB claim for their listing to completion statement of 88% (and higher). PB dispute these figures and claim theirs are correct.
Imagine this… eventually, the only stat any business will have to publish is how many ‘informal resolutions’ they have had through the ASA. The lower the number, the more reliable their marketing and brand.
My thinking is this. This claim is no more outrageous than any others that are consistently ‘resolved informally’.
Nevertheless, the time has come for the ASA to clamp down (hard) on one of the firms making these claims just to set an example – “sure, 9 out of 10 times we’re going to resolve it informally… but do you want to take the risk of being the 1 who doesn’t?”
All the ASA need to do is come out all guns blazing on one agent who makes a stupid claim such as this (cos let’s face it, everyone knows that claim is untrue) just to put the fear of god in those who have hitherto approached their marketing campaigns as opportunities to lie.
If the ASA continue to resolve informally, no business has any incentive to publish reliable data – because they can just pull together some garbage that is more compelling than the actual data, then hide it under the bed when they get caught out.
ASA, are you listening? Call it an informal resolution if you want, or an honest mistake, but businesses are lying to the public day in and day out, and you exist to limit these practices. If you’re too lazy to do your job properly – fold. Otherwise, get a move on and give me a reason to trust the thousands of ads I see everyday!
Wonderfully put……it appears that false and misleading claims to gain market inroads is now perceived by many companies to be part of their overall ‘marketing strategy propaganda’. Evens if it is challenged the most you get is the equivalent of a rap over the knuckles….if that. Until companies that deliberately do this are charged or fined…other companies will do it more and more.
Just a reminder to any agent making claims they cannot substantiate through verifiable data. If you make knowingly false claims to make a financial gain, that is regarded as fraud in law.
I am sure Ros is in the process of doing it, but I just wonder how they are going to respond when asked to justify and prove their claims. Can’t wait to see it on PIE.
Chris, didn’t you have a ruling made against your website last year by the ASA? Isn’t that fraud therefore too?
There has been no ruling made against me by the ASA or any complaint ‘informally resolved’. I believe you are referring to a minor issue that Russell Quirk correctly identified on my website which had arisen due to problems we had suffered after 123Reg deleted our website, data and backups (along with 1.7 Million other customers at the time) and which we instantly amended.
All agents make occasional mistakes and I am no exception to that rule however, whenever I have made a mistake or published something in error, I have immediately withdrawn it and, where appropriate, issued an apology. What I have never knowingly done, is published figures or statements I know to be untrue or, have been unable to substantiate with reliable or reasonable data/ evidence.
There is a world of difference between an agent making a genuine mistake and, that of an agent deliberately falsifying figures/ statements to win business by deception as some agents very clearly have done and continue to so do. In saying that, I am not, for one second, insinuating that HouseSimple have deliberately falsified figures nor that their figures are necessarily incorrect. However, as stated above where I posted my figures, Housesimples figures need to be substantiated.
They’ve been claiming it for months.
Luckily, ASA made a ‘ruling’ – albeit one of their famed “informal” ones – against eMoov to remove their similar ‘33% more likely’ claim just a few weeks ago so this one should be dealt with in a similar fashion pretty PDQ.
I, and others, reTweeted Mr O’Ds original Tweet to @ASA_UK – let’s see if they respond. Any updates will be forwarded to Ros for a follow-up.
Just don’t hold your breath…
This looks like post-truth pseudo science to me. If it cannot be repeatedly verified and measured then it’s a dodgy claim. What is the frequency for selling 40% more likely than a High Street Agent?
I imagine they will skirt out of any action by saying for two hours on March 15th last year they were 40% more successful than High Street competitors in Coventry, Stoke Poges and Huddersfield. Total eyewash!
The inference they are drawing from the data is a direct claim. This is really dubious statistical drivel.
The time has more than arrived for all proper agents and our professional bodies to call in the Trading Standards boys (or girls) to get all this misleading advertising stopped. This particularly applies to the likes of Purple Bricks, who’s TV campaign claims that they do not charge commission, indicating that they do it for free.
So it’s not just me that thinks that about the TV adverts…I did wonder if I was looking through biased eyes. It is so..so..so misleading….but unfortunately it seems to be getting them lots of new customers.
What is clear is that some online listers are prepared to game the system as much as they possibly can to get the attention of customers….and the eunuch regulators are no deterrent whatsoever!
Am I reading this right? – We can now say “we are 60% more likely to sell than an online agent”, by their own admission?
Or you could say “according to housesimple we are 60% more likely to sell your home than they can” !!!
Direct Quote – I like it and in writing! we should jump all over this..
Dear House Simple.
I challenge you to come onto this thread and give us the evidence that your statement is factual.
Unless you do so I think we would be justified in drawing the conclusion that you do not have such evidence and that your advertisement is therefore an #alternativefact.
Very simple this – my next 12 months adverts will be ALL of these in a “Did you know?”
Voted Best High Street Agent in UK* The Most Trusted Brand in UK*
More Likely to Achieve £1,000’s more than any other Agent*
More likely to achieve the asking price and above*
Quickest Selling Timescales in the industry*
The BEST possible Internet coverage* A chosen Rightmove Partner*
A Major Zoopla Contributor* & OnTheMarket CoOwner* The only agent using all three!*
No Fees to pay* No Dodgy Loan Agreements* See us on your TV everyday*
24 – 7 365 communication software*
No More Upfront Misery* Coveted 6 Star Rating don’t settle for 5*
*Results and opinions of the people we asked, *link your computer to your TV to see us on TV every day when you visit ric.co.uk *We use all three portals, but you wont be on them
Fair commet. They advertise their brand nationwide, gain attention such as this article from their advertising and get people thinking / talking / and going to the House Simple website.
I think from today I will change the marketing message for my firm.
“Largest UK Estate Agent guarantees to sell your house in 2 hours and get you a price 25% higher than any other agency. Not only that but you will save on average £25,000”
This is the same bonkers message these online listers use time and again and get away with.
You know you risk being asked to change it in an informal resolution from the ASA if you do. I bet that puts the fear of … into you!!!!
The most commonly used method amongst many call-many agents is the following formulae for calculating statistics
L1E
where L is listings and E is anything you want it to be
No doubt they will be asked to substantiate it, obviously won’t be able to, and then it will be resolved ‘ informally’ by the ASA.
But in the meantime they will have gained traction with some consumers and earned business from it. As someone else said recently, advertising nowadays appears to be say what you want, whether it’s true or not, for as long as you can get away with it…..and then change it when you are made to. You have still won something without any penalty.