A total of 264 new offices have signed up to Agents’ Mutual in the last month, it is revealed this morning.
The number easily beats the average of 122 per month of earlier this year, and brings the total to over 2,450.
In an update to supporters, Agents’ Mutual chief executive Ian Springett says: “This means that we are over 60% of the way to our next major milestone, which is the achievement of 4,000 supporting agent offices – a point at which the venture really does become unstoppable.”
He adds that some 3,700 agents from over 3,250 firms have now registered interest, and who are being contacted and invited either to group or one-to-one meetings. Other agents that have not registered an interest are on a ‘prospecting’ database and will also be contacted and encouraged to learn more about Agents’ Mutual.
Springett also reveals that 18 regionally-based business development consultants have now been hired – the majority having joined from Rightmove or Zoopla.
He says of the team: “They are all very experienced and knowledgeable people and are excited about communicating the alternative to the duopoly which Agents’ Mutual offers to agents.”
Marketing and PR sources will be built up shortly, adds Springett, who also says that branding experts have been engaged “to help us develop the brand name, proposition and identity”.
He says he understands how keen agents are to have more details, but cautions: “We do not want to rush the work or miss the opportunity to derive maximum PR impact from the announcement of the brand name. Please, therefore, bear with us on this.”
Springett pays tribute to the “excellent support” from Gold members who are helping to organise local and regional meetings to help spread the word.
He also adds a note of warning to agents, whether or not they have signed up to Agents’ Mutual, asking them to “manage your contacts with your existing portal providers in a manner which will allow you to join us … and comply with our ‘one other competing portal’ rule.
“Please do not sleepwalk into a position where your contracts prevent you from listing on our portal and supporting us at launch, so we can make the biggest impact possible.
“Feedback from agents suggests that our impending launch is already providing them with much greater negotiating strength with Rightmove and Zoopla than they have had for years.”
Springett adds that both Rightmove and Zoopla initially underestimated Agents’ Mutual, but that “it is now clear that both the major portals will be taking every step possible to resists and diminish the power of our market entry”.
He says the stock market is also taking Agents’ Mutual seriously. Since February, Rightmove’s share price has fallen over 20%, and “Zoopla’s valuation appears also to have diminished significantly”.
He points out: “Directors of both organisations have sold down, or will shortly sell down, their holdings in their own companies.”
This was a reference to Rightmove chairman Scott Forbes recently selling half his holding, and Zoopla’s current major shareholders who will be cutting their stakes in the flotation.
Springett says of Agents’ Mutual: “It is a momentum thing – the more agents who pledge their support, the more agents will do so.”
Comments (73)
Hi
I'm not an agent but I am interested in Agents Mutual. Is the aim of this mega collaboration to improve the traditional estate agency service delivered to vendors, or is the portal just a means of online marketing the status quo? Hope that makes sense.
(I run an online platform and I could spend a ton of money and write all sorts, to drive traffic to the businesses I support. However, I am painfully aware that unless the glowing message I disseminate gels with the level of service delivered to the end user, the marketing platform is a pointless and expensive exercise in disappointing potential end users.)
The answer you receive will depend upon the agenda of the poster.
Good luck dissecting the spin from the reality.
Doesn't sound too optimistic there PeeBee! In my black and white world how far can you spin:
yes it will be a better traditional end service with xyz extra benefits, or
it will only provide an easier way to find the current traditional service, but we will be working on these value added improvements .
Neither are wrong or cause for concern, just want to know what is coming.
Peebee…."Your pitch sits far more comfortably with me Robert"….good news is that I believe there is still enough time to invest in Local Properyy Index, will you back yourself Peebee? 😉
You just never know… do you?
I'll let you know if I do.
Hi All, I have to say that AM has not entered my consciousness before this morning – looks like I better do a bit of research. I'm the owner of an Estate Agency in Haslemere, Surrey. I'm rather guessing I should already know more about AM.
Hi djneilan – welcome to the debate.
Are you new to EYE? – I can't say I've seen you post before, either here or on 'that other' Industry news website. That doesn't mean of course that you haven't been visiting this site since March – or the other for the past whatever number of years.
I'd be interested to know how you 'found' this.
Look forward to your response.
PeeBee
Hello Feebee (It’s ok all, Pee is sometimes Pheobe at the weekends) this is a classic Peebeeing post, one where you have smelt a rat.
I have the advantage (this time) of my Linkedin profile being viewed on the same day as a new poster to PIE appeared.
I simply can not believe that any NAEA member firm in Surrey is not aware of Agents Mutual. Casting your mind back [without posting a URL back to the wasteland where tumbleweed is the only movement in the news stories] to the Propertylive stories you will remember that the Surrey branch of NAEA were the only blokes putting up a spirited fight to save the Agent owned, FREE to list, alternative to the Duopoly.
I don't mind this somewhat weak 'pantomime’ post', the Surrey Crew have put a considerable effort into backing Agent owned portals. Mr Wyatt (BIG respect) shows as much consistency as I do in that regard however if he had looked harder at the version 2 Radar engine he would now have had a seamless replacement for Propertylive and Agents Mutual would have had a 500 member head start, taking them to 3000 members and a site that was live 12 months ago.
I don't need to get involved with the politics or reasoning behind refusing to treat with a 1 agent 1 vote portal but I can question the logic of wasting a full 18 months to get Agents Mutual to the same place it could have been in June 2013. In my opinion the NAEA ought to be leading Agents Mutual not a core of wealthy firms who at the end of the day are still ‘Competition’. The Homeflow engine behind Radar is superb and I really doubt it will be bettered by the Agents Mutual beta release in January. Non of it makes any sense but metaphorically has opened up a crack between the Ice flows for me to sail the James Caird out of the Weddell Sea.
Happy Father's day everyone!
Hi Robert
Where IS Surrey, by the way?
If I draw a RM search radius of 20 miles around my office (all that matters, basically… 😉 ), Surrey doesn't show up.
D'oh! Pressed 'Post Comment' in error (although HOW I did it beats me…)
As a NON-Agent, I frequently posted questions of why NAEA Members didn't support their own, free, portal. But then, as a Member, I wondered why most Members didn't support the Association they were PAYING FOR. Some things never change…
But am I alone in thinking I see a new 'Association' forming here?
No qualifications required; just a Gold Membership of a business (its disciples can call it what they want, a business is what it is…) which by its own admission aims to disrupt the entire process that the public have become accustomed to.
You 'pitched' me earlier in the week, Robert. So far I haven't commented and for that I apologise.
Prior to that, I heard the AM offering; watched the PowerPoint Presentation in glorious, four-foot technicolour that accompanied it.
I read the deluge of what I strongly suspect is orchestrated pro-AM spin that is drowning EYE (and for me, THAT is the most disappointing part of this entire malarkey).
I, personally, feel that YOUR 'pitch' sits far more comfortable with me, Robert.
We still have a lot of ground to cover on your offering – this is in my opinion neither the time nor place to raise that – but then I am under no 'threat' from you to act NOW; no deadlines; no pressure.
You are simply offering me a service.
You don't know whether I'm an influencer within my company structure or a decision-maker – if it helps, last week I made the decision to go Dowe Egberts rather than Nescafe – s0d the expense… 😉
But – if I HAD to make a choice – based on the evidence in front of me…
I'd NOT be going down the AM route.
…and I will be exerting my influence in that respect.
Hi djneilan….
Welcome to EYE, yes you certainly do need to know about Agents Mutual and your not alone in only just finding out about it….If you go the agents mutual website you will see that some 2500 of your fellow independent agents have now signed up to help fund the business and take the venture forward, that equates to 200 gold member sign ups in the last week alone.
You've come to the right place for good, open and honest debate.
Peebee…it depends on your definition of "all agents". I believe he is referring to the agents that are not parasites as previously stated. Based on your distain of those "parasites" that put out the "lies" that you so readily attack I think you in some way agree with him.
Paul H – this is why I so enjoy reasoned debate with the likes of yourself! 😉
At WHAT point, matey, do we Estate Agents emerge from parasitic status? We provide a service – BUT the service we provide is based entirely on our dependence on vendors and landlords, who in turn are dependent upon our service.
I guess you could call that symbiotic existence rather than parasitic, if you think that lifts us up the evolutionary scale a notch or two.
As you rightly state, I have great disdain for "lies". The simple fact is, however, that being an online Estate Agent does not mean you are necessarily a liar, in exactly the same vein that being a traditional Estate Agent does not mean that you are necessarily truthful. Far from it in both cases.
You are, I firmly believe, an "honest" Estate Agent. If you were to hand in the keys for your branch, and set up an Online Agency, would you change your morals? I didn't think so. Similarly, if you had made a swift buck as an online operator – one who couldn't lie straight in bed – and saw a ripe unit which would make your fortune, you are hardly likely to become a respectable pillar of society the second you turned the doorsign to 'Open'.
I would argue that I attack the "lies" – and NOT the people.
There are exceptions to that rule, I concede – but that is because the person and the "lie" cannot be separated.
We're almost at the half-century, matey! If the entire industry was 100% behind AM, each of these threads would have two posts, three at most – along these lines:
Paul H – AM is brill, innit!
wilko – Seconded, Paul H!
The White Knight – Erm… guess I'm redundant, then. Bye, guys…
It's SO much more interesting this way – like a bit of Star Trek.
You guys are The Borg; Robert May is Jean Luc Picard, intent on engaging you at warp factor 10.
Resistance ISN'T futile, mon ami! 😉
😮 I am not sure I know what that last bit is about (out of touch emoticon) Peebee I just see things through an experienced eye that has seen this game from both sides of the fence.
The dividing line has to be those people with training, experience, knowledge, honesty and integrity enough to correctly value & sell property, working in the best interests of vendors are Estate Agents whether they have an office or not. Those missing any one of those characteristics isn't an Estate Agent whether they have an office or not.
Hi Robert
Sorry – at midnight onward there is little else to watch than re-re-re-runs of TNG so think yourself lucky I didn't type it out in Klingon! 😉
I am simply (or not, as it seems…) trying to point out to Paul H that EVERY situation has more than one potential solution. He, wilko, etc herald Mr Springett's as THE ONE; THE ONLY way forward. Assimilation, in Borg terms. Join the Collective – or watch the destruction of your homeworld by its' massive, unstoppable power.
You are just one ship – one Enterprise. NO requirement to conform to a Collective seemingly intent on leaving a wake of destruction.
In Star Trek terms – I'm probably seen here as a Tribble! Luckily for you all, I don't multiply…
I made the point that their collective posts are keeping this and every AM thread running into the dozens – but this is only because there are people like me NOT currently buying into it. On this thread alone, 'CLG' and 'GilesH' have expressed their dislike of the proposition. Both received impassioned responses from The Collective – and 'phoenix' did the cause no good whatsoever. Two wasted posts for AM – but, hey – it gets the numbers up.
Unfortunately, by the 'rules' laid down by AM, Agents have to make a choice between your offering and theirs.
And more unfortunately, Aleksandr Orlov cannot ComparethePortals (sorry – TNG has commercial breaks…)
You won't be surprised to learn that I LIKE Aleksandr and as a result I put trustings in his judgementals.
So – for me, the decision is NOT simples! 😉
…or is it?
“At WHAT point, matey, do we Estate Agents emerge from parasitic status?” We provide a service – BUT the service we provide is based entirely on our dependence on vendors and landlords, who in turn are dependent upon our service.”….Our dependence is indeed on vendors and sellers but the problem now is that our “service” is deemed as (for many) being on Rightmove and Zoopla, and this is where it’s all gone wrong. “YOU ONLY NEED TO ADVERTISE ON RIGHTZOOP TO SELL YOUR PROPERTY” and “ESTATE AGENTS EARN THOUSANDS FOR DOING NOTHING WHEN ALL THEY NEED TO DO IS ADVERTISE ON RIGHTZOOP” is the usual lies we get from the online brigade. Our service should be about well our ***** service, the fact that we have now rely so heavily on the duopoly is where it's all gone wrong and we just need to have one portal to list properties, it is all that is needed.
“As you rightly state, I have great disdain for "lies". The simple fact is, however, that being an online Estate Agent does not mean you are necessarily a liar, in exactly the same vein that being a traditional Estate Agent does not mean that you are necessarily truthful. Far from it in both cases.”…..Yes of course there will always be one rogue online agent that wants to play fairly 😉 but we know that in general online agents can only prosper by attacking traditional high street agents with “lies”, rightzoop has helped to make this happen.
“You are, I firmly believe, an "honest" Estate Agent. If you were to hand in the keys for your branch, and set up an Online Agency, would you change your morals?”…No but like I say there is always one good rogue online agent, although you could argue that perhaps I would not be as prosperous a business as Emoov for example if I did not come out with the lies.
“I would argue that I attack the "lies" – and NOT the people.”…Yes but the people are making the lies by stating that all you need to do to sell a property is be on rightzoop, when we all know it’s cobblers.
“There are exceptions to that rule, I concede – but that is because the person and the "lie" cannot be separated.”…The lie has to be given to win business.
I’ve got to say this debate is becoming an interesting debate, one that’s turning me against many of my staunch Tory beliefs and slowly turning me into a trade unionist, I think I need to go and wash my mouth out!
Hi matey.
Firstly can I say I'd LOVE to have a pint of something with you one day. Mine's coke (full fat, extra sugar, no ice…) but don't hold that against me! It could just as easily be vodka but I don't feel the need the speed these days… 😉
Oh, Paul H – I SO agree with a lot of what you say.
"…Yes but the people are making the lies by stating that all you need to do to sell a property is be on rightzoop, when we all know it’s cobblers."
So, then – why don't we ALL agree, unilaterally, to BREAK the internet's 'hold' on what we do. We ALL come off EVERY portal; turn off our own – and do the job we did back in the day? The levelest of level playing fields!
I'm up for it.
A tad unfair to our 'online-only' brethren, maybe – but I'm sure they will adapt. Or regress – not sure which it will be for them. But I'm sure they will remember what to do when someone opens their branch door and wants to speak face-to-face to them about 27 Acacia Avenue.
Oh, hang on – they haven't got a 'branch'. Bu99£r! Okay – they'll have to adapt/regress a little more…
And what about the poor people who sit at home on their tablet thingies, adding the hundreds of Summary Views that scupper up 27 Acacia Avenue's CTR every week? They'll have to adapt as well, won't they?
But, one way or another, with the AM offering, "adapt" is what is being forced upon them.
And, as I have being said from Day #1 – THAT is in my opinion the biggest problem that AM and its' Members will have to overcome.
Matey – please tell me (if you know and you won't have to shoot me for telling me, that is…)…
1. What Market research has AM carried out into public perception of the proposition?
2. What Market Research have Paul H & co carried out, with their clients or customers, into the possible impact of leaving EVERY OTHER BUT ONE portal?
I'll throw open those questions to ANYONE who cares to answer them, by the way… but you still can't shoot me! 😉
Loving the banter, Paul H.
Believe it or not – it's for all the right reasons. I have the industry and its customers at heart.
“Firstly can I say I'd LOVE to have a pint of something with you one day. Mine's coke (full fat, extra sugar, no ice…) but don't hold that against me! It could just as easily be vodka but I don't feel the need the speed these days… ;)”…It’s a deal PeeBee, Im easily pleased when it comes to drink mate, as long as there's alcohol in it, only 7 months until the EYE xmas shindig 😉
“So, then – why don't we ALL agree, unilaterally, to BREAK the internet's 'hold' on what we do. We ALL come off EVERY portal; turn off our own – and do the job we did back in the day? The levelest of level playing fields!
I'm up for it.”….This is what we are trying to do but there is no hiding the fact that the internet is a part of someone’s property search, what AM is trying to do is ensure that it’s not the be all and end all and that our business must rely on it.
“A tad unfair to our 'online-only' brethren, maybe – but I'm sure they will adapt. Or regress – not sure which it will be for them.”….Precisely, perhaps then it really will be more on the SERVICE we provide and not on the internet. I’m happy with that.
“Oh, hang on – they haven't got a 'branch'. Bu99£r! Okay – they'll have to adapt/regress a little more”……Is it adapting or is it more realising that estate agency is not just about the internet, estate agency is about so much more than that as you know, currently Rightzoop are changing our industry and in my (and many thousands of other peoples ) opinions for the worse.
“But, one way or another, with the AM offering, "adapt" is what is being forced upon them.”….Just in the same way the high street agents are have had to adapt. Adapt to online is not the solution, we need a better regulated industry, not more people working out of laptops from their garden.
“And, as I have being said from Day #1 – THAT is in my opinion the biggest problem that AM and its' Members will have to overcome.”…We are getting there PeeBee
“1. What Market research has AM carried out into public perception of the proposition?”…No idea mate, I don’t work for AM.
“2. What Market Research have Paul H & co carried out, with their clients or customers, into the possible impact of leaving EVERY OTHER BUT ONE portal?”…For the last two months I have asked landlords/vendors on a val where they would expect an agent to advertise their property, the answer I got was “online”….and a few said Rightmove. That’s enough for me to know that if I do my job properly on a val then they will trust me where I advertise and market their property. I SELL MY COMPOANY ON A VAL NOT RIGHTZOOP AND HERE IS THE PROBLEM MATE, WE SHOULD BE SELLING US AND NOT ANOTHER COMPANY.
I'll throw open those questions to ANYONE who cares to answer them, by the way… but you still can't shoot me! ;)”…We can try tho
“Loving the banter, Paul H.”…Like wise!
“Believe it or not – it's for all the right reasons. I have the industry and its customers at heart”….There is no douting that PeeBee
Robert…I've had to answer here. So you want to point out Ian Springetts flaws in his strategy fine and perhaps you didn't have that post pre prepared, again fine. I've got nothing against you, I'm sure your a half decent chap. But It still does not take away the fact that agents in general have had enough of company owned portals, we all know from experience that it will all end the same way, you will get too big and try to squeeze as much money as you can out of us.We need an agent owned portal that acts on behalf of agents to showcase properties and not for making profits. Again it's nothing personal.
Hi again, Paul H. Sorry to be 'realistic' again – but when you state
"We need an agent owned portal that acts on behalf of agents…"
it seems from what I see and hear that it will not acting on behalf of ALL agents.
Is THAT a big enough flaw in Mr Springett's strategy – ESPECIALLY when he is quoted as saying "the more agents who pledge their support, the more agents will do so.”
Not if they can't because they don't match the criteria being set…
Paul I agree with you but…. what you just posted could be the same sentiment of the HPC crew and Generation Rent. "B l 0 0 d y Estate Agents and their profits we need a vendor owned, not for profit, Agency to sell our Homes- FSBO Mutual rah rah rah!"
I am sure you realise you are building exactly what you are saying you do not want. Despite it being Agent owned there is a core of owners who outside of Agents Mutual are your competitors, concentric to that is the ring of Gold members , then Silver, then bronze.
In that organisation chart the Agents closest to the centre have all the advantage but outside of Gold membership Agents have the same relationship with AM as they do Rightmove or Zoopla, dress it how you will it is a commercial arrangement.
What you shouldn't be doing is knocking what I am doing until you understand the whole picture and the full detail of what I am up to. Yes I am Head of Business development for a not owned by agents portal but my fees and therefore profit is governed by your success. Only if I send you 50 leads in a month will you pay me 40% of your Agents mutual subscription. Using KPIs your LPI maximum fee for the whole year (£2340) requires you to sell to 1 property to the 600 enquiries we send you. If we do not send you enquiries we do charge. I don't know about you but I used to need 50 applicants on my books to give me 8 viewings to get one sale. I will leave you to work out what you would earn from 12 sales before you tell me it is unfair, unreasonable or extortionate.
Do not worry about being robust in your posts but don’t put words on my mouth, twist what I have said or try to paint me as something I am not or mis quote me. I am here for the discussion not to sell anything. I appreciate if I earn respect and some people might, as a result , buy my services is selling but what you have to consider is that as Ampersat (and others) I was making the same points and can show 4 years of opinions (Peebee has done his research) where I had nothing to gain. Such is my honesty and integrity I can not hide behind a moniker now I do have a commercial interest.
I have set Peebee to be my judge and jury, he is free from influence and bias but as I already said has a very sharp mind. He has every opportunity of destroying my reputation if he can find a single thing that points to me having anything but agents best interests at heart.
" He has every opportunity of destroying my reputation if he can find a single thing that points to me having anything but agents best interests at heart."
No, Robert – only YOU can destroy your reputation.
I can simply gnaw at your ankles; poke and prod into crevices. It will be what YOU have hidden there that would be your undoing.
You give me far too much credit – but thank you.
And as I have said to Paul H – I, also, only have the best interests of the industry and its clientele at heart.
No you have got it wrong, i've answered above anyway, it's not about grammar, I would not do that although plenty do!
"Paull
on June 13, 2014 at 5:20 pm said:
I was not referring to grammar Robert it's the way you say it, it comes across a touch aggressive imho. Anyway, have a good weekend everyone."
Okay… I can't speak for Robert but I fully accept your explanation.
Funny, innit though, how WHAT you posted was picked up as offensive, by both Robert and by me (and, I have little doubt, others also).
What is ALSO funny, Paull, is that the examples I gave of your own grammatical ruck-ups came across to me as a touch aggressive when I read them.
I, by the way, am probably the last one to point an accusing finger in that respect – as is evidenced above.
The written word, Paull, is a dangerous tool in the hands of both the writer and the reader (as also evidenced above).
That being said, I get the feeling from what you have written (and the way I am 'hearing' it in my mind when reading it…) that you are genuinely shocked to have been picked up in the way you have been.
That's good enough to convince me. I take things on face value.
You have a good weekend also – that being said I'm sure we will all be adding something to this debate during it! 😉
Paull –
"The way how you type Robert I don't think any agents would use your service."
Robert has given his explanation for this.
YOURS, please, for the following:
"Paull on June 10, 2014 at 7:51 am said:
So really its against small upfront fees? Otherwise an online agent could just rent a shop for £500 a month a get listed."
"Paull on June 6, 2014 at 7:48 am said:
Why would you want to leave Zoopla anyway? There fees are low, its Rightmove we need to ditch, they are ripping us off, stick with AM and Zoopla."
Unless you suffer from the same condition as Mr May (in which case you wouldn't have posted in the first place) – trust me – you REALLY don't want to dance with me on this one.
Robert said "So are you saying that despite me having a developed and live ‘in beta’ website a full 6 months ahead of the AM site I have somehow missed the boat?"………I'm saying your going to be up against it mate, I think that fairly obvious, especially if your trying to win business by pitching the AM pitch. I say again it's nothing personal.
Paul, I will leave it up to others to decide if I am piching anything. I know full well I am up against it but that is now more a concern than you being up against Countrywide. For the whole of the past 20 years I have been up against far stroger and better financed competition and for me this is simply 3rd time around this particular track.
I am deliberately not pumping out my contact details or URL and in most cases I am waiting till the discussion has slipped into the archive before posting. I did post today simply to add a balance to the content of the site.
"I am waiting till the discussion has slipped into the archive before posting."……….Well in all fairness Robert your opening gambit at 7.50am this morning was clearly posted to cause provocation as has some of your other posts today.
Why only partially quote me Paul?
"and in most cases I am waiting till the discussion has slipped into the archive before posting"
It was not cause to provoke anything. If you haven't learned that your opponent's opinion is as valid as yours then you are missing the whole point of Internet discussion groups.
I am getting the impression that I ought to do what Miles Shipside, Alex Chesterman and Ian Springett do, refuse to engage with the customer base other than in clinically controlled circumstances or relying on the services of professional copywriters to provide advice and PR.
To be fair Robert that 7.50am post was a very subtle negative sell against the comp (AM). I'm just pointing that out. Your opinion is of course valid, although in truth it appears that you had that post written out even before the article was published this morning. Do you catch my drift!
Gospel truth Paul that came straight from the heart. I was up at 6:30 to watch the stories coming on and was relieved for PIE that there was not an AM story to fuel the growing criticism of Ros and Nick that there is a definite bias on the site.
At 7:06 BST that story appeared, I spent the next 105 minutes typing it. What has to be noted is that the PIE clock is an hour out.
Subtle negative sell? Sorry to pick that up separately, if my posts shows anything negative then it is a flaw in Ian's strategy to control things. If you read carefully what was typed I simply posted what Ian or his supporters have posted on here over the past few weeks. Against each position I have stated my position. If that has come across as a negative for the AM proposition I am at a loss as to how I can be allowed to have an opinion and keep everyone happy.
Is PIE owned by Agents Mutual? I used to have a lot of respect for Ros but it appears that she has now simply become Ian Springett's pet parrot. There are far more agents like me who think Agents Mutual is a waste of time but PIE seems to be interested in only those who tow the line. Not really an industry magazine – simply an Agents Mutual PR outlet. It's boring. I shall not bother reading any further.
GilesH…
This publication, in my opinion, shows balanced reporting, only on Wednesday there was an article that helped publicise the Zoopla share offering and even mentioned the fact that many people will buy shares for a quick flip.
Ros has her finger on the pulse with regards to industry news, hence why there are endless amounts of people posting on here and neigh on no posts on the other site.
As the first post this morning said, plenty of agents do not know about AM.
Plenty too probably did not know much about the new cooling-off regulations until Ros told them.
But then, ignorance is bliss. I met a VIP agent in the past few months who said: "Help to Buy? What is that?"
That might be cause the Reps are telling everyone who attends the presentation to follow the PIE PR machine.
Putting two and two together let me guess that Yawn is now here as 'Smile on'. "Springett also reveals that 18 regionally-based business development consultants have now been hired – the majority having joined from Rightmove or Zoopla", all of a sudden I have a troll who has the spelling and grammar of a Rightmove rep and it all starts to make sense.
For the record GilesH –
Property Industry Eye is wholly owned by three people – see the 'About Us' section. Agents' Mutual has no financial interest in the business, nor does anyone else. AM was the first company to sign up to advertise with us and is a highly valued client – but we report news without fear or favour and would just as freely run a negative piece about AM as we do the positives. Any other portal is very welcome to submit its news to us and to advertise if it wishes. And any individual is free to express their views in these columns. I hope this makes matters clearer for you.
You will be missed……
You will be dearly missed…
It would be a shame to lose Giles H from the debate,I am yet to meet an agent who thinks AM is a waste of time.Even those who aren't yet convinced see the need to stop the duopoly from continuing to milk our industry in the way they have in recent years.
Please clarify how an agent owned price controlled portal can possibly be a bad thing for the UKs Independent Estate Agents ?
Giles I respect and value your view,though I hope to change your mind and others like you who still remain unsure.
White Knight
PS Ros is no ones patsy!
"Please clarify how an agent owned price controlled portal can possibly be a bad thing for the UKs Independent Estate Agents ?"
Mr White Knight – at last, someone who will EXPECT me to call them 'Sir' and not think I'm being facetious… 😉
Humour me on this a minute or two, please…
1. "agent-owned…". Hmmm – HUNDREDS of owners; HUNDREDS of agendas. VERY LITTLE consensus except on the 'keep it cheap' route.
2. "price controlled…". see comments above – but according to the presentation, 'Bronze' Members won't have any 'control' at all, and will be wide open to price increases from 'Day 1'. Those who sign now as Gold/Silver Members have prices fixed, I believe, for 5 years. I have picked up from the multitude of posts from 'The Collective' that the plan is, the more people who join, the cheaper the monthly Subs will be – but with the initial fixed contribution, the plan must be to invest/spend more in getting the site actually into the public domain.
3. "…possibly be a bad thing for the UKs Independent Estate Agents ?"
THAT depends on a multitude of factors, Sir. I have covered them many times in my posts, both here on EYE and on 'that other' site.
Will it "work"? Yes (in a fashion) – because it has to. The Agents Collective can't let it be seen to fail.
That being said – I look at the debris already behind it of failed site after failed site – EVERY one of them claiming to be the new 'Hovis'.
Even the NAEA chuffed it up big style (or, more importantly, the Members who were paying for it in their monthly subs did…).
Well done Phoenix, I bet they are HATING it lol lol lol
Be interesting to see how my RM chat goes this afternoon….
Yes please update us.
No further comment?
Maybe the RM rep was under instructions to shoot phoenix after telling! 😉
Ahhh… apparently phoenix got the grand offer of "SQUAT" off his bill.
RM not so 'on the run', then…
Whatever the outcome, I have just renegotiated my Zoopla membership and made a saving of £334 PCM! Rightmove meeting scheduled this afternoon!
I'm sorry, phoenix – I just don't 'get' what you are saying.
You've got a new Z deal; you are now going to negotiate a new RM deal.
So – AM Membership isn't on YOUR Christmas list then?
I understand Peebee. If Phoenix does join AM his subs will actually increase by £334 because the AM subs were set at the pre-negotiated discount rate for Zoopla. Why isn't that obvious?
Phoenix has got it spot on…. play the Rightmove rep off against the Zoopla rep tell them both you are going to AM, grab a discount from both and leave your competition paying higher subs to AM whilst using their bargaining power to feather your own nest– genius- win-win. Good one Phoenix lots of the AM doubters will love that and be grateful for your sharing that tip.
It's nothing personal but you've missed the boat by about 12 months Robert, someone got their before you and the AM boat has now set sail, there is no turning back or deviation I'm afraid.
So are you saying that despite me having a developed and live ‘in beta’ website a full 6 months ahead of the AM site I have somehow missed the boat?
I suspect many people will fail to follow your logic in much the same way as Phoenix didn’t spot the error of logic and reality in his, I am guessing, intended ProAM post.
I am sorry to say with the market as it is and the city telling Alex in particular that AM is not a threat, I can quite easily seeing the Duopoly terminating the contracts of just 13% of agents early leaving the boat, I have apparently missed, high and dry without a web advertising presence. You be nice to me you might need me.
The way how you type Robert I don't think any agents would use your service.
Paul I am not ashamed to tell people I am dyslexic and have come up a fair number of people who thought me stupid as a result. Normally I will run everything through a spell and grammar checker and at least make an effort to post clearly. Others clearly don’t.
I was not referring to grammar Robert it's the way you say it, it comes across a touch aggressive imho. Anyway, have a good weekend everyone.
You obviously don't understand that many dyslexics will post in a staccato fashion just to get their opinions heard and respected, if that comes across as aggressive I apologise
This is a business to business forun and I think one can expect the tone and language to be more robust than that used in Social Media.
An awful lot of posters are seeing my posts and opinions as anti AM, they are not. As someone who has already experienced this competition controlling measures before I am simply wise to them.
I am more than happy to be judged by my contemporaries and that is the reason I have challenged the most consistent and respected Estate Agent on these forums to test my theories, thoughts and commitment to the Industry. I think Peebee is far better placed to offer his industry colleagues an unbiased opinion on whether or not they should do business with me and it will be based on something a little more substantial than my writing style.
@ PaulH I suppose you think I prepared that earlier too!
Paul, I would not worry about him, you are right in what you are saying. His constant drum beating is making him and the company he is working for look small and bitter. The only real option at this stage is AM all this "Other" lot are doing is watering down AM's impact.
"The only real option at this stage is AM…"
Erm… I don't think so.
Ever heard of 'leave as is"?
I think you'll find that a LOT of companies will be doing exactly that – at least at the outset.
"…all this "Other" lot are doing is watering down AM's impact."
Well… it can't have much "impact" to offer, then, if a few disagreeing comments mainly from anonymous 'trolls' like me are watering it down – can it?
Until this launches everything Agents' Mutual promises is just that, a promise. Reality can sometimes be horribly different to the idea that forms in someone's mind.
We still have no idea about the brand, what the website will look like, how they intend to market to the public to draw them away from RM & Z etc.
As an idea I think it's great but I am going to wait to see what things are like when it comes to fruition before jumping on this bandwagon.
It won't launch or have the full impact if we don't get behind it and commit to it. There will be no bandwagon to jump onto.
But….. I do hear you. You need to know more and that is coming. As this article states, a sales force has been prepared.
More and more agents are hearing and are coming on board.
The whistles and bells will come, but that is not the priority.
What is the priority, is gathering enough support that will guarantee a disruption to the market and make a massive impact, day one.
The draw away from the duopoly will be the fact that AM has stock from 1000's of agents, not that the website looks flash.
Don't get me wrong, it needs to be slick and user friendly for the public, but to be honest even if it's the best produced website there could be and AM creates the best brand you could think of, if it hasn't got any agents (and their stock), there won't be anyone coming to view it!!!
One step at a time. There will be PR at the right time.
"Marketing and PR sources will be built up shortly, adds Springett, who also says that branding experts have been engaged “to help us develop the brand name, proposition and identity”.
He says he understands how keen agents are to have more details, but
cautions: “We do not want to rush the work or miss the opportunity to derive maximum PR impact from the announcement of the brand name. Please, therefore, bear with us on this.”
He knows what he is doing and we need to make sure when we push the button, it is pushed with FULL FORCE!
oh good the Robert May PR machine is in full flow again, yawn! did you not get a job in the end? as the youngsters say "Bore off mate"
Sorry I don't quite understand your post. What point are you trying to make?
If your intention is to drag Property Industry Eye down to the constant personal attacks of Estate Agency Today congratulations you are the pathfinder; the very first of those who make no contribution other than to attack others. I suppose it had to happen. The trouble is it is posts like yours that discourage dialogue and limit the number of visitors to the site.
I have to say it is sad that a day after Nick posted "On behalf of Eye may I thank everyone for their contributions to this thread – and indeed many others. It really is gratifying to see that the posts are well thought-out and well-reasoned, and above all not abusive. Thanks everyone." Your are the one to introduce irrational nastiness and abuse to PIE.
"Do not ‘sleep walk’ into restrictive contracts with other portals, agents are urged" I'm sorry but I did chuckle at the irony and coincidence of that précis.
"Do not ‘sleep walk’ into restrictive 5 year contracts with other portals” Is what I have been saying to agents.
There are a lot of similarities between what I have been saying and what Ian says. It is interesting that we share much the same target audience with much the same aims but it is interesting that;
He has started with the large and dominant firms whereas I am looking at the smaller professional firms who have already got the odds stacked against them due to their size, coverage independence.
Ian thinks it fair that multiple office firms enjoy the economies of scale with discounts on their subscriptions. I think everyone should pay the same but in accordance with how successful we are for the individual agent.
Ian thinks a flat rate subscription that is immune from market fluctuations is the way to continue, I think a performance related, pay per enquiry, system provides a fee structure that reflects the market. We do well in the good times but are living the pain of Agency in the bad. The fee structure of AM gives only in certain circumstances a saving on subscriptions, Local Property Index have capped fees at £195/month.
Ian thinks a typical agency outlay on portal fees of £15,000 a year is the main issue, I see fee erosion as the main concern; where in 5 years typical fees have dropped from an average 1.5% to in many cases sub 1%, a drop that represents an income drop of £45,000 per annum per branch.
Ian see all online agencies as “parasites” I am keen to differentiate between a High Street presence-less, full service, Agencies and Passive intermediary Agencies who offer no more than an Internet listing service which I do not consider as Estate Agency. An office-less full service agency will typically spend more on SEO just to compete with the subliminal sell of premises as so bears very similar level of fixed costs.
Ian highlights muti listing groups and Franchises as a threat in the same category as Rightmove and Zoopla. I view such agents as valued and influential members of our industry who demonstrate as much professionalism and commitment to the industry as any Agent I have met.
Ian thinks it is important to break the Duopoly, I think it is importance to reduce Agents reliance on the existing duopoly and recognise that without further investment in staff or technology that has already been achieved simply by the existence of the Agents Mutual Movement. I congratulate Agents Mutual for that achievement.
No doubt Local Property Index will be considered a threat by the controlling Executives but some grass roots Gold members have expressed a desire to find a way of working with me. They are members who have worked with me on other projects and are aware of my passion for and commitment to Traditional Agents. They are people who know I will deliver market leading innovative solutions as technology evolves. More important than all of that they know that if there is any sort of problem they have my direct dial phone numbers and I will take personal responsibility to get things sorted.
Enough from me I thought is best to add a little balance to PIE as it is getting a bit too AM centric for a forum aimed at the whole industry.
Morning Ric and the rest of the PIE community.
I think we are beginning to see the PR machine kick into action and with the sales force now in place, the uptake of agents will only increase.
Let's not forget Ian was averaging 122 a month on his own with just an assistant for company. With a full team in place he has seen an immediate impact and over doubled that amount last month.
Couple this with all the positive PR and effort that we can make and very quickly the message will get delivered.
I also mentioned yesterday that we must talk to as many of our competitors as we can, when in their offices collecting keys, in the street or in the pub, at every opportunity. It's an absolute must.
On the staff front, you make a good point Ric, its no good just a few at the top knowing about it and championing it on their own. Everyone must be involved.
We have spoken to our staff at group meetings and they are also encouraged to read trade press and online material.
But as with all things, it's good to keep driving it home and gently reminding all of our aims.
Lets have a good day today and let's spread the word…….
"Morning Ric and the rest of the PIE community."
Surely you mean "AM community", Paul…
You are part of the AM community you certainly put enough input into the debate!
Thank you for including me in your community, Paul H.
One day – who knows… 😉
Boring post sorry but to echo a comment on a story on PIE yesterday…. I was a little amazed when a London agent who I know was up in Cheshire yesterday afternoon where I am based and when I asked him about AM and said would you be joining he said "what are they" I explained thinking perhaps saying our last chance to get rid of RM and Z would jog his memory…. "Nope never heard". He is not an MD so in fairness his MD's may have signed and not communicated to staff, however having Managers not aware of AM is ridiculous, in fact having staff not aware of it is.
I like some have now decided to write to our locals, explaining we are signed up and if you are not make a call.
Do all your staff know about AM? This is my question to all my BM's this morning, let them all know and explain it, tell them the story so far and the goal and remind them in their "chit chats" with the other locals, make a comment about AM "have you heard of it, it's going to be great, a portal for quality agents" spread the word from the industry level now….. (which I assumed everyone knew about it)
Have a good day to all and weekend. Ric.
Precisely Ric. The fact that 3700 branches have registered tells us that 1000's more do not yet know about it. Pull your finger out everyone.
I echo your sentiments and have been flabbergasted and the number of good agents that know nothing about AM. I've made a point of ensuring that my BM's are briefed and that ALL front end staff are subscribers to PIE.
WELL… sorry – but that is the fault of AM, isn't it?
Why should they rely on compulsory readership of EYE to get them known IN THE INDUSTRY?
Six months from 'Live' – and many of those that will be 'selling' this sea-change to their clients don't even know about it?
Laughable. The 'duopoly' must be loving this.
So must those Agents who plan to stay with them.
You playing the role of chief provocateur today then Peebee 😉
Somebody has to, Paul H…
I'd prefer to call my viewpoint 'realistic', if you don't mind.
Like I've said time and time again – please, please, prove me wrong.
I'll be over the moon. 😉