Online agent Emoov gets ‘best price’ for vendors, beating both high street and online rivals

New research carried out for Emoov claims to show that on average the firm gets a better price for its vendors than other agents.

The study, covering a two-year period, says that Emoov gets the best price for sellers at its price point – around £350,000 – in six out of ten regions in England, and in six out of 12 regions in the UK.

It also says that Emoov achieves an average of £4,000 more than other online or hybrid agents and that on average the firm sells properties for £6,000 more than all types of other agents operating at its price point.

Over the two-year period, the study shows that Emoov took on 8,231 instructions at an average price of £353,263 and sold them for an average of £12,911 more than the AVM (automatic valuation model), and on average for £6,092 more than rival agents.

The analysis, by twentyea, compared Land Registry data with Automated Valuation Models of homes (AVMs) between September 12, 2016, and September 11 this year.

The study ranked all UK national estate agent by volume of new instructions over the two-year period, an exercise which put Emoov 33rd nationally.

It then excluded Knight Frank, Savills, Hamptons, Dexters, Foxtons, Fine & Country and Winkworth from the analysis, as they operate at higher price points than Emoov.

That left agencies operating at prices roughly between £150,000 to just under £500,000.

While Emoov’s own average price during the period of research was £353,263, Purplebricks’ was £276,090. The most expensive was Chancellors at £490,627, and the cheapest was Whitegates at £151,746.

While Emoov took on 8,231 new instructions, Purplebricks took on 118,164 – easily the highest in the table, and confirming its assertion that it is now the biggest agent in the UK by both brand and business.

Your Move was the next highest at 47,953 new instructions, with William H Brown at 43,296, Connells at 40,666 and Hunters at 38,377.

Emoov overvalued its listings by 5.5%, reduced prices by 1.76%, and achieved a final price of 3.69% more than the AVM value of the property, says the study.

Ward & Partners came in lowest, at 0.98%, for price reductions (initial asking price compared with Land Registry price), while the highest was Express Estate Agency at 5.4%.

However, no other firm in the list of 23 national agents did better than achieving over the AVM value of the property compared with the Land Registry price.

The research also drills down to regional levels.

For example, in inner London it found that Emoov would achieve 4.71% over the AVM value; this was bettered only by Keatons, which achieved a 6.33% uptick.

The research shows that within Greater London, Emoov are ranked 47th by volume of instructions.

Yorkshire & The Humber proved one of the few regions where Emoov did not top the leader board, with the research finding it in third place in obtaining the best price for the vendor. In first place was Saxton Mee, followed by Hardisty & Co.

Emoov also came third in the north-west when it came to getting best price, after Julian Wadden and Move Residential.

In the south-east it took fifth place behind haart, Miles & Barr, Ward & Partners and Cubitt & West, but beating Fox & Sons and Purplebricks.

When it comes to onlines and hybrids, by volume of instructions over the two years, Emoov are ranked fifth nationally.

The research found that Emoov was top at achieving the best price, followed by Tepilo (which it now owns). Purplebricks came seventh in a list of ten online agents at achieving the best price.

Again, there were variations at regional level: in inner London, Doorsteps achieved the best price for vendors with properties worth £600,000 – Emoov’s average price in the region – with Tepilo in second place.

Homesearch EOS
x

Email the story to a friend



13 Comments

  1. AgencyInsider

    I love the smell of bullsh*t in the mornings.

    Report
  2. Chris Wood

    To paraphrase the line from Anchorman “60% of the time it works every time”

    Report
  3. Hillofwad71

    Statistics ,damn statistics Well, Emoov despite being around as long as Bricks,attracting  £18m worth of investment currently have only 2,592  instructions this morning  actively being marketed . The gap becoming increasingly wider with Purplebricks and Yopa   romping away

    Looking through Zoopla another  interesting statistic

    % of current instructions actively being marketed  on  Zoopla which have  been on longer than 12 months as of today

    Purplebricks 10% !!!!!!

    Emoov 5.5%

    Yopa 4%

    So Yopa winning there and Bricks in a class of their  own with a hefty amount of comisery for 2,000+

    Onliner  with instruction currently being on market for longest SEVEN  YEARS UNSOLD FIRST LISTED OCTOBER 2011!!!

    Emoov

    Maybe if they  changed the headline from 3 bed property  to match that in the description of plots of land  for sale they would have  stood half a chance

    https://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/42583243

     

    Report
  4. WestMidsValuer97

    What a load of rubbish….this is also impossible to measure. I wonder how much emoov paid EYE to publish this crap?!

    Report
    1. PeeBee

      WMV97

      I can confidently say that the answer to your question is £NIL.  I am also confident that EYEs MD will at some point vehemently confirm this.

      I will state once again what I firmly believe to be the reasoning for these articles.

      They are “news”.  They are hawked around, as ‘Press Releases’, hoping that someone publishes them.  Sent out as regular as bowel movements (and equally as nitrogenously enriched…) on the 1:20… 1:50 or even 1:100 success rate basis.

      EYE publish them all – even those that attract little or no other media interest.

      Why?  BECAUSE THEY SHOULD.  This type of marketing *********** (credit: Jonnie) is sloshing around out there – and EYE pulls it all together so that we are informed.  Forewarned of the fireworks that are going to be lit and chucked into our room.

      Anyone can wazz all over this puny squib.  It doesn’t take any effort at all.  But it’s stuff that people believe.

      And if one vendor pays a Fee on the back of it and then fails to sell as a result then, simply put, the damage is done.

      So as the old saying goes, to be forewarned is to be fore-armed.

      Report
  5. AgentV

    So can emoov explain what or anything they do diffferently to the other agents to achieve a supposedly higher sale price?

    We are all waiting with baited breath!

    Report
  6. AgencyInsider

    Unless each dataset is for an identical property, with an identical buyer, at an identical moment in time, this whole exercise is meaningless nonsense – which no doubt will be exploited by emoov to the full.

    As for using AVMs as the basis for comparison – Pah!

    Report
  7. PAG45

    I’m waiting for my staff to receive another 8 page letter from headshepard#2 ranting about this now

    Report
  8. El Burro

    Only just been able to post as couldn’t stop laughing before , how . . . . . . oh sorry I’ve gone again . . . .

    Report
  9. Ostrich17

    So how much did Emoov pay for this research ?

    Report
  10. GeorgeHammond78

    New research carried out for Emoov claims….gave up at this point. Can’t be bothered reading Fake News.

    Report
  11. Thomas Flowers

    Reading this statistical bull**** i’ve just had an evacuation movement or emovement for short.
    Evacuation meaning:
    the action of emptying the bowels or another bodily organ. “patients with a feeling of incomplete evacuation”.
     
    What I really want to know is how much money have they lost investors and how many users feel an ”incomplete” emovement?

    Report
  12. PeeBee

    Hmmm…

    Just a quick point here.

    eMoov’s “price point” as they call it. £353k, apparently.  The basis and focus of this “report’s” findings.

    “the study shows that Emoov took on 8,231 instructions at an average price of £353,263 and sold them for an average of £12,911 more than the AVM…”

    NOT “SALES” of properties at that “price point”, then?  How many of them would have been COMPLETED SALES AT THAT FIGURE (+/- say £25k)

    NOT 8231 £353k “SALES”?  HOW MANY? (again allowing the £25k +/-)

    NOT A REAL “VALUATION” –  an AUTOMATED VALUATION.

    Just HOW MUCH of this *********** (credit: Jonnie) actually has a modicum of reality as its basis?

    Answers, on a postcard, please…

    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.