Debates on portals and agents now online

For those interested in last week’s round table debate, online versus traditional agents, reported on Eye last Friday, a fuller write-up is now available.

Written by Emma Ward-Hunt, it can be viewed via the link below.

http://www.vtuk.com/-VTUK-Round-Table-Debate-Full-Write-Up

Readers may also be interested in another ‘debate’, this time with the bosses of Rightmove, Zoopla and Agents’ Mutual, which was carried in Peter Knight’s new magazine, 4i.

It can be found here:

rightmove.co.uk/news/files/201…

x

Email the story to a friend



19 Comments

  1. MF

    Chesterman casually brushes off criticism of his listing rates by saying that the average agent is paying £5 per property per month. What about the smaller agents??? Those advertising just a handful of properties – how much are they paying per month per property?? Try an average of £75 to £150 per month. WHY will these portals not be fair to the many smaller agents, who chose to remain small, by offering them a rate that reflects the number of listings? It's hardly fair, is it.

    I do hope Agents' Mutual will be offering a suitable package to the smaller agents (otherwise many smaller agents will probably decide to wait until AM can match the leads currently being provided by whichever portal they currently list with, which is unlikely to be both of the duopoly, before ditching and switching).

    Report
    1. PeeBee

      MF – "Those advertising just a handful of properties – how much are they paying per month per property?? Try an average of £75 to £150 per month."

      But what is the RoI on that spend, MF? Very high I presume – otherwise you wouldn't be spending it!

      "I do hope Agents' Mutual will be offering a suitable package to the smaller agents"

      Ain't gonna happen, mon ami.

      Report
      1. PeeBee

        MF – you there?

        Report
  2. PeeBee

    Well… that meeting must have taken all of three minutes, if that is the full write-up (according to the blog).

    Three minutes of everyone's lives needlessly lost, never to be regained… 😉

    Report
  3. Rosalind Renshaw

    Actually, it did take quite a bit longer than three minutes, PeeBee – more like three hours!
    Take this opportunity to apologies to anyone who has been trying to log in to post comments on our stories this morning – in the interests of making a few improvements to our site, we have had a few glitches. We are on the case, though.

    Report
    1. PeeBee

      THREE HOURS??

      I only hope then that there were plenty of handbags being slung – ducking those must have been the only thing keeping you awake, Ros! 😉

      Report
      1. Emma Ward Hunt

        Hi PeeBee. Thank you for your "constructive" comments – as Ros mentioned, it was a lengthy debate (and er, should I have included everyone giving their food order to the waiter)? 😉 We are hoping to make the video footage available so you can watch the handbag slinging at your leisure…

        Report
        1. PeeBee

          Well – if you REALLY want "constructive" comments – here's a few more…

          Maybe – just maybe – including the food order would have padded out your "Full Write Up" to more than the 1min 28 seconds it took me to read all about the three hour "lengthy debate"… 😉

          I look forward to the video. If I watch it at 202x normal speed it will finish almost as quickly as your review!

          Also, there won't be any grammatical errors to negotiate round. That would be a plus for me. Doesn't a software supplier use a simple Grammatik these days?

          Might also be not so biased toward online Agents.

          We'll have to see.

          Report
          1. JAM01

            "Might also be not so biased toward online Agents"

            PeeBee, that's just 'PIE in the sky'. "PIE in the sky" – did you see what I did there? Comment of the week I reckon.

            Report
          2. Tike Nick

            Pah! who was it schmoozing his bestest 'Mayty' mate's spelling and grammar just the other week? A bit of double standards me thinks! Mon Ami.

            Report
          3. PeeBee

            Tike Nick

            So – grammar and spelling issyews aside, may I take it that you agree with my actual point – that, from what is being reported, the three-hour debate was apparently a minute and a half of harrumphing and feather-fluffing… and bu99er all else of substance to actually benefit the industry or its customers?

            Report
          4. Tike Nick

            It was only ever going to be a spring time stag rut; all eager to show who has the most points.
            People who agree with you get a bad rap so although I do agree I have to disagree #16pointsonamonarch

            Report
          5. PeeBee

            Like your train of thought. I look forward to potential future disagreements.

            Welcome to the party! 😉

            Report
          6. PeeBee

            Oi! Ros – what's happened to 'winkeys'??

            Report
          7. Tike Nick

            ooow err Missus! you can't ask a Lady about Winkies

            Report
          8. PeeBee

            I already have… too late to go back now!

            Once posted – there forever.

            Report
  4. Tike Nick

    Amazing thing about this thread? AM mentioned, no Paul H. Now that IS a first

    Report
    1. PeeBee

      He'll drop by later, I'm sure.

      Currently getting a top-up at a 'Collective' meeting, no doubt…

      Report
    2. PeeBee

      Hmmm… 24 hours and nothing!

      Maybe it's Paul H who is in Magaluf…?

      Maybe the entire EYE audience is there with him!

      Why wasn't I invited? (sniff…sniff… wipes tear from corner of EYE…)

      Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

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.