Agents in Australia have become so incensed at rising fees charged by portals that they are launching their own portal imminently.
Called Squiiz, it will be 100% industry owned and operated, and already has the backing of agents who between them have 65% of the listings market.
Crucially, it also has the backing of the Certified Practising Real Estate Agents Group, which decided to shelve its own portal plans.
Mike Green, managing director of Harcourts, who is currently in this country on a fact-finding mission about the UK market, told Eye: “The existing portals are so arrogant. They keep hiking their prices. They don’t listen to their customers.
“So, about a year ago, three of us got together to put a plan together. If there are more than a few people in the planning stage, that’s when it all falls apart.”
Green’s wife and colleague Irene, with him in the UK, told Eye: “The current portals are robbing agents blind.”
Australia’s biggest portal is realestate.com.au which is majority owned by Rupert Murdoch’s newspaper group.
It is followed by domain.co.au – also owned by a media group – and Reiwa.com.au, which is owned by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia.
Squiiz has both similarities and great differences with OnTheMarket, to be launched in January by Agents’ Mutual.
With Squiiz, the emphasis is on launching first – after ensuring that the technology runs well and will offer major opposition – and then building up membership.
Currently, there are 12 shareholders – but representing between them the lion’s share of listings.
While 12 sounds small, one of the shareholders is Independent Real Estate Network of Excellence, which represents a group of some 600 independents, while Harcourts itself has some 400 offices. Other shareholders include RE/MAX and Century 21.
Unlike OnTheMarket, there will be no restrictions as to where else agents may advertise. Green says this would be illegal in Australia, where there are tight controls over anti-competitive behaviour.
Green said: “I don’t think anyone will be pulling off the other portals. However, the immediate aim is that we make Squiiz a very serious contender.
“The longer-term aim is to reinvest all profits into marketing and technology, and to make it the number one portal.”
Unlike OnTheMarket, Squiiz will be free – but agents will be charged to display pictures and their own logos.
Also in contrast to OnTheMarket, the launch of Squiiz – due on October 15 – has been a rapid process, with most fund-raising being done post-launch, rather than before.
The name of the site was unveiled only in August and rounds of meetings with agents have been held since. A meeting in Brisbane attracted over 400.
While Australia is far larger than the UK, there are just 11,000 offices. The aim of Squiiz is to get one-third of them on board.
Another big difference is that in Australia, vendors theoretically pay all marketing costs upfront – both newspaper and portal advertising costs.
But, said Irene Green, in practice most independents find it difficult to get costs paid upfront: “One way or other, it’s the agent who pays, and we have to stop agents being robbed.”
So, will Squiiz succeed?
As with OnTheMarket, opinions seem split and the trade press has been following the story with huge interest. On September 11, a poll by Property Observer resulted in a very narrow “no”.
The Greens have been in the UK to see whether they want to launch Harcourts – a highly successful franchising company with over 780 offices in Australia, New Zealand, Indonesia, China, South Africa and the US – in the UK.
They have been taking soundings from a number of sources, including the NAEA, Peter Rollings of Marsh & Parsons, Winkworth, and Sean Newman. They also had a meeting with Eye editor Rosalind Renshaw.
The troubled OtM will have is that there are many 1,000's of corporate offices that through holding companies have shares in RM and Z……….. who between then have 100's of thousands of listings that OtM wont get…………RM and Z also have many vertical marketing platforms that other portals can't get…………..Although better funded and deployed than PropertyLive, a real head on portal attack could cost £100m……………I wish OtM well – but if agents don't get results in 6 months, first AM agents I can see might leave ship.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I reckon you seriously underestimate the combined marketing clout that the OTM agents have. Between our newspaper adverts, shop fronts, e-mails, websites etc that EVERY Agents Mutual offices the name will get out there. Sure RM and Z spend millions on TV advertising, but for them the hard fact is that they HAVE to spend that kind of money if they want the public to know aboyu them – because they haven't got anything else.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Hi Taff……….I wish the attempt well………but if you look behind the corporates and main portals they have backers with £billions behind them…………for RM or Z to spend £20-30m protwcting their models in additional consumer advertising would need OtM to maybe throw another £20-30m and still without most agents on.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I agree and have been banging this drum with AM for sometime. I just do not understand why their teaser campaign, utilaising all member resoirdces has not kicked ito gear.
In reagrds to RightZoop, the only issue is that they are now established and we cant close pandoras box.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
10/09/2014 Agents Mutual financial rating downgraded from 43 to 24 'High Risk' due to 'Director Failures (1)'
——————————————————————————–
Description: A Director of this company is also appointed to a company which has become insolvent within the last 12 months.
——————————————————————————–
Details: Mr Clive Rook, a current Director of this company is also currently appointed to 03428978 which has failed and entered some form of insolvency within the last 12 months.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Thats a good spot but I'm not sure what it means other than he possibly has a little more time on his hands!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Not due to personal experience simply a quick Google check and apparently…………….."If during the director investigations you are cleared of any wrongful trading then there is no reason as to why you cannot go on to be a director of another company. However if you are found to have performed misconduct while trading an insolvent company, then a ban can be implemented by the Secretary of State for up to a maximum of 15 years………………………."…………. I sit here more wondering, what are the terms for these new Directors popping in and out of AM……… what are they earning?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Well I have a meeting with them next week….so I will ask!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
In fairness, OtF, Mr Rook was appointed as a Director of AM about two months before the company that you refer to entered into voluntary insolvency (as per the Gazette Notice on 6/6/14). There are those that would argue that doesn't make a jot of difference – but as we all know our industry throws curve-balls at us daily…
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Agents provided all the initial "advertising/brand awareness" for RM & Z, and now they can do the same for OTM. Surely in the end it will come down to one simple thing: who lists the most property.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Having seen this now from both hemispheres over the last 18 months its been absolutely fascinating, albeit from a trainspotterish point of view about the similarities in the arguments.
Cut and paste Domain and RealEstate.com for Right Move and Domain, the feelings of agents, the portals defending their positions against paper advertising and its almost identical.
Mind you if Agents think they're paying too much over here they'd sob at the rates that are charged in Oz, albeit with the caveat that much of it is payed by the vendor there. $6000 one paid for a premium listing on REA.com is eye watering.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Should have been Zoopla instead of Domain clearly. Brain still not quite recovered from the 4am watching of the Scottish vote!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Not a great name; I presume its pronounced 'Squitz' which of course has a different meaning in the UK?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Could be 'Squeez'?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register