Blow for OnTheMarket as one of its very first Gold members quits to join Zoopla

| Rosalind Renshaw

Major regional firm Gascoigne Halman – one of the first to take Gold membership with OnTheMarket – is quitting, and is set to go live with Zoopla this week.

The move highlights acquisition activity by the larger industry players, who back the likes of Zoopla to the tune of millions.

The departure from OTM by Gascoigne Halman follows its acquisition last autumn by Connells Group, a stakeholder in Zoopla.

It flags up the recruiting headache for OTM, in the midst of the current massive buying spree by corporates of independents.

Yesterday afternoon, John Halman of previously independent firm Gasgcoigne Halman told EYE: “The position really became inevitable when the decision was made that Gascoigne Halman should become a subsidiary of the Connells Group in the autumn of last year.

“As an independent company Gascoigne Halman was one of the first to take up Gold membership as we foresaw OTM as an opportunity for independent firms to have increased control over their internet spending.

“This mutuality gave us some control but has generally been poorly received by the press and some of our more savvy clients, who don’t like the “one other portal” rule.

“It also appears to have become a battle between Zoopla and OTM as to who has the biggest register and the largest amounts of traffic, with claims and counter claims from both organisations.

“With all of the larger corporate estate agents remaining significant shareholders in Zoopla they are committed to continue supporting them.

“It seems therefore that the battle will continue for some time yet and this is not helped by the corporate estate agencies being in such an acquisitive period.

“It does give OTM an extra challenge for the future.”

He added: “We have no argument with OTM and wish them well, but as a supplier of data to Zoopla and Rightmove we will no longer be eligible to appear on their site.”

OTM has consistently refused to comment on individual memberships.

Sources say that the acquisition price of firms such as Gascoigne Halman with tie-ins to OTM will have that cost of breaking the agreement factored in by the larger firms swooping the market for purchases.

x

Email the story to a friend!

More top news stories



26 Comments

  1. ARC
    February 10, 2016 at 08:03

    Not really a conscious decision then born out of circumstance.

    Report
  2. danny
    February 10, 2016 at 08:11

    on the contrary,knew it would happen when he sold to Connells

    Report
    1. Ric
      February 10, 2016 at 08:24

      Yep, completely. I heard they turned down a couple of higher offers from companies not associated to Z…. but when the slightly lower off from Connells came in and they realised it would mean coming off OTM they jumped at it. Big part of the decision process. Well spotted danny!

      Report
      1. danny
        February 10, 2016 at 09:29

        That’s not what I’m saying Ric, I’m pointing out that John sold to Connells , this is a very clever guy. He didn’t think after he had signed the paperwork ” I wonder what that means for my portal membership”… He knew exactly what it meant

        Report
        1. RealAgent
          February 10, 2016 at 09:40

          We all read that they had sold to Connells Danny so it really didn’t need pointing out did it?!

          If you re suggesting that he even thought twice about what that meant for his portal membership, then I genuinely feel sorry for you.

          Report
          1. danny
            February 10, 2016 at 09:56

            Thats exactly my point real agent, the comment above made out that it wasnt really his choice.He is still a huge supporter of OTM. My point is that he is a businessman and I doubt he thought twice about what selling to Connells meant for his OTM membership, not a “consequence of the action” rather a shrewd businessman who knew exactly what it meant but did it anyway

            Report
            1. RealAgent
              February 10, 2016 at 10:47

              I think we seem to be in some twilight zone. When I sold my first business, the buyers chose which suppliers they would keep and which they wouldn’t, thats exactly what has happened here.

              The story here is how OTM may be hit by the wave of corporates buying strong independent agents many of whom have chosen to be on OTM.

              It would be wrong however to assume that this offers any vindication for Zoopla and certainly, I for one, will poor scorn on any subsequent press release from them announcing how many agents have come back to them!

              Report
  3. inthefield
    February 10, 2016 at 08:20

    John halman was and I bet still is a big supporter of OTM so it’s a big shame that he’s been told what to say here by his new bosses but as predicted it was inevitable!

    Report
  4. RealAgent
    February 10, 2016 at 08:26

    It seems pretty evident to me that being a member of OTM clearly increases your market presence, identifies you as a market leader and makes you a desirable acquisition for a corporate.

    AN OTM subscription seems like a good investment if you ask me!

     

     

    Report
  5. Property Paddy
    February 10, 2016 at 08:55

    Most of the agents in my part of the world are with OTM. I’m not complaining as we are the smallest agent out of all of them.

    Guess who, according to RM stats, is selling the most houses in the area?

    We have benefited enormously by not being with OTM.

    However as I have stated before, OTM catches up on traffic, market presence and unique visitors we would consider them.

    Right now we are laughing all the way to the bank.

    LOL

    Report
    1. RealAgent
      February 10, 2016 at 09:07

      As you didn’t say what area you are in it’s pretty difficult to guess who is selling the most houses in your area “Paddy”.

      Its also a pretty amateur mistake to assume that if you are selling lots of houses you are first of all, actually making money and second of all, making more money that your competitors. Unless of course you are charging a decent fee, which if I’m honest I doubt you are.

      Can I suggest that perhaps your competitors are laughing at the busy fool?

      Report
    2. inthefield
      February 10, 2016 at 09:08

      Thats because youre probably the best estate agent in the area, nothing to do with not being with OTM. I was the best performing agent in my area. I then swapped to OTM……Im still the best performing agent in my area.
      DO IT….!

      Report
      1. Woodentop
        February 10, 2016 at 10:41

        I have to agree you probably are the best in town, anyone who thinks they can only be the best from whichever web portal they are on is deluded. I’m assuming that the other agents are also on RM or Z in any event?

        Report
        1. Property Paddy
          February 10, 2016 at 11:20

          Thanks for your mixed comments.

          To answer fairly

          A: 35 years in the business

          B: 9 months in this area

          C: 4 competitors are very large concerns with all their head office support.

          D: I charge a fair fee, not the highest not the lowest.

          E. I work on a simple philosophy: If I cant get on with the client I wont take them on because I know they will be trouble or hard to please. So they go to my competitors.

          OTM doesn’t have full market traction like Z & RM therefore I cant consider them yet. But like any business I would jump on the band wagon if they take market share or look like they might.

          Report
          1. Woodentop
            February 10, 2016 at 15:53

            I thought I was looking at my CV except B would read more years that take into account my grey hair.

            Report
  6. treehuggergraeme
    February 10, 2016 at 08:55

    Sensationalist reporting as usal

    Report
  7. Woodentop
    February 10, 2016 at 10:44

    I’m having some trouble in understanding why this story is news! Maybe it should be headlined “Agents has to leave OTM when taken over by rival Zoopla shareholder”.

    Report
  8. marcH
    February 10, 2016 at 11:05

    My sentiments entirely Woodentop. I seem to recall that when I got married, I had to give up all other girlfriends….;)

    Report
    1. RealAgent
      February 10, 2016 at 11:16

      That was funny marcH!

      Report
    2. Property Paddy
      February 10, 2016 at 11:22

      A man on a diet can still read the menu.

      Obviously when you get old like me, even reading the menu is touch and go !!!!

      Report
    3. Woodentop
      February 10, 2016 at 15:58

      Yeah but you can read my confessions of an estate agent sometime soon. Lost count of the number of scantly dressed women or in dressing gowns I’ve walked into. Had one last week pop a breast out to feed the baby just as I was filling out the agency agreement.

       

      Now that one be a story if everyone posted their funniest (or not) moment.

      Report
  9. the message
    February 10, 2016 at 15:03

    poorly received by the press and some of our more savvy clients, who don’t like the “one other portal” rule

     

    says it all to me sadly – a savvy client knows the portals add some value, however good an agent you are, and restricting the amount of marketing you do, purely for the long terms benefit of OTM, is hard to argue in the best interest of the client.

    Lets be honest about the fact that OTM is a trial, and those on it are using their vendors as guinea pigs – and some of them wont stand for it, as Halman has acknowledged here.

     

    drop the one portal rule, charge a sensible price and we will be on like a shot, as I believe will many others. Then set some sensible goals around growth and stop throwing monety down the drain. Its simple really springers!!

    Report
  10. Woodentop
    February 10, 2016 at 16:01

    Who actually are you referring to “… charge a sensible price”, can’t be RM can it, lol.

    Report
  11. the message
    February 10, 2016 at 16:20

    thats what OTM should do. Get to whole of market overnight by dropping exclusivity and charging £30-£50 a month. Its not rocket science. Then slowly build up a base of people who visit, without wasting stupid marketing dosh. The simple problem is the people running is are pretty dense, and those supporting them are too dozy to ask proper questions. Result equals the mess we see before us.

     

    Report
  12. BrandNew
    February 10, 2016 at 16:38

    And your business qualifications to run a multi million pound mutual are…..?

    Report
  13. Robert May
    February 11, 2016 at 05:23

    It isn’t really a blow. As the old saying goes ‘The graveyard is full of indispensable people!’

    ….. Good turnout, nice spread, what were they working on?

    Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Log In Register

Back to Homepage

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.