It’s been another hectic week for the industry, here is what has caught our eye.
First: Purplebricks hits Australia
Purplebricks launched in Australia on Monday, weeks ahead of expectations.
At the start of last weekend, it had a website up and running in Australia and the Australian press reported the launch – with one headline suggesting that Australians’ dislike of estate agents will fuel Purplebricks’ success.
One striking feature is that it will be charging Australian sellers far more than British ones – over three times as much.
Mark Walker makes a good point about the sheer size of Australia and how local the LPEs will be. He said: “Are Purplebricks aware of the sheer geographical scale of Australia? How local will there LPEs be? Like their Liverpool and Manchester LPE, will there be one LPE who covers both Perth and Sydney..? Will he be flying with the Flying Doctors?”
Nextchapter was interested in how the launch will work, stating: “This is really interesting. I’m looking forward to seeing how this pans out. Thing is, the concept of Purplebricks is great but in reality I’ve learnt that the public do not just want to deal with 1 individual that works from home and they prefer a no sale, no fee model.
“The likes of Purplebricks and other similar companies have only done so well, as we’ve been in a property market, where houses have practically been selling themselves! That’s now changed, so let’s see.”
Should homes with low EPCs be banned from the sales market?
That is the idea from think-tank Bright Blue.
The document says that a minimum EPC rating should become mandatory “in order for the sale of the home to be permitted”.
Will was less impressed, responding: “Sounds like this group should be renamed ‘Dimbo Blue’ This idea could lock property into a void where it could not be advertised to sell a property needing renovation; if I am understanding this correctly?”
Eric Walker commented: “Ridiculous. The poorest people who need to sell but can’t afford to upgrade, executor sales, flood / damaged properties and the speculator market would all be affected. This is almost funny.”
Third: Target practice
Do targets help motivate agents? That is the latest debate being hotly discussed on The Arena forum.
One user, htsnom79 said: “Targets are fine if you trust the setter of those targets and importantly respect them. Have done a bit of corporate in Essex.
“We were advised that on a monthly basis we would have the use of a sports car, had to hit all KPI or you were out.
“Targets set by people who don’t get the people they are setting targets for are worthless, haven’t worked for corporate since but am glad of the experience, have never worried about corporate competition since.”
PeeBee added: “The person who sets the “targets” should have a target of their own – to aim to motivate staff to perform at their peak through encouragement and example.”