Staff changes and departures have been confirmed by Countrywide, which is cutting the number of its regional territories by almost half.
The firm also confirmed that it is cutting out management layers.
It declined, however, to confirm whether those on a list of names we sent the firm are among the casualties, saying this was being done out of respect.
The full Countrywide statement is as follows:
“On Thursday 24th we updated the markets on our Q3 trading results and the good progress we have made in delivering our Building our Future strategy, despite tough market conditions since the EU referendum.
“On Friday 25th, we updated our colleagues on changes to Retail and London teams. In Retail, we are reducing the number of territories, from nine regions to five territories.
“Across both London and Retail, where we can, we are reducing the layers between our front line and leadership teams. These changes will enable us to move faster as we roll out new propositions and ways of working to benefit both our customers and colleagues alike, as well as to move to a multi-channel model with fewer, bigger brands and branches around the UK.
“We are committed to working with colleagues to ensure that those who wish to be redeployed are supported in doing so.
“In parallel, and on the back of a successful pilot, we are now rolling out our online offer to the next wave of brands and branches as planned.
“These strategic choices and investments give us the tools we need to succeed in a changing market.
“Obviously these changes impact a number of our colleagues. To be respectful we think it’s their right to share their names should they wish to – not ours.”
Comments (26)
Countrywide are totally blind to their problems. Cutting out layers of management? So regionals now have twice as many branches to cover when they couldn’t manage the workload previously?. Here’s a bright idea, cut out the RED tape of actually getting the job done. The amount of layers in the way of getting a property on the market once the vendor rings up and says “Yes please go ahead” was about 75 before I finally walked out.
The problems that occur from a centralized admin’ department who have to approve every step is horrific. Show me a half million pound branch+ in the country that doesn’t have an amazing administrator sitting at the back?… Put administrators back in branches, make it easier to do the job, give managers more control of their own P&L… Agents of change? “Launchpads” that don’t talk to Reapit, who thought this rubbish up?
if CW cant make any money from selling ‘aousez maybe they should convert them to coffee shops ?
Innit !
And seeing as they are looking for a retail director I can’t be that far off the mark either !!!!!!
2 negatives.
PAH !
Does anyone know why the ‘comments’ section has been removed from the Spicerhaart tribunal article?
Paul smith got upset?
Robert made a very accurate comment on there early on about the length of the article. I gave up reading it a quarter of the way through. Just think its probably being revised for consumption.
Oh OK thanks.
Thank you for that clarification Ros I was sat here thinking I’d offended you.
CW make a trading statement to the City that has no indication that they are about to engage in a round of closures and redundancies that may have major ramifications to their profit/loss and their balance sheet.
Then the next day the information comes to light. I would not be a happy investor if I held CW shares.
But then, given the share performance since they embarked on the ‘Great Retail Debacle’ I would not be happy anyway.
The statement above might work on those that do not know better however, those that do know this business, see it for what it is; whitewash. Income is reducing and will more so by virtue of introducing a ‘PB esque’ alternative within current brand/s. You are what you tell people you are. If you do cheap then prepare yourself for that to be what people come to you for. In the meantime let’s buy ourselves some time and strip out some cost in the vague hope that the market improves sufficiently to enable us to appear as if we know what we’re doing. I’m not holding my breath and neither should anyone else and especially if you are an employee of this now irrelevant organisation. Looking forward to the Q4 numbers and the next update on what appears to be complete fiction aka within the organisation as ‘building our future’.
Are they trying to replicarte the ‘faster decision making’ more dynamic ‘smaller independent model’?
Not replicate it, Grenville went around the country buying up agents like that but everything that made them credible in the communities they served has no been stripped away. No, this is an attempt to emulate the budget internet lister model that’s delivering massive profits to their competitors already in the niche.
Cut costs, go low on fees, pick up vertical opportunities.
I think you are absolutely correct Robert. However, I think we both know that when you have the cost of premises, rates, staff for the number of outlets etc, etc, there will simply be insufficient volume for it to work. Even if you get close, another more compact comptitor arrives to under cut. Countrywide is too big and poorly managed to be sufficiently agile. In the meantime the quality staff that were there, leave as soon as an opportunity appears for them.
Grenville had it as right as corporate agency can get; buy trusted local names apply economies of scale and try to give the impression of not being corporate.
If someone had not fiddled with that it would have continued quite successfully albeit with inevitable rationalisation in areas where they saturate the market.
Premises rates and staff are not the burden most people assume them to be. the cost of replacing the 24 hour subliminal presence of an office is enormous, beyond calculation.
Around here something as subtle as a number plate still wins instructions; VDM for Vivian Moon, CW for Clive White, CWF for Chris Faviel. none sell house any more but people recognise the number plates and think; 2thats the chap who sold me our home”
There is none of that on the internet, it is an SEO arms race no-one can win.
? 1100 sets of premises, maintenance. 10,000 staff, work place pensions, NI, apprenticeship levy. Leases that you may not be able to sublet so carry on paying for and then rates that come with them. That’s a bunch of cost in there.
and to pay for this it comes down to:
Would sir like the £995 inc vat option or the 1% of the sale price portion. Don’t mind which sir, as I have a target to hit!!!!!
dont forget the £20m off the bottom line because you are about to lose tenant fees also!
Remember all the agencies the Pru, Black Horse, Woolwich, Halifax et al couldn’t make pay? what happened to each of them that the original partners bought back for a fraction of what they were paid to go way?
Loss leading the one thing vendors want to buy the bit that has no competition; trust, knowledge, experience, reputation to grab a % of BIG DATA verticals that everyone else, including your own service suppliers is simply doesn’t make sense
The problem has always been in sell outs is how do you reward those street fighters who were just below equity level . They see their future imploding as their future prospects of being rewarded with equity disappearing over the horizon being replaced as a small cog in a corporate machine They didnt join th epractice for thht reason buy in for that and the best plot their deparure with clients in tow often with thee backing of the partners who have been bought out andt he whole merry dance starts again Ask the partners of BW Shiels in N Ireland who have had 2 bites of the cherry
Scuse spegging!!
I’m not 100% sure on that one, isn’t it more a case of the betrayal of both staff and clients. As soon as there’s an HR department caring for staff evaporates. As soon as the agency no longer cares for it’s staff, the staff no longer care for the client.
Pru. woolwich et al gained an awful lot of customers in to their clutches for pensions or current accounts which is where they make the profits. I doubt they ever wanted a long term relationship.
As an ex top adviser with pru i recall that the adviser sales force sold more life cover than the 12000 fields dales force. And Pru are probably still dining on that.
Yes it cost them millions but they are still making profits on it today.
When Abbey Cornerstone sold out, we had a briefing from the Abbey accountant who advised us that just delaying a rate cut to mort account holders would make more money than Cornerstone in 1 year. Apparently a delay would save circa 30 million if it was not passed on to the customer for over 1 month!
i, m sure that these big institutions had vanity but bottom line is that they are the biggest investors in the UK so the plan was bigger than flogging a house for the 1000 fee that was the norm in 1986! or so.
Countrywide made the mistake of employing the ex head of the BDM sales force (Grenville) and then asking the ex junior neg to run it. Alison is probably suffering estate agents who feel they should have there own names above the door so long as it,s countrywide taking the risk. Is her model working …I doubt it….but it must be frustrating seeing the message get to the bottom rung and looking like it came from another mouth.
So the solution is taking some rungs off the ladder.
As for names above the door ….important to a degree but not as important as the people in the office. Just look at how many offices fortunes have been changed by a change of manager!
Hodge you really do have a bee in your bonnet about a lot of ex CW people and I am curious why it is so? Would you like to share and enlighten us as I am sure there is a good reason or you could carry on sounding like the whinging kid who walks off with his ball cos he’s useless and no one passes to him, your choice.
Unless you can’t read, then i suspect that the posts and the profits would speak for themselves. just look up the change of management with the change of fortunes , or read the posts. Rather than ARCing on.
I have looked and since Grenville and Bob have left the share price has dropped by a third which is why ask what is that upsets you so much about that regime as from the outside and the inside it was was successful?
Philospher
Turn the clock back to the late 1980’s and for Countyrwide replace with Nationwide Anglia or indeed a host of other household Corporates. They never and will never learn.
Sadly it is the staff and the company names that were bought up as that was producing the ‘value’; get rid of those and the answers and results are obvious
Surprise surprise and all the people who work as ESTATE AGENTS on the “GROUND” are left in the dark again over this, nice to hear the good ship Countrywide are advising its staff about this ….and not finding out all the ongoing news from this site!!!