The Property Industry Eye survey into property portal pricing received an initial 1,293 responses.
We removed a number that did not have an identifiable individual or company name, those that were clearly not credible, and those whose answers were so incomplete as to be unusable.
This left a total of 1,115 responses to work with.
It should be noted that not every respondent answered every question. Therefore quoted percentages across different survey questions may not always be calculated on the same base figure. They are calculated on the actual number of respondents to that particular question.
To keep things simple, on several questions we set ranges for each possible answer – for example 2-5 branches, £200-300, etc.
In terms of deciding how representative the survey is of the entire UK industry of estate agencies, we use the calculation that there are around 20,000 branches across the country, as explained here
At minimum, the survey responses represent 2,192 branches or 10.6% of the industry.
We publish the results of this survey in good faith but with the caveat that the information received from the respondents has not been verified. We believe that the survey is an accurate representation, but any conclusions or inferences that may be drawn from the data must be treated with due caution. We also acknowledge that within the limited scope of the survey questions, it was not possible to drill down and identify the exact composition of the portals’ charges, so there may be unknown factors that cause similar sized operations to be paying widely varying prices.
Finally, we would like to make absolutely clear that this survey has not been undertaken at the behest of any portal or third party organisation. It is an initiative that Property Industry Eye conceived and carried out with total independence.
We would like to thank everyone who took the trouble to help publicise the survey, and all those who have taken part in it.
Further analysis will follow throughout this week.
Sorry for being a numbers pedant but even with the briefest of eying of the numbers published your mean number of branch per reply is higher than you are giving yourself credit for. If the mean number of branches is 5 then 1115 valid replies is about 27% of the industry.
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 completed the survey honestly. It's seems credible within the parameters outlined above and it portrays a picture of where the industry sits in relation to Duopoly fees. It isn't an 82% of those using MagicShampoo said it was wonderful! response, only to notice at the foot of your tv the tiny wording…. from a survey of 112 people! Thank You propertyindustryeye for trying to shed some real light on the hidden costs of The Duopoly which again give an indication of the likely drop in monthly/annual income that they will suffer with the start & growth of OnTheMarket.com
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Would it be possible for The Eye to contact RM and Z to ask them to supply their national rate cards for publication? If they don't then perhaps they would care to comment as to why they cant/wont?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register