Agents’ Mutual will pose no serious threat to Zoopla’s stock market launch, a meeting of City analysts was apparently told yesterday.
Zoopla is said to have outlined plans to grow its revenue by 50% over the next three to four years.
Meanwhile, it has been confirmed that there is no lock-in period for agents buying Zoopla’s discounted shares – meaning that in theory they could make a 20% profit on the first day of trading.
A spokesman for Zoopla told Eye yesterday afternoon: “There is no lock-in period for those agents taking part in the member offer; however, to be eligible to purchase a further £2,500 worth of shares a year later at a 20% discount to the IPO price they would still have to be members of ZPG.
“We will in due course give an update as to the take-up of shares by our member agents.”
Meanwhile, one analyst who was at yesterday’s meeting, which was attended by some 50-60 other analysts, told Eye that Agents’ Mutual was discussed in some detail.
He said of the meeting: “Agents’ Mutual came up and my take was that they were quickly pooh-poohed as the fifth agent-owned portal to be launched, with a likelihood that a portal will in fact never launch.
“Alex Chesterman told us that he actually believed a launch was more probable than not, but was convinced the threat would be nothing more than a few news articles.
“He elaborated that Agents’ Mutual has no audience, which will be difficult to get on their budget. They haven’t got the whole of market and therefore they were unlikely to generate too much traffic.
“He said he believed that a lot of estate agents in Agents’ Mutual will get cold feet or that Agents’ Mutual would drop the restrictive advertising policy.”
The analyst said that Chesterman, who founded Zoopla and is its chief executive, cited a survey which claimed that 80% of vendors would not give their properties to an agent that didn’t have maximum market exposure.
However, the analyst said: “The ironic thing is that, should 10% of agents in Agents’ Mutual see this project through, they would most likely drop Zoopla and then Zoopla wouldn’t have total property coverage.
The analyst went on: “Mr Chesterman also stated that it was their intent to increase ARPA [Average Revenue Per Advertiser] by 50% over the next 3-4 years, although some of this will come from selling data.
“Still, I wonder if estate agents would be happy if they knew they were expecting circa 15% price increases per year over the next three years.
“The lead quality question came up and the chief finance officer stated that Zoopla leads were of equal quality to Rightmove and cost per lead was 30% cheaper. This point was questioned but the group hadn’t much granular data; suffice to say 60% of leads came via telephone and they treat this as an equal lead.”
Agents are being offered shares in Zoopla at a 20% discount and have until Friday to accept the offer. Shares are often offered with a lock-up, meaning there are restrictions on how soon the shares can be sold. But in the offer papers that agents have received, there is no mention of any such restriction – meaning that agents could sell their shares on the day that Zoopla launches.
The analyst went on: “With respect to the offer to agents, there is no lock-up, and I would personally urge anyone who can get these shares to subscribe as you can sell them on day one and net a profit for pretty much zero risk.”
He continued: “The question came up as to why the group were doing an IPO [Initial Public Offering] considering they were going to grow revenues 50% over 3-4 years.
“Mr Chesterman stated that some owners had initially envisaged some kind of exit route, but in my opinion, this is an opportunistic exit at maximum value because of the Agents’ Mutual threat.
“The fact that the estate agency portion of the share offering is coming from the existing players is a very clever way of exiting the stock.”
He concluded by telling Eye: “For your readers, the key takeaway would be – prices are going up just under 50% over the next three years.
“Longer term they believe the business will move to Australia’s biz model where the ARPA for leader REA is currently £1,332. The share offering is a great bit of free money to those who can subscribe.”
The analyst has asked to remain anonymous. However, his twitter address is below.
He has tweeted that it is in an agent’s DNA to flip Zoopla shares on day one and take the profit.
He has also recently been tweeting that Rightmove shares are a buying opportunity and has put a price target on them of £27.
However, broker Morgan Stanley yesterday included Rightmove in its list of ‘Hype stocks running out of steam’.
Rightmove was included along with Telecom Plus, Supergroup, Domino’s Pizza and Clarkson.
Morgan Stanley explained: “These stocks are popular, expensive, have high expectations and have rallied recently, but also have weak earnings revision trends.
“All meet at least four of the five hype criteria: in the top third of European stocks in terms of broker rating, six-month performance, price-to-earnings, price-to-book value and sales growth expectations. In addition, they have a negative and falling earnings revision ratio.”
Rightmove shares slipped 28p yesterday and ended on £22. However, please see our next story.
* Eye issues the following disclaimer: this website is not licensed to give financial advice, and it does not do so. The value of shares can go down as well as up. But if you can make a profit on the stock market, good luck!
Comments (68)
You should be a politician PeeBee 😉
Should I? Why?
It's not something I have a passion for.
Because it took you 8 sentences to answer a question that you could have answered in one sentence. I like your style PeeBee 😉
Paul H – "style"?
I'm not trying to sell anything to anyone.
Just poking, prodding – and gnawing at ankles.
THAT'S my 'style'… 😉
Sorry, peeps – but I'm going to cut'n'post this on all AM-related threads, as I think it should be flagged up.
I'd like to take some of you back a couple of years or so to a thread on 'that' other site – and for those who did not frequent that site, this will be new ground.
I'd forgotten about this – but researching Mr May's contributions to previous
articles brought it back under my nose:
"PeeBee on 2012-02-24 16:06:02
IF RM cost more than its' worth – if you got less out of it than you pay in – you and every other Agent would walk and it would shrivel and die overnight. It doesn't.
Time to face fact, I am afraid.
Look – you want to make it better – make your own!
How about someone who knows what the **** they are doing create a RM clone. All (…or most of…) the bells and whistles – but NON PROFIT MAKING. The site must be OWNED by the Agents who advertise on it. Each a shareholder. One price paid per branch/discipline. Any profit made after operating costs is then repaid to the shareholders proportionate to their payment.
OR – donated to charity. Get some positive publicity out of it!
Only thing – DON'T allow anyone to be a site spokesman!"
Erm… royalty cheques?
To be made out to my No 2 Jersey Account please, Mr Springett…
Hold on where these comments made by Mr May?! If so then surely he will soon be applying for a role at Agents Mutual?
Good find PeeBee (with a capital B?) 😉
Paul H
I think you misunderstand – the comment I have pasted was MINE, made in response to the usual melee of anti-RM posters on a story ran on Ros' previous site.
EYE have rightly requested that we do not upload links here – but if you paste my comment into your searchbar, it should bring the original thread up. I'm not going to risk the wrath of Ros – you'll have to do the work! 😉
I would add one more statement. At the time I made that comment, I was not actually a practicing Estate Agent. I was working on other things in the Property Industry (and NOTHING to do with websites, I add quickly…)
I don't think for one second it was an unique idea. I was probably regurgitating something I'd read somewhere else – but at the time it made perfect sense (another indication it wasn't MY idea…) and to be honest at the time RM-etc bashers were doing my chuff in – as you will see if you search back.
When backtracking Mr May, I have to dig very deeply. I have come to realise (but he had to spoon-feed me until the penny dropped…!) that this gent has, through several aliases, built up a large pool of individuals who respect his various characters – me being one of them (the 'individuals', I hasten to add, NOT the 'characters'…).
Dunno about you, young whipper-snapper – but I was brought up to 'respect'. Respect your elders; respect a uniform – respect plays a big part in my make-up (believe it or not). But, I work on the following formula:
A POSITION/TITLE 'commands' a degree of respect.
The person in that position must EARN respect for it to be worth anything.
Robert May's 'characters' earned my respect when I had clue not one who was behind them.
Now that he is, in his words, 'outed' – it all makes perfect sense.
Ah fair enough, in that case Mr May is obviously in the right place at Local property Index and apologies if iv'e caused any offence to him by mis-understanding your post.
However, and now that you have brought up your previous comments from the 'other site', perhaps an explanation is due as to why you are one of the people responsible for putting coal on the fire and now continually try to throw water on it??
Coal on the fire? Me? I wish. I'm WAAAY too small a cog in this mahoosive machine I exist in, matey. But thanks anyway. 😉
I was ONE PERSON, not even an estate Agent (at that time…) – suggesting that those dischuffed with what was available to them do something about it.
I'm going to go off on a tangent – bear with me.
I'm sitting here eating an apple for my lunch (really!). I like apples – and mores to the point, they 'like' me. I usually throw the core away, although od course it contains seeds for the next generation of fruit. I should, instead, plant some of the seeds – leave my mark, so as to speak.
Now, back to the point…
IF, in that post two-and-a-bit years ago, I planted a seed; IF that seed germinates; IF the resulting plant bears long lasting, tasty fruits to the Estate Agency world and its' customers – then I will sit back and smile to myself.
BUT… so far… I see a seed. I HEAR what that seed is going to be grown for – I even read it, here and 'that other' site.
Sorry – but there are some fruits that I just won't bring myself to try.
Not saying 'never' – just not today, thanks.
Of course, seeds need water. Maybe, then, in "throwing water on it", I'm doing more good than harm! 😉
No offence taken Paul. Thank you for the plug, I have been deliberately not mentioning it, so I can be respected (or not) for my opinion rather than the position I hold and certainly not using it to parasite off the back of stories others want to read.
I have to say I was most impressed to learn that PIE is now recommended reading for all AM members. Ros and Nick deserve their Number One spot but I do hope that the support for Agents Mutual doesn't get so top heavy as to spoil the independence of the publication.
I have to say that the PR machine is going great guns but as I said to you a few weeks agao make sure it is measured and on message.
There have been a couple of over zealous posts which I have chosen to ignore, but I really would recommend someone coordinates the output.
I have made a valid observation to White Knight, someone ought to read it and think about a reply. Not for my benefit but for the benefit of the chap who made that observation to me as HIS concern about AM once he had had the presentation.
I can win hearts and minds because I will do what Alex Chesterman and Miles Shipside have failed to do; engage with their customers.
Could I add that if you offered the anonomous poster in that thread every penny of Alex Chesterman's worth he would not take it for himself. He might take it and give it to cancer research but some people can not be bought.
That anonymous poster is clearly one in a million, Robert.
Another name for "Agents' Mutual" could have been "Agents Unite".
There is no going back now. Agents MUST unite, or face the consequences….
Check out Charlie Wright's take on the Agents' Mutual debate over on thebu2iness.com's blog
http://www.thebu2iness.co.uk/the-big-agents-mutual-own-goal-or-does-it-have-the-courage-to-change-strategy-and-win/
My motto (very original!) is "nothing ventured nothing gained" – so we have signed up as Gold members of Agents Mutual. However, skimming through BNP Paribas' 48 page analysis of RM and Zoopla (mentioned elsewhere in PIE today), it publishes the following reactions to the perceived AM threat:
Z: "Likely damp squib"
RM: "Some churn likely but RM well placed as market leader"
BNP Paribas: "Expect noise but new entity will struggle to gain traction".
It then goes on to say that "a successful AM launch would be negative for both players but likely more so for Zoopla".
Let's all remember, basic RM prices (according to this report) have risen from £95 in 2003 to £490 in 2013 (with no doubt more in the pipeline) and RM's profit margin has tripled since 2004 to around 70% today. That's what they make out of us agents who created this monster that now bites the hands that feed it. Zoopla after it launches will do the same.
Roll on January !
“Mr Chesterman also stated that it was their intent to increase ARPA [Average Revenue Per Advertiser] by 50% over the next 3-4 years, although some of this will come from selling data.
“Still, I wonder if estate agents would be happy if they knew they were expecting circa 15% price increases per year over the next three years.
Seems perfectly reasonable for portals to increase their prices circa 15% per annum, as agents compete in the current market and reduce their fee’s.
This is fine by me, as I will have my rates fixed for 5 years, whilst the duoplistic agents will be losing £1000's by having to cover the 15% increase not only for them but also for those going to Agents Mutual.
Me too Paul…I really can't now see the logic in people staying with Zoopla as they wont be advertising anywhere near the whole of market.Their effectiveness will therefore subside, the public will switch to RM (and AM) yet they will increase their subscriptions by 15 % a year…..no logic short, medium or long term to stay with them!
"I really can't now see the logic in people staying with Zoopla as they wont be advertising anywhere near the whole of market. Their effectiveness will therefore subside, the public will switch…"
EXCELLENT POINT, wilko. I agree with you a million percent there – you've done what no one else has done on the whole AM thing – even the presentation.
The two sentences above have won me over.
Oh – hang on… let me re-analyse that. Give it a "PeeBeeing"…
Houston – we have a problem.
AM "won't be advertising anywhere near whole of market" either, will they?
Sorry… count me out.
Well Zoopla should be worried and investors should be cautious. From my understanding a lot of the local associations that are going to join AM will look to play DPG and RM off against each other. They will have the buying power of around 50 offices and ask for preferential rates, then all the agents will drop one of the brands and I am guessing it will be Zoopla!
“Alex Chesterman …" “He elaborated that Agents’ Mutual has no audience, which will be difficult to get on their budget. They haven’t got the whole of market and therefore they were unlikely to generate too much traffic".
They don't get it…they REALLy don't get it…so let me spell it out in terms even CEOs of major portals may be able to understand.
RM & Z need to spend £Millions to attract stock. Estate Agents already HAVE the stock and it is the agent's prospecting and listings the maintains and increases their stock, including a good record in customer service and proven sales – SOLD boards.
As Agents have the stock, if the bulk of it is placed onto a certain website (AM), then stock ATTRACTS buyers. The buyers will go to where the stock is. THAT will give AM the exposure it needs without a massive advertising budget being required.
The advertising AM needs to utilise is NOT to gain individual properties, it is to gain the support of the Agents. When they join, they bring their stock with them.
I hope Mr Chesterman can now understand why AM does NOT need a massive advertising budget…the buyers will follow the stock on any portal, the same as they do with individual Agents at the local level – they register with agents who hold stock.
(Phew!)
I'm not sure they do spend millions to attract stock. They spend millions buying public recognition, once they have that the agents advertise their stock with them.
AM needs to have a plan and budget for similar public recognition if it is ever going to be a viable long term option…….I look forward to hearing it.
Hey Paul………what a fantastic article you wrote this morning……..could have been written minutes before the battle of Agincourt……..absolutely 1st class……..10/10
Thanks Billyboy, nothing like getting the blood pumping first thing in the morning.
@ Paul H – Indeed, this is a chance to change the course of events. When they come, I am a believer in taking those chances.
I believe a lot of us got to where we are, not because we didn't take risks, but because we did and we believed in ourselves.
Lots of us invested our own money to do what we do, the biggest risk of all I would say?
Having said that, I am not one for reckless risks, I like to throw the dice with them slightly weighted in my favour, as we all do! So when I see an opportunity like this, I believe it is worth it and so will champion that.
One final point.
When some of you took the decision to run your own businesses, plough money into a new office, expand, put your house on the line….
Just before that, did you say, wow, there are two or three independents agents here that have the market sown up. Look at that Countrywide mob, they have thousands of offices, millions of pounds to spend, I can't compete with that, I can't go up against that sort of company. This is a mad idea, setting up on my own as an agent?!
Or did you say, I'm good at what I do, there is a place for me in this market, I can take some of that market share. I can make it a success, I'm going back myself?
Well what would happen if all those people that backed themselves came together?
As we have had a few quotes this morning, here is one from me.
It is better to regret something you have done, than to regret something you haven't done!
"Or did you say, I'm good at what I do, there is a place for me in this market, I can take some of that market share. I can make it a success, I'm going back myself?"…..This sort of talk is going to make me launch another office!!!
I think I like you already Paul;-)
You've done it before, so you can do it again….
Inspiration is my other anonymous name:)
Got to get back to some work now, my manager has just walked in and he looks like he is in a bad mood!!! 😉
PS – I love to see all these people, as someone said, nailing their colours to the mast… anonymously. 🙂
No anonymity here, my name is Paul and always has been 😉
Is AM a threat? Of course it is. It's impossible to make any assessment as to how much of a threat until AM actually launch their portal and the letters of intent become a reality. Some may well indeed get cold feet, others will not. The question I would like to ask RM & Z is how many agents have failed to renew? I bet it isn't as many as heralded.
Rhetoric from both camps falls in to the category "Well, they would say that, wouldn't they"
I hope AM succeeds as it gives agents bargaining power and competition is healthy, a duopoloy most certainly is not . The assumption that because the big two are PLC's will drive up prices for shareholder benefit is flawed if those price increases drive away agents. If anything, service and results will have to improve. And what happens if the more extreme AM advocates get their way? Will RM & Z shareholders take it lying down? Beware the backlash – consider the effect of direct vendor listings.
Do fewer people shop in Sainsbury's because they make a bigger profit? No – they shop where they get best value for money.
I would join AM in a heartbeat if there wasn't a restriction. I embrace the idea of a mutual. In time, I could conceivably drop RM or Zoopla if AM does what is promised. What I won't do is throw away a service with an outstanding ROI and a universally recognised brand in favour of the unknown.
What will the outcome be? I have absolutely no idea, but am confident that AM is good thing, and as Diogenes said to Alexander, "who is afraid of the good?"
Eric, a tenner says you would have signed up by December.
Paul H isn't Northwood a franchise and according to page 13 of the PowerPoint listed as a threat? I am not asking the question other than for the sake of clarity. Why is Eric and his franchise group considered threat. The overwhelming number of agents I am talking to and you might guess that is a lot right now all share the same concern about the new Duopoly telling them who they can and can't advertised with, how they should spend the marketing budget of their own firm in order to benefit Agents Mutual and its shareholders who have actually more to gain from the restriction.
Even if Eric is convinced to join the unanswered question is are some threats OK (isk) and can join whilst others; presumably the somewhat unclear group of Online Agents referred to as parasites and FSBO/LBO, can't.
Hi Robert,
I've looked at both of the two powerpoint presentations that have been published by Agents mutual, and none of them contain any mention of 'threat' in fact thee is no page 13 in the first memorandum, perhaps we are talking about two different presentations?!
Northwood or any other franchise are no threat as far as I can see. Hence why Winkworth, Ellis and Co and many other franchises have signed up as gold members.
In what way could we be a threat? I am fascinated by that. I would have thought if we were a threat, someone would have contacted us by now. They haven't #notimportant 🙁
Instead of trying to be a third portal perhaps AM should consider and alliance with one of them. If the said portal were to offer to help finance, subsidise subscriptions from members and build an estate agent run portal, then AM could serve a purpose as an insurance policy against future huge price increases.
AM would not be the 3rd portal, they would end up being THE portal?! That's the aim.
AM don't need RM or ZP, they just need the support of the agents,which they already have and are growing every day!
That's it, in a nut shell.
Don't get me wrong I admire your passion but the bottom line is that as it stands, I am not convinced AM have enough support or is signing up enough commitment, to be a credible option by the end of the year.
I hope I'm proved wrong, however given that Zoopla have spent many millions and are still not the first choice consumer portal the end goal is in doubt, so perhaps the best way of achieving control of our data and costs, is to nail our colours to one mast.
"Fact: If we all pull off ZP and RM tomorrow, they have no business." – nor would you. 🙂
I have more faith in mine and your ability Mr Walker. 🙂
That's why the likes of Foxtons can be beaten when offering 0%, it's about the individual, not the price.
That reminds me, I best cancel our yellow pages adverts!!!! 😉
We are nailing our colours to the AM mast!
We already have control of our data, we just need to stop giving it to RM and Zoopla.
The wheels are now fully in motion. The majority of agents that got on board, did so before the AM mobilised their sales force and moved into the next phase of recruitment.
If Zoopla and RM don't have any stock to advertise, it will not matter, they can spend billions on their site, no one will come……
Precisely Paul, been saying this for months. AM will be a massive success if everyone simply shifted their listings, the consumer will not use RM or Z if no one is on it, the consumer do not give a dam about the name of the website.
Although talking of "billions they can spend on their site" I heard on a presentation the other day that AM's budget will be £14m for launch, and personally even if only 4000 agents sign up i'm looking forward to the competitive edge I will have over my comp by being on AM.
Staggering….
How long will agents continue to allow these companies to dictate to them? The arrogance is unbelievable, however when I see some of the comments written by some of my peers, I can see why they take this stance.
Whilst we gathering our army, the enemy try to look like they are gliding across the water, but there is carnage underneath as they frantically off load shares, try to intice agents with discounted shares offerings and employ PR men to paint the picture that AM will not affect them.
These are the actions of multi million pound companies that will know and will have advisers that know, that AM does pose a real threat. Their only chance of survival is to chip away at the agents and rely on the fact that some of them believe the spin that the duopoly put out and that they do not have the conviction to make the final push.
The duopoly claim that AM will have no audience. Advisers claim that the duopoly actually drive business to us and support our businesses. They claim along with some agents that the public will not want to list on the portal that does not control the market.
We operate in an industry where we go out and win the stock, then hand it over to RM & ZP, giving them money for the privilege, safe in the knowledge that they will continue to ramp up charges and invent new ways to extract money from OUR data and OUR stock.
We have always won the stock, way before RM & ZP showed up.
Fact: If we all pull off ZP and RM tomorrow, they have no business.
Fact: If we all pull off one of the above tomorrow, AM become the 2nd largest portal in the country.
Fact: Agents control the stock.
Fact: The public couldn't care less what the largest portals are called and who runs them, they will just want to be where everyone else is. So if no one is on RM or ZP, they WILL NOT want to be on there!
This is not just about costs, this is about taking control of what is ours, this is about being as one, to safe guard the interests of our livelihoods. This is about not being dictated to by people outside of our business that in reality bring nothing to party apart from the stock they somehow managed to pick pocketed from us!
In reality you could drop them both.
Take control.
We stand on the edge of the battlefield, ready to take down the enemy, with the bigger army and all the weapons (stock) but we need the conviction to drive home that advantage.
Now is your chance, don't waste it!
Comment or rather sentence of the week?
"Now is your chance, don't waste it!"
This is a chance and our very last chance, if we do not take this opportunity and make it work….. we should all stop moaning about RM and Z forever.
time to put up or shut up……………
Thanks Ric, I've never been quoted before.! Good point by the way.
Hi ric, matey! 😉
"time to put up or shut up……………"
And you've been saying that for HOW long, bud?
Great response Paul. I do however think AM screwed up by insisting you drop either RM or Z. I believe most agents with a brain recognise that RM and Z have no interest in the wishes or desires of the agent. However dropping one has to be a choice made by the agent not a decision dictated by AM. Once they start dictating criteria then its "out of the frying pan and into the fire"
How many portals have entered the market and failed with the high risk, high cost strategy of simply launching a new portal and trying to attract agents. Agents cannot afford a third portal, and so Agents Mutual must enter the market in a position of strength to succeed, to do this it must cause disruption, it must take listings and revenue from the duopoly. The one other portal rule gives Agents Mutual the best possible chance to succeed, just ask Chesterman and Forbes who are all trying to flog their shares like no ones business!
Paul H. I get that. However, I don't win business by insisting my clients don't use competitors.
Yes but your an agent now a web portal.
Spot on!
Thanks surreymac,
I do understand that the one other portal rule is proving to be the most problematic hurdle for some to get over, however this strategy is not about dictating the criteria, it is part of the strategy to take control and be the number 1 portal for our clients to go to.
AM are not naive enough to think that they could get everyone to drop both RM & Zoopla in one go, although if everyone did, that would save some time and achieve the goal today!
In order to become the number one, we need to inflict real damage and make an instant impact by taking a massive share of the portal market. Once this is achieved, the process of dropping the remaining portal becomes a natural bi-product of the successful launch.
Without this strategy, AM just becomes another portal trying to enter the market and compete against the duopoly.
5000 agents delisting overnight and dropping one of the portals is a game changer of epic proportion.
If AM isn't a success it will be down to the inability of the sector to take control and take their chance for change.
If the critical mass of agents needed is met, AM will succeed and it will be in OUR control and those agents that did not embrace it, will follow at that point.
I hear people saying they will not be dictated to by AM, or told how to run their business, but this couldn't be further from the truth, it's about running OUR business.
The irony is that these people are happy to let RM and Zoopla dictate to them over how they list THEIR stock and how they pay for it. Every year you sit in a room or on the phone and get told what you are going to pay, and you take it. They fight a bit, pull faces, moan, but in the end, cough up because everyone else is doing it.
I'm not against companies making profits or increasing fees, but where is the value and where is the extra benefit for us paying more to RM and Zoopla to list OUR stock.
Oh yes that's it, here is a new feature that doesn't make much difference, but you better have it, because all of your competitors are taking it – Cue panic!
Some might feel I'm a bit too Pro AM, but if we don't seize the moment, it will be gone.
This is serious. This chance will not come again, so I'm doing my bit to help people sitting on the fence, come down on my side, the side I believe, along with like minded people that operate over 2400 offices, to be the right side.
AM can't come along and tickle the problem, it needs to take market share and kill off the supply line to its competitors, by starving them of the stock we control.
"Fact: If we all pull off one of the above tomorrow, AM become the 2nd largest portal in the country."
Fallacy. No it doesn't. It currently doesn't exist.
"Fact: Agents control the stock."
Fallacy. HUGE fallacy. Agents HAVE the stock. Offer it "For Sale" or "To Let".
VENDORS AND LANDLORDS "CONTROL" IT.
"Fact: If we all pull off one of the above tomorrow, AM become the 2nd largest portal in the country."
Fallacy. No it doesn't. It currently doesn't exist.
"Fact: Agents control the stock."
Fallacy. HUGE fallacy. Agents HAVE the stock. Offer it "For Sale" or "To Let".
VENDORS AND LANDLORDS "CONTROL" IT.
Come on PeeBee, you can do better than that: FACT!
At least give me a kicking on something meaty, rather than playing with my words, but just to appease you, let me rephrase. If on the day of launch, we all come off, AM become the 2nd biggest. Now is that better?
As for controlling the stock and another play on my words, I will say this.
When the vendor or landlord instructs you, they handover the control to you. They put their trust in you to deliver what you promised them on the valuation. They buy into you, and employ you to sell or let their property, using the skills and resources that you have available to YOU, not them, because if they had all of those resources and skills that you possess Peebee, then we are all in trouble my friend, as that is the day that we are not needed at all!!
Paul –
"Come on PeeBee, you can do better than that: FACT!"
Didn't know I had to – you put forward an extremely long and detailed argument – I think I smashed it in three sentences. FACT. 😉
But… to your last paragraph of the above, which I completely and comprehensively agree with in its' entirety – ESPECIALLY the bit that states
"…using the skills and resources that you have available to YOU, not them…"
Just remember that, by going down the AM route, those "resources that you have available" are somewhat limited by design. Sorry – also FACT.
You will note hopefully my comment to wilko, in response to his ""Seriously, and out of a genuine interest, at what point would AM have to reach for you to sign up?"
MY response – "When – AND ONLY WHEN – I can see that it will not adversely affect my clients."
I stand by that 100%. I would hope that you and others would agree.
Paul – you (all) and I want the same. We are just looking at a POSSIBLE solution through different sets of eyes.
I am the 'yang' to all of the 'ying' that is being posted by others, including several 'Pauls'.
Does that make me the 'anti-Paul'…? 😉
Never took you as the anti Paul Peebee and I respect everyone's opinion and I also agree about protecting our clients interests and doing what is right for them.
My view is that if we are to make a success of this, we need to pull together, spread the word and get this thing done.
If you are of the mind that you will switch when it is successful, then I would say, what are you doing about making it successful now?
We can make it happen and we can make a difference.
If AM doesn't get to critical mass, then it fails. If we get the industry on side and get behind it we all win, including your vendors and landlords. That's not in AM hands, it's in ours.
Rather than pouring cold water on the situation, get behind it, because you will seek the benefits of AM if it makes it, as you clearly want to look after your clients.
On today's breaking news postings, there are many people planning to spread the word and get others on board, are you going to be one of them, or will let everyone else do the hard work?
I'm sure, unless I have misread the situation you are not anti AM at the point it is an actual working and a successful entity.
So what is the reason that you want to be the king of yang? I agree there needs to be yang, but not just for the sake of it.
As we like to quote each other on here, you said only when I can see that it won't adversely affect your clients.
Well you know if AM is successful you will join, so why don't you, on behalf of the clients that you want to look after, champion AM and help your fellow agents make this a reality?
If AM isn't successful, if you are so inclined, you can say I told you so, or if it is, you can say I helped make it happen.
There will only be two outcomes, one is we take control, the other is the big 2 continue to control us and having defeated the only realistic chance of breaking the duopoly, the pain will get worse.
The actual task ahead is simple, make it work and make it a success.
Hypothesising about the success of AM is pointless because we do know that it can become a success if we all join.
So let's put our energy into making that a reality.
The reality is Rightmove, Zoopla and for that matter AM have no portal without the inventory controlled by the rank and file of independent estate agents in the UK.
Of these three portals only one understands how to engage with its members and respects the work we do to make their Portal possible, and that's Agents Mutual !!
It's simple, the Estate Agents up and down the country have woken up and will undoubtably move as one. No more year on year rate rises without justification, and no more reinvention of existing services to gain extra revenue !!
White Knight.
"The reality is Rightmove, Zoopla and for that matter AM have no portal without the inventory controlled by the rank and file of independent estate agents in the UK."
REALLY?? What about the Corporates?? And, in the case of AM, the FSBOs, the Onlines – all those that WON'T be listing on there?
I VERY much doubt that "the Estate Agents up and down the country… will undoubtably move as one."
Never have: never will, I'm afraid.
But, hey – prove me wrong.
"I VERY much doubt that "the Estate Agents up and down the country… will undoubtably move as one."
Never have: never will, I'm afraid."…….Sorry to interject Mr Peebee but can I refer you to the article at the bottom showing 150 geordies munching on cheese and pickle sarnies and sipping on newcie brown ale whilst discussing what portal they are going to drop!
In addition didn't Taff state last week that some 90% of agents from West Wales have all signed up to gold.
Sorry to be a killjoy but I believe these two examples alone kinda blows your theory….over to you;-)
Have you any clue how many agents there are up and down the country Paul?
Agents Mutual have apparently signed up firms with 2300 offices, Rightmove have 9500 FIRMS, many of whom will have multiple offices, do the maths, then tell PeeBee that his theory does not hold water!
"Have you any clue how many agents there are up and down the country Paul?"12,000
"Agents Mutual have apparently signed up firms with 2300"….It's 2400 but lets not split hairs!
Peebee states that agents never have worked with each other and never will….I'm sorry but this is clearly being proven wrong. Again see Taff and the geordies!
"Sorry to interject Mr Peebee but can I refer you to the article at the bottom showing 150 geordies munching on cheese and pickle sarnies and sipping on newcie brown ale whilst discussing what portal they are going to drop!"
No – sorry but you are wrong on pretty much all accounts there, Paul H.
1. There were NOT 150 people – the people that were there collectively represented 150 BRANCHES. The chap at the head of the table has near 20 alone…
2. Most of them aren't 'geordies' (capital 'G', please – like the 'B' in PeeBee… 😉 ). There ARE some – but also there are a fair smattering of Mackems, Sand-Dancers, Smoggies and Sheep-Worriers (from the wild hills of Northumbria – and I changed the second part of their name in fear of repercussion from EYEs anti-naughtiness software!) as well as the mahoosive majority of the North-East region that those groupings don't cover. And that doesn't take into account the number of immigrants from far-off places like Yorkshire and even beyond…
3. We don't eat cheese and pickle sarnies here 'oop North –
it's tripe and lard sandwiches, and washed down with Lindisfarne Mead – Newkie Brown isn't made here anymore so it's banned!
4. Do you REALLY think that all 150 branches will agree to collectively drop 'Portal 'A' or Portal 'B'?
As far as West Wales goes – does "90% of agents" actually enter double figures? You know what they say about "statistics", matey.
For all we know, they may hold THEIR meeting in a telephone box! 😉
And, to quote your own words as proof of my claim "never have…":
"What we are now seeing for the first time EVER is estate agents working together on what is the same common goal."
You are seeing the ripples on top of the water appearing to flow in one direction, Paul H.
You fail to see (…or simply choose to ignore…) the undercurrent.
Pee Bee.
"I VERY much doubt that "the Estate Agents up and down the country… will undoubtably move as one."
Never have: never will, I'm afraid.
But, hey – prove me wrong."
How can we prove you wrong when you (and others) have no intention of buying in …..or do I detect the first indication that you may be a teency bit interested in AM if 99% of of agents sign up?
Seriously, and out of a genuine interest, at what point would AM have to reach for you to sign up?
"Seriously, and out of a genuine interest, at what point would AM have to reach for you to sign up?"
When – AND ONLY WHEN – I can see that it will not adversely affect my clients.
Did you expect any other answer from me, wilko?
But surely when making your last comment , in your mind, there must be a benchmark when you would consider that it didn't adversley affect your clients and would advertise?
Yes – and that would be "not yet"… 😉
Do you still pay your local newspaper £300 a week to advertise, White Knight? Perhaps Agents Mutual can set up local newspapers for us all and we can bring the existing ones to their knees whist we are about it. The logic you apply to the portals is the same!
You also need to understand how Rightmove, or 'the monster' as Ian Springett dubbed it, has come to be the biggest. We don't use Rightmove to make it the biggest, we use it because it has become the biggest. Why has it become the biggest? because it has been the most effective at promoting itself to the public. We as agents have no control over the public use of the internet, so when a prospective seller or buyer contacts you, having found you via Rightmove, what do you think they will say wehn you tell them not to use Rightmove any more, but only to use Agents Mutual?
I would be interested to hear if all the anti AM people have actually spoken / enquired about signing up? Have they actually listened to the proposal or have they made up their own mind without investigation.
Not suggesting you haven't, but would be interested and if you have?
"having found you via Rightmove"
That's not very good, if you can only be found via right move?
Right move don't use their own money to promote themselves, they use OUR stock and OUR money that we give them in the millions.
You don't have to control the public's internet use, they will self regulate. They will go where the property is.
Ther are 2400 offices now, but what will happen when there is an announcement about 3000, 4000 and then 5000. What is the tipping point at which agents will believe?
It's one step at a time and this is only just getting going.
Many thousands may have made up their minds already, many thousand may not have decided yet.
AM will continue to engage the industry and continue to discuss their strategy, as more agents continue to join. If you haven't investigated AM fully yet, I would urge you to do so.
As Paddy McGuinness says…
THE POWER IS IN YOUR HANDS!