The boss of Agents’ Mutual has hit back at what he says are smear tactics circulating the market and which are aimed at deterring agents from signing up.
Chief executive Ian Springett told Eye that there are a number of misleading and untrue claims being promulgated – proof, he says, that the opposition are rattled.
In particular, he says Zoopla seems concerned.
Springett said that this was because, ahead of its planned flotation, some agents had terminated their contract in order to fund their support of Agents’ Mutual.
He said that common claims being put to agents to try to rubbish Agents’ Mutual include:
• Agents’ Mutual is London-only. In fact, over 70% of offices signed up are outside London.
• Agents’ Mutual is upmarket. Blatantly untrue, says Springett, who says that on the board are representatives of Spicerhaart, the NAEA and Kinleigh Folkard Hayward.
• It’s for big firms only. In fact, 78% of Agents’ Mutual members have just one, two or three offices.
Springett says that a number of new claims are being made, again with the object of damaging Agents’ Mutual. These new claims include:
• Agents’ Mutual is under-subscribed. Not so, says Springett, who says that 1,825 offices have signed up to Gold membership, and 99% have paid for it. This is against a target of 1,000.
• The constitution has been altered so the site could be sold. There is no truth in this at all, says Springett. In any case, changing the constitution could only be done with a 90% vote of the member firms.
He added: “All this effort to mislead agents tells me the two major portals are now worried. This concern is partly due to the fact that investment markets are becoming more aware of Agents’ Mutual.
“For instance, there have been articles about us in the FT over recent weeks which seem to have affected the Rightmove share price, whilst Zoopla’s planned flotation is their preoccupation.”
Springett said that just before Christmas, Agents’ Mutual passed the 2,000 mark of offices signed up via non-binding Letters of Intent for Gold membership.
He went on: “We closed that Gold membership offer at that point and issued contracts to be returned by mid-January. A total of 573 firms with 1,825 offices entered the contracts, committing to provide us with over £6m of funding.
“At the start of February, we called for funds under the contracts, and to date over 99% of firms have paid.
“Effectively, therefore, we are now at base camp. The £6m is to fund the development of the portal and the creation of the supporting operation; a sales team, comprising regionally-based field executives and a central telemarketing function; and the development of the brand identity and, in due course, the development of marketing programmes.
“This money is not to pay for the marketing activity itself, which will primarily come from the listing fees which members commit to pay from launch. The Gold members we have so far have contracted to pay listing fees of £7m per annum.
“Inevitably, there has been a pause in our member recruitment. Our progress to date has been based on the efforts of just a handful of people (including the executives working for nothing) and seedcorn funding from the founders. We are now organising to approach the tasks in a structured and properly-resourced manner.”
Springett said that work on the new portal has been under way since November with an in-house team in offices at Southwark, London. Brand development work has also started.
He added: “We opened Silver membership formally on February 12 and already over 240 offices have signed Letters of Intent. We also opened a second Gold membership offer so that all agents can have the option of contributing to the development funds and gaining extra benefits from so doing.
“We are getting great support from NAEA/ARLA who are giving us access to their members via mailings and meetings, and a variety of other agents’ organisations are also behind us. Over 2,500 agent firms are registered via the Agents’ Mutual website.”
Springett issued a clarion call to the industry, saying: “We now need to ramp up the momentum again and need to reach ALL independent agents with our message. Agents’ Mutual is an organisation of, by and for them, after all.
“In doing so, we can counter the very considerable misinformation being put about by the existing major portals and others with vested interests in preserving their position.”
An email from an estate agent based in Oxfordshire to Springett which Eye has seen backs up his claims.
The agent’s email ends: “This is having a negative effect on the agents that are already vacillating about joining Agents’ Mutual.”
Comments (23)
Russell
Won’t you be needing to advertise on one of Rightmove, Zoopla and Look4aproperty?
ALL independent agents? Seems that online agents are being excluded from AM’s plans. How is this inclusive and competitive?
Some years ago I was looking for funding to open a new branch. My bank spent half an hour slagging off a Scottish bank that was head hunting their staff and offering low interest rates to enter the commercial lending market.
After the meeting I responded to this ‘advert’ and got the funds faster at a much lower rate.
Every time a competitor mentions your name they are advertising your business, whatever they say about you, they are raising your brand awareness.
So just enjoy it.
Lance
Chartered Marketer
I agree with the principle of AM. What I am confused about and what I asked Mr Sprigett and Mr Savills’ is why they have delayed the launch of AM portal for so long. The key importance with a website is SEO. The easiest way to be recognised is to be long-standing. Why they could not launch, any-old-portal now just so something could be seen, whilst it is tinkered with.
The rest of us would ‘see’, something to invest in then….?
I think you answered your own question there. Who’s going to invest in ”any old portal”
Sprigett knows that it has to work from the get go and look amazing at launch.
To make AM work it must go live “fully working with all features live and active” The domain name may not be Agents Mutual??!! so quite rightly, branding, logos, colour schemes….everything is being kept under wraps for now.
How many “under construction” websites have you stumbled upon and “never” gone back to? The public will simply not trust the web address if their 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th visit shows a “coming soon” message (in my opinion).
AM will therefore launch this with a HUGE stock list. The advertising saying visit http://www.???.co.uk today to see 1000’s of properties this will carry huge weight and with FULL AGENT backing like nothing ever seen before means the public within a few days and weeks will quickly realise a new player has arrived which agents promote on valuations, viewings, registering applicants, windows, letters you name it!
The agent backing and promotion is the bit which will make this work….and with so much of their/Our own money in the pot….. IT HAS TO WORK and WILL…….
just saying 🙂
Have a good weekend by the way……
I’m still not clear on how the only one other rule is going to policed? If anyone has been to the meetings I’d be grateful if they could clarifie.
Thing is many of us have control over our data feeds but as I keep finding out, I can do nothing about the scraper sites.
When they say one other portal, do they mean literally?
Hi Wardy (long time no post…if this is the Wardy I used to read on EAT)
I agree, this will be the tough one, as some agents may have fallen fowl of signing one of the Zoopla 2 or 3 year fixed fee deals….. They tried flogging one to us, which if AM was not about I would have signed, BUT then if AM was not about they would not have offered the deal.
Ive come off Zoopla all together late last year and wish more AM agents would start the move now……
My opinion on your question – I think it is only 1 of the 2 main portals, so come off either RM or Zoopla. For me RM are possibly slightly relaxed in the knowledge most will drop Zoopla whilst waiting to see how good AM is, but sure enough will be worried..
If they freeze my next membership fee I know they are worried, if they don’t and raise it, they clearly don’t care….
There is no denying that Zoopla are worried, but I envisage that come the summer, rightmove will also start to realise the significance of the shift change in listings due to come in to effect Jan 2015 .
I’m with Wilko on the one other portal rule and I believe this to be a big USP for AM, in that every single office that goes with AM will be dropping their listings off one of the duopoly, and I believe this to be key to AM’s success and has to stay .
Some make this into being a massive challenge but I think it a lot easier than some think, we just need all agents to stand up, put your money where your mouth is and do the switch, it is as simple as that .
I think you’ll find the exclusivity rule can only apply for a few short years. It is there to encourage start-up business where there are near monopoly situations which discourage newcomers into the market – as with Rightmove and Zoopla.
Congratulations Property Industry Eye for bringing some competition into online publications for the industry. It’s also great that downloading your contents takes a few seconds rather than the usual two minutes of your main competitor! I look forward to receiving Eye regularly.
Well said Ian,
I wonder if that other paper will run with this story…..or continue to print the editors opinions only?
With regard to AM being anti competitive that is the main reason all our branches joined…..the dropping of one portal in favour of one owned by the insustry is the only way to make an impact and will save us 10’s of £1,000s over the coming years as it is a mutual not for profit company.
Nice to see some real facts about AM for once.
Will be interesting to see comments/debate relating to the FACTS and not the rumour or fiction.
Fully behind AM and everything it stands for.
We have come off Zoopla already and made our first move, after resisting the offers from Zoopla of very low fixed fees and even free welcome back offers.
I was hoping a few more AM supporting agents near us would make an early move and come off in readiness. Especially the first set of original supporters of AM. “You know who you are!”
Just like ChippyJames, we saw well through the attempts to sign us up for low fee’s based on 2 and 3 year contracts…..
I was at the ARLA/NAEA conference in Oxford yesterday, where Ian Springett and he did a much better job of explaining the costs for lettings only offices like myself. Where I was very supportive of the idea but felt the cost was prohibitive I am now much more interested and will be exploring marketing with them.
I already cut Zoopla when they tried to rip me off after the merger by charging me double for providing the same service so this would be an additional cost for me.
The sooner the whole industry wakes up and realises we need more control of the Internet the better. We need to be looking further down the road than our bonnets to be sure we know where we are going and what’s coming at us. Thank God Ian Springett is on “our” side. If you are an agent and have not signed up to Agents Mutual yet, I suggest you do.
If agents get fully behind this, promote this, and stop promoting RM & Z; in a few years from now why would anyone need RM or Z? Their greed can be their demise.
Erm… is it just me being dumb here – or is all this whinging on about ‘exclusivity’ malarkey a complete, hypocritical crock?
Remind me – a ‘Sole Agency/Sole Selling Rights’ Agreement between vendor and Agent amounts to WHAT, exactly…?
AM might, or might not, be the new ‘Hovis’. For me, the jury is out and I wouldn’t want to be putting my money down until I see the results. Some may think that is shortsighted – but at the end of the day I don’t give ‘my’ money away lightly. I want to see, feel – and benefit from – RoI.
Good for those who cash in if it’s an instant success – the early bird catches the worm and all that.
But in my experience it’s always the second mouse that enjoys the cheese… ;o)
Hey Peebee, good to see you on the other side:-)
I completely understand your position about waiting to see the product before deciding whether or not to jump on board.
But surely AM is about a bit more than that. I see it a transition of our listings from two portals to AM and change of bank account details that I pay my monthly standing order too.
Is it not that simple?
I should hope top brass at AM are able to rise above it. It’s completely true though. Not long ago I had the zoopla rep in the office for 40 minutes. 3o of those where spent trying to deter me from going with AM.
They must be worried, take it as a compliment Mr Springett.
“They must be worried, take it as a compliment Mr Springett.”
I would agree wholeheartedly with that sentiment, wardy mate.
In my opinion, RM will be the ultimate ‘winners’ in this malarkey – at Zoop’s expense. AM are simply a tiny fly in RM’s huge vat of ointment… but they may prove to be a massive nest of hornets in that of Z.
Defiantly PeeBee, Zoopla are the only losers here.
I don’t see that its anti competitive.. if you don’t like it, don’t join and stay with RM or Zoopla surely?
I concur.
Could somebody please explain to me how the Agents Mutual ‘exclusivity’ rule is not considered anti competitive?
Whilst, at the moment Agents Mutual will be considered a small part of the market against two ‘dominant’ media surely their ‘exclusivity’ rule by default aims to ‘seek control over a market’ reduce competition and is against all freedom of choice for businesses that operate in that market.