OnTheMarket is pro-competitive, chief executive Ian Springett said this morning.
Totally dismissing criticisms of ‘cartel’ behaviour, Springett told EYE: “The disruptive influence and service of OnTheMarket are positively pro-competitive.
“With our launch, our members have created more choice for consumers and agents alike and are pursuing a longer-term strategy to prevent an unhealthy dominance and control of the portals market by just two firms.
“These two firms generate super-profits on the back of the data provided by traditional estate agents and provide the essential platform on which an ever-growing number of online-only agents depend.”
He also said that the new portal is here to stay, whatever the critics say.
Springett singled out Russell Quirk and Zoopla as being the most strident critics.
He said: “It is now nearly eight months since OnTheMarket.com was launched – 230 days to be precise – and in that time we have delivered rising traffic levels month-on-month and an increasing volume of quality leads for our member agents.
“Support for OnTheMarket is snowballing in terms of agent membership and property listings. Naturally, these impressive successes – which have already helped us to disrupt and transform the landscape of the portals market – have attracted the most relentless and strident criticism from those who would prefer the business to fail.
“Online-only agent Russell Quirk and Zoopla Property Group – which lost almost a quarter of its agents between the end of September 2014 and March 2015 – remain the most consistently vocal detractors.
“Given the scale of Zoopla’s losses of agent members and property listings and given the fact that Mr Quirk’s agency is excluded from joining OnTheMarket, this remains unsurprising.”
Today Springett hit out at what he called “the more outlandish claims from these detractors which we consider either wildly inaccurate or simply ludicrous”.
Some of these claims, and Springett’s responses to them, are in our next story.
Comments (11)
PeeBee, obvious question in light of your last answer but how do you know that not being on Z never did you ‘an ounce of harm’?
I advertise on both and know for a fact that had I not been on Z I would have lost instructions. How do I know this? Because my customers have told me so. Many ask directly if they will be advertised on Z and many ask if they will be on RM. Many have their own preference.
Now I am not saying that Z is fantastic and it certainly has faults (some laughable)but it does have its own loyal customers whether I or anyone else like it or not. There are those out there for whom it is the No 1 choice. If you do valuations/market appraisals you will know this for a fact.
As a wise man once said there is no accounting for taste (or logic). I only actually joined Z as it was free (and remained so for at least 3 years) whilst it established itself so it was both risk and cash free.
Conversely do I lose instructions because I am not on OTM? I really cannot say. I was recently asked if we were on OTM and explained why we weren’t. The client said he had been impressed with all the bullseye adverts in EA windows. This puzzled me as there are no OTM agents near any of my offices. It turned out he does a lot of business in the North East and saw a lot of bullseyes up there? This confirmed to me how regional OTM still appears to be. His wife wanted to know if we were on Z! Neither asked if we were on RM??? I got the instruction anyway.
And by the way 8 months in and I still haven’t heard from an OTM rep?
I will jump in purely because you raised a very good point. The strength of any Web portal is down to the support it gets from its agents. My area is very low key Z (long way away from PeeBee) and why we never really got any worthwhile business. RM are very strong, only because they got there first from agents promotion. OTM is now heavily promoted by nearly all agents in my area and loads of leads coming through. If we could get the two who are not on OTM to join, RM would be practically dead as far as local support is concerned, it would follow that when every agent has joined OTM around the country, it would become the consumers first choice. As for the OTM Rep may I suggest you call them rather than wait?
Jeez how did Harry’s comment get 17 dislikes? His first sentence was bang on in context to the tag line “On the market is pro-competition”.
Also I’ve said it on a previous post, I’m very cynical of any website that doesn’t feel it’s got enough strengths and USP to succeed on it’s own merits, and has to implement a rule that states you can only use one of Zoopla and RM if you’re with OTM. That smacks of fear and lack of confidence in your offering.
On the other hand agents getting together to form an industry portal is fine (but then I’m bias). As is delaying feeds to other websites, that’s just smart, as you can then market to the consumer the “see it first” tag line.
But if the market wants a one portal market then it’s barking mad. A monopoly is not good whether it’s agent owned or not. OTM’s aim should be to be taken as seriously as Rightmove thus eliminating RM”s ability to price gouge and allowing agents to be on both (or I personally think all 3 websites) for a modest cost. Surely the ideal scenario is being able to be on all 3 sites without it hitting your bottom line.
‘Pomdownunder’ – you’re missing the point. Agents HAD – AND STILL HAVE – A CHOICE.
MORE choice, in fact.
If they didn’t want to agree to the specified Membership criteria – they simply walk away. What could be more free a choice than that?
And in response to your stated cynicism over OTM’s “lack of confidence” – I would ask HOW MUCH MORE confident must AM be than to set such criteria in stone at the risk of a percentage (however big) of their target market not wishing to abide by them?
So where is the “fear” you refer to – either that of the portal – or of its’ subscribers?
I would have to say THEY are the only ones with b@lls.
Oh – and before you say ‘Well you would say that, wouldn’t you…” – actually no, I wouldn’t. I was previously not on Z – for all the right reasons. Never did me an ounce of harm pre-Jan 2015 – and every OTM lead I get is one I wasn’t getting before.
Lol PeeBee. I don’t miss points, I make them. And may I suggest you take care not to lean on the caps lock when you write 🙂
Anyway jokes aside, um, would you like to clarify how there is “more choice”? The optimum choice as I’ve already stated is to be in a position to utilise RM, Zoopla & OTM. Anything less than that is less choice. If I offer you 3 different types of Quality Street, that’s more choice than if I offer you 2 different types. (just for clarification).
So what we’re saying here, is as an agent I’d be given an ultimatum? I either take the OTM offering, but drop one of Zoopla or RM, or I don’t take OTM at all?! Yes that’s a choice, but it’s not a very liberal, flexible choice! What if I as an agent understand the need for diversity and spreading my exposure, and want to offer my vendors the best exposure I can give their listing, but also at the same time want to support my industry owned website and thus list on all 3 websites? I can’t!!! That’s a ridiculous concept!
Let me put it another way just to ridicule the concept further. I need a nice sporty car for me, a family car, and a car for my teenage daughter. I’d like a Ferrari, maybe a BMW for my daughter and then a Porsche Cayenne for the family. But hang on, the guys at Porsche say, sorry sir, you can only have a Porsche and one other from Ferrari and BMW? Crazy? Yes, any different to this concept really? No not at all….
“So what could be more free choice than that” you say? uh, being on, (brace yourself I’m about to lean on the caps lock), “BEING ABLE TO LIST ON ALL 3 WEBSITES”!!!!
As for the comment about lack of confidence, nothing you’ve said discounts that comment. It’s simply an opinion that they (OTM) come across as lacking in confidence, or not backing themselves wholeheartedly, if they don’t feel they can achieve what they want to achieve based on innovation, USP and individual offering alone. Back yourselves against your opponents based on your own strengths and beliefs. Or are they afraid (referencing fear) that they don’t have a solid enough offering without that condition?
As for your last paragraph in italics I wasn’t going to say any of that, so you kind of had an argument with yourself on that bit.
Monday morning and the same old stories farmed out by Ros, ‘OTM’s the best thing since sliced bread!’
Yawn……
Don’t see you getting all flushed with happiness over the reverse being said down the other pub – why’s that?
SOMETHING must be keeping you here…
Err,
A portal which restricts the suppliers that its customers can use for 5 years is anti-competitive.
100 agents getting in a room and agreeing which portal they are going to drop is illegal, as well as anti-competitive. Which new, disruptive innovators/competitors are going to emerge into that environment!
Telling customers that somehow removing them from a more established website and holding their property back from the other for 24-48 hours is dishonest.
Of course Springett will defend his business model – he has to, but it is a falsehood to describe OTM as pro-competition. Its stated aim is to kill all competition in the portal market. Agents may jump up and down and celebrate in the short term, but when they are being dictated to by a small and self-interested group of high end agents, led by Springett, they may live to regret their enthusiasm.
Oh you do talk a lot of twaddle.. Please try to bring some sense of realism to these debates.
Is there one simple agent in the UK who would not benefit from having one simple, straightforward and in expensive portal, rather than all having to advertise on a site which spends 80% of our money on profits for shareholders. It is time to kill off Hoopla and then move onto Wrongmove.
Still full of enthusiasm here and definitely a more than little self interested – for the public, the market, agents throughout the UK and me!
I love it when back street lawyers rant over being illegal, more to do with their hatred for OTM. Come on HarryN please tell us which actual law? Inferring something is illegal is not the answer, chapter and verse please. I can save you the time, you won’t find any law has been broken.
Silence, no-one is surprised!