Online agent Emoov is taking on high street agents with a new land and new homes service.
It is to offer a new package to developers which it says will help them save ‘significant’ amounts of money when it comes to listing and selling new-build or converted properties.
Rather than pay a high-street agent a commission-based fee for every property sold, developers will have the option to list each unit on Emoov for £795 upfront or pay £1,495 on completion of sale.
Developers will be able to market both off-plan and completed developments with the assistance of Emoov’s Local Property Agents as well as its in-house team, which handles offers negotiation and progression.
Emoov has hired Andy Court as its head of land and new homes.
Formerly the head of property management at Aspire, before working his way up to director level at Stirling Ackroyd and then holding the position of director at Pinnacle Property Centre, Court will be responsible for fine-tuning and implementing what Emoov describes as an industry first.
Court said: “I’ve joined Emoov because, like many, I can see the direction the market is moving and how dramatically it has already changed from a residential transaction point of view.
“The dynamic approach that Emoov takes appealed to me and I am excited about applying my passion for new homes sales to the latest chapter of their journey.
“Currently, mid-range developments across the UK are appointed to local agents that just don’t have the experience or sales approach to create an identity for these developments.
“Through a mix of great people and disruptive technology, we will handle each development individually, creating a personal, creative marketing campaign while delivering consistently high levels of service and great value for money.”
Emoov CEO Russell Quirk said: “Estate agency is changing and we’re proud to be leading the revolution with an emphasis on fairer fees, better service and a process streamlined through the use of technology.
“While we’ve seen the industry change dramatically in a few short years, there is still some way to go, and this latest move will help us improve another area of the industry that is crying out for a new, better alternative to the traditional way of doing things.”
Comments (9)
Good luck, Mr McCourt.
Just remember one thing – no snazzy eWhassname logo’d hard hats, hi-viz or toe-tectors will protect you from the ‘developers’ you aspire to be working for in your new CV entry.
If your can’t think like a builder; talk like a builder… and jump like a demented flea BEFORE the builder tells you to, you’re gonna have a very short and painful career in that line.
Andy Court is a property manager, very different to an estate agent. ‘Formerly the head of property management at Aspire’
Good luck
This really sums up why the whole Online offering is failing. They aren’t Estate Agents and they don’t understand agency and that is why they are failing. Developers are handed plots by estate agents and get the re-sale in return, standard business practise, it’s reciprocal. It’s just another glaring example of people trying to make a quick buck out of a complex industry. I’m just glad it’s not my money they’re using to fail once again.
@Moveaside01 Your statement that it is standard business practice for developers to be handed plots by estate agents in return for the instruction presents a very murky view of the current estate agency model. I am genuinely shocked that this is normal business behaviour among agents and no one has challenged your view. If this is the case Competition Commission needs to become involved and review these sweetheart deals between agents and developers as surely this is illegal?!
Your post makes little sense. Estate agents handle development sites for sale (some modest, some decent sized). Builders buy them. Hopefully along the way a relationship is formed and said introducer agent gets favoured with instructions to sell the built product. STANDARD BUSINESS PRACTICE. If you see this as illegal and not above board, you need to give your head a wobble.
DanRobo68
Looking at your post, there are two distinct issues here:
Firstly – a ‘developer’ buys to sell – no two ways about it.
They will not waste their time and potential profit margin on a lightweight performer.
They will appoint the Agent that will do the job.
On the other side of the argument:
An Agent is appointed by the property owner to do a specific job – to find them a buyer. The EAA1979 sets out the Agent’s obligations to the vendor – to find the best buyer… at the best price… in the best timeframe.
ALL offers to purchase must be conveyed to the vendor, under the same Act (unless specific instructions are given).
The Agent does not have the final say as to who the successful buyer will be.
Do ‘developers’ offer what you refer to as “sweetheart deals”? No doubt yes – some will and do. In exactly the same way that some ‘normal’ buyers offer ‘sweeteners’ to Agents to secure the home they want.
For the record – I’ve been offered them by both camps many times in my career – accepted not one of them.
Thank you PeeBee and DanRobo you need to be careful about slinging around accusations and clearly it is people like you I refer to in not knowing the complexities of estate agency. Established professional agents will have forged strong relationships with developers and if you introduce them to a suitable profitable sites, of course they’re going to give you the resale, no brown envelopes required. You should do your homework before making allegations.
Developers of any decent size are sensible and savy, they engage with local agents because they want to attract local people, they want a local agent to work to promote their development not just plonk it on Rightmove as they can do that themselves.
Emoov CEO Russell Quirk said: “Estate agency is changing and we’re proud to be leading the revolution with an emphasis on fairer fees, better service and a process streamlined through the use of technology.
What a joker.. taken 90% of the service element out of the process, and he thinks its revolution.
Estate Agency is a service industry not retail.
Not Simple are doing a FSBO at £995 and not £1495 like NoMovement. So disruptors, you need to keep on disrupting each other on price first.
Listing service No Moovement are charging 33% more for the same service. Consumers are being ripped off by No Movement.