Eye is always a bit conscious about suggesting our readers watch videos, as we know how busy you are. Many videos may be only minutes long, but they’re minutes you cannot afford to waste time on.
However, this is one that we suggest that the Eye community does take a look at.
It is the video that goes with the current crowdfunding pitch by the iProperty Company – and will bring you up to speed with the latest arguments for NOT using an agent.
The iProperty Company is the portal that bans agents, but allows private sellers to list their properties free.
Crucially, in the UK, thanks to backing by the NHBC, most listings are from developers who also pay nothing.
Can we suggest that the NHBC should re-think this – and fast.
After all, shouldn’t developers value their relationships with agents above a free advertising platform which may or may not work?
So, how will it make its money? We know that iProperty will sell services such as For Sale boards – something that helped wreck Tesco’s chances of its “we are not an estate agent” model.
We are baffled by iProperty’s suggestion that “data processing information” will be an income stream. What does this mean? If it is really just another price index giving us information about trends, supply and demand, etc, then it would launch into an already very over-crowded and contradictory market.
It also flashes up a number of logos.
We glimpsed, among others, that of Hometrack.
Until very recently, when Hometrack changed methodology and adopted a cities index, it relied entirely on estate agents for its monthly data.
When we last looked, the iProperty Company had raised £315,0780 via crowdfunding, or 63% of its £500,000 target.
This would be in return for a 6.25% stake in a business valuing itself at £7.5m.
The video is here
Comments (5)
Not quite but see your point.
the water is very murky when it comes to new home builders as the relationship with agents is mutually beneficial.
new homes builders are essentially selling there own property. But need relationships with estate agents for all manner of reasons, in particular part exchange options.
an interesteting point is that RM and Crapoola have been listing their stock for years. In summary the portal s have been assisting direct sellers right under agents noses but few have taken notice.
AM is looking for out for the interests of it members not looking for double standards
in summary new build developers need to choose if they want to cosy up to direct sales or use agents and the other benefits they offer. but agents should stand strong and united and not allow them to have their cake and eat it.
Thanks for illustrating my point Eamonn; precisely my point when I said this whole issue is menacing:
“new build developers need to choose if they want to cosy up to direct sales or use agents and the other benefits they offer”
Or what – you’ll gang up on them?
I think this approach is exactly what many of us are objecting to Eamonn. I don’t need to collude with other agents to sell and win with my service. I am your competitor and do not (and should not) ‘stand strong and united’ with you.
Take a chill my friend……its not that big an issue.
Plus I don’t think I fully understand the point your trying to make but having said that, I am not that bothered either.
I do however, encourage a principle called positive competition. It works in nearly every industry
Is it just me, or does this sound a little menacing?
Isn’t this the same news service which supports – and is sponsored by – agents mutual: the portal that ‘bans’ house builders?
Seems a bit like ‘want cake and eat it’ to me…
Please could you clarify who you think is being a little menacing? iProperty or Eye.
When this project was first muted back in may I posted that this project threatens the symbiotic relationship between Agents and developers, when developers realise that I can’t see many of them wanting to disrupt agreements and loyalties that have been in place for at least a generation.