One of the founders of Agents’ Mutual has totally dismissed concerns about corporate agents’ stock not appearing on the new site.
Ed Mead, of Douglas & Gordon, said he does not think it will make any difference.
The corporates are shareholders in Zoopla, and none – as far as we are aware – have joined Agents’ Mutual or expressed any interest in doing so.
Mead said it would not matter because the corporates – Countrywide, LSL and Connells – have only around 10% of market share between them.
He said: “I don’t think their stock not appearing on Agents’ Mutual really matters.”
Mead also said that the “only one other portal” rule is not a concern, and is no more than a business model. Agents, he suggests, will co-brand, and have every confidence in their business model.
Mead has given succinct answers to ten questions posed to a “great portals debate” feature that appeared in Peter Knight’s very good new print magazine four-i.
The questions (which Eye has slightly abbreviated) and Mead’s answers (which we have slightly elongated) are as follows:
Q. The corporates will all stick with Rightmove and Zoopla. None of their inventory will appear on Agents’ Mutual – what impact will this have?
A. The corporates are circa 10% of the market. I don’t think their stock not appearing on Agents’ Mutual REALLY matters.
Q. Members of AM will not be allowed to promote their membership of either RM or Z. What consequences might this have?
A. Given Agents’ Mutual’s advertising spend, is it really so difficult to believe the public will check three rather than two portals. Agents will co-brand.
Q. If left unchecked, will Z raise their prices by 50% to match RM and then will both portals increase prices to unacceptable levels?
A. They could if they wanted to, and being plcs, who’s to say pressure wouldn’t force them. AM is a way to countermand that.
Q. AM believe the majority of their inventory at launch will come from agents dropping Z. What will this do for RM’s position?
A. In some areas it would reinforce RM’s position but agents would see that [the AM model] works and disrupts, and would gain confidence in AM.
Q. How will the consumer feel about a portal owned by agents? How might they react to their property not being advertised on one or both of the established brands?
A. Why would a consumer notice – they’ll just see AM advertising and co-branding. Plus are three portals really tougher than two to look at?
Q. Can AM succeed where others have failed (including Google and NAEA)?
A. This question shows a lack of understanding. AM brings both the agents’ advertising spend and their stock. Past entrants didn’t.
Q. Is AM the last stand for the traditional agency model? If it fails, will it herald the demise for full service agents?
A. [Supporting AM] shows agents’ confidence and that they believe that AM protects their business model and serves the market best.
Q. How might Google fit into the landscape? Will there be a role for the world’s largest search engine if the consumer cannot conveniently access all properties available for sale and to rent in one location?
A. Google always has potential to disrupt but thinking public won’t look at three rather than two portals seems counter-intuitive.
Q. If Google were to re-enter the market, will this open the door for private listings on their platform?
A. Private listings have always been a part of property sales. But wherever they list their properties, sellers seem to prefer a human interface.
Q. If AM attracts a high percentage of agents, then will anti-competitive legislation allow them to restrict agents advertising on other sites? If so, might this result in agents paying three or more fees?
A. Most sites have started this way [restricting where agents can list properties]. Primelocation started with total exclusivity. It’s a business model, no more.
Comments (37)
Robert…if you read Danny's post he was suggesting that people will not look at 3 sites, if so then clearly both yours and AMs business is flawed, correct?
Sorry not correct at all Paul, it is easy to make assumptions based on what you are being told as fact by people you respect, it is then all too easy to dismiss and attempt to belittle anyone who challenges that thinking.
Robert, Ed Mead said…."is it really so difficult to believe the public will check three rather than two portals."
Danny than said that it is "naïve" to "believe that the general public will log into every different site"….
Now either Danny has misunderstood what Ed Mead is saying or he believe that the consumer will not use a third portal, if this is the case then you and AM are doomed to fail.
This is the point I was making, if you want to make it into anything else then that is up to you.
There was no reference to AM in your post so it is fair to read it in the context of what was written at the time, not what you are claiming now.
The unmentionable portal has been designed to cope with there being 2 major portals along side the multitude of boutique portals that currently exist, are in development or planned for the future so it has not been ******* by anything. If that is true for AM as you seem to be saying now that possibly explains the dogged emphasis on the one other portal rule.
"so it has not been ******* by anything"…Danny thinks it is do you agree with him?
I remember the days when there was findaproperty, primelocation, rightmove, then all the others rolled along trying to grab some market share. Rightmove was always market leader but findaproperty and primelocation always generated leads!
Following on from 'danny' Mr Mead DOES appear to be fixated on the 'three not two' issue:
"…is it really so difficult to believe the public will check three rather than two portals."
"…are three portals really tougher than two to look at?"
"…but thinking public won’t look at three rather than two portals seems counter-intuitive."
Is this evidence that, for some, if they say something enough, then even THEY will start to believe it?
Anyway… it's immaterial.
The simple fact of the matter is that the public WON'T HAVE TO change their browsing habits.
The properties will still be listed on RM OR Z – just not both.
Therefore, visiting TWO portals will still suffice.
Or am I wrong?
Please feel free to point out the error of my ways, Gentlepeeps… 😉
Not on holiday Paul, just not posting on anything where my presence, opinions and experience is considered counter productive or which can be easily misconstrued.
You will find I did post yesterday but it was 4 or 5 pages back in the archive.
Three times Mr mead has said "is it really hard to believe that the public will check three websites not two… Well actually Ed.. Yes , yes it is . Firstly one of them will be brand new with no history , user base , downloaded apps etc , secondly knowing the general public it's hard to fathom them looking at 3 sites . Ask the next person throughout the door which money site they found there mortgage on. Then ask them if they checked the results on that site with money super market, go compare and …let's say … Lloydstsb . If they say they just went on one then you can ask them "well why, it's the biggest financial commitment you'll ever make and you just picked one off the website you use " to believe that the general public will log into every different site is .. To paraphrase Ed",nieve"
"to believe that the general public will log into every different site is .. To paraphrase Ed",nieve"….Well that's ********* up Robert May's business plan then.
Don't you go worrying about me Paul. Using the figures you have supplied; 7000 target for AM and 2000 for the corporates I have got over 9600 branches to target. That would put the portal for whom I am working in 3rd spot, 2nd if you manage to take out one of the Duopoly. (The business plan of the portal for whom I am working tends to agree with the City in respect of the impact of AM)
I was not having a dig at you Robert.
Also the target for AM for launch is 5000, I have said that I think they will achieve 7000.
In the same way as you weren't trying to insult Peebee's integrity last week.
Turning this on its head:
Q. The corporates will all stick with Rightmove and Zoopla. None of their inventory will appear on Agents’ Mutual – what impact will this have?
A. The corporates are circa 10% of the market. I don’t think their stock not appearing on Agents’ Mutual REALLY matters.
If only 2850 independents join AM and have 10% of the stock, will them being on AM and not RM or Zoopla matter to either of them?
🙂
"If only 2850 independents join AM and have 10% of the stock, will them being on AM and not RM or Zoopla matter to either of them?"
Are you saying circa £2million per annum LOST revenue (just for starters) is of no matter to either of them?
Is your timesing as good as my debating wilkoy? 2850 Indepedants is about 7000 branches. Your figure '£2million' suggests £25 per office per month- What's the fuss about?
Hi Mike, it sounds like you've got loads of questions/concerns and clearly you want to bring out people like Ed Mead in to the debate so you can discuss this head on on this forum. Funnily enough I remember having the same discussion with another poster who works for a portal, his probably on his holidays hence no posts today. In any case(and as I told the other poster) I reckon your best bet is to put all your questions/concerns directly, have you possibly sent an email/tweet?!
What are you on about now and who is Mike?
Tike Mike……
"Do what you like, not trying to stop you, just saying you're wasting your time."…I didn't realise I was even selling to you, I was just replying to a comment, as you have done. Perhaps we should leave the comment section blank from now on then 😉
"I'm not buying the numbers (or the attitude)"….Indeed, as you've clearl stated.
"VEN if you get 7000 branches as you boasted/posted the other day telling someone else why they MUST believe,"…..I told someone that they MUST believe, when on earth did I do this?
"ith at best 30 in 100 available props there won't be enough stock to make the public visit or come back for a second look. Bored already, convince Peebee and I'll listen. #should'veexpectedthat"…..Hold on I thought I was wasting my time trying to persuade anyone.
Welcome to EYE Mike!
Benetton Paul you are like a teacher stood at the front banging on and on and on. It's almost as if this is your own blog site.
Wilko get over yourself, show where the FACTS have come from.
"Wilko get over yourself, show where the FACTS have come from."
I am not Ed Meade, so can't help you there tikey. Besides, you are the one who seems to disagree with the FACTS yet you can't show any reasons why they are innacurate, further proving my initial point that there won't be many arguments against these answers, which is still very true at my time of writing.
""Wilko get over yourself, show where the FACTS have come from." I am not Ed Meade, so can't help you there tikey."
So… simply because it is Ed Meade that has committed them to screen, you are stating without doubt that they are fact?
Okay – here's my starter for ten based upon the "facts" you trust so faithfully, wilko –
Mr Meade states "Given Agents’ Mutual’s advertising spend, is it really so difficult to believe the public will check three rather than two portals."
Sorry – WHAT "advertising spend" is he referring to? So far – with less than 6 months to "switch on" day, total spend = £bu99er all.
And, from what I understand, that mahoosive total ain't gonna rise until November.
Floor's all yours, mon ami…
Very comprehensive answers to the the "usual" questions being fired around.
I dont think we will see many comments here that can argue against these answers given as they are, in most part, fact based.
Proven already by the debating skills of tike Nick.
"Proven already by the debating skills of tike Nick"……His like a little Yorkshire terrier bless him/her!
Not round here. The Corporates only seem to manage a reasonable market share in areas of weak independents. 5% and no more in this part of Essex. Roll on AM.
" The Corporates only seem to manage a reasonable market share in areas of weak independents."
So… AM will no doubt allow these "weak independents" to advertise.
What happened to The AM Collective's mantra that it is "the site for the proffessional (sic) agent"?
Grenville Turner just hasn't got around to your area yet. Where he and the others have focused they are better than 50%. They're the real threat not the online spivs and franchises. Disregard them at your peril!!!
"They're the real threat not the online spivs and FRANCHISES"…..I've heard this before?!
"Mead said it would not matter because the corporates – Countrywide, LSL and Connells – have only around 10% of market share between them"
Really? Mr Mead really needs to substantiate that claim. Some places are 80% dominated by just 3 corporates.
"Some places"….I think you have just partially answered your question there. In some areas there are hardly any corporates certainly in some parts of London.I'm sure Mr mead is referring to the number of branches across the country which equates to roughly 2000 branches and therefore 10% of total branches.
Sorry Paul H/ Paul? You are wasting your time preaching the AM gospel at me, please don't bother. Unless you are Mr mead (sic) don't try explaining obvious propaganda with what YOU reckon he meant.
The list of those not allowed on AM is now so long there will not be enough stock to be considered a true portal. Is the URL ‘Primelocation2’ available? #readitinthetelegraph
"Sorry Paul H/ Paul? You are wasting your time preaching the AM gospel at me, please don't bother."…Do you mean wasting my time replying, are we not allowed to do that anymore then?
"The list of those not allowed on AM is now so long there will not be enough stock to be considered a true portal." ….Really and may I ask what your definition is of a "true portal"?
Do what you like, not trying to stop you, just saying you're wasting your time. I'm not buying the numbers (or the attitude)
EVEN if you get 7000 branches as you boasted/posted the other day telling someone else why they MUST believe, that's less than a third of agent branches. With at best 30 in 100 available props there won't be enough stock to make the public visit or come back for a second look.
Bored already, convince Peebee and I'll listen. #should'veexpectedthat
"…Mr mead is referring to the number of branches across the country which equates to roughly 2000 branches and therefore 10% of total branches."
So – we have 20,000 Estate Agent branches in the country all of a sudden?
Actually PeeBee you may have a point there, I'm not sure there is that many branches, although on Zoopla and Rightmove there advertisers consist of not only agents, perhaps this is what he was referring to.
"…perhaps this is what he was referring to."
Perhaps he is… perhaps he isn't. Unless Mr Mead cares to post – we'll never know.