A PropTech start-up led by a prominent commentator has become the latest part of the industry to take a pop at portals for putting profits before people.
Twindig describes itself as an investor-backed service “committed to putting trust and transparency back into the property industry, providing admin management tools” to free up agents and developers to focus on improved customer service.
Its chief executive is Anthony Codling, a former analyst at Jefferies investment bank and best known for a searing critique in 2018 on Purplebricks’ sales record.
In his new role, Codling has released details of a recent survey - albeit of only 300 sellers, buyers and owners - which shows an overwhelming demand for more transparency in the buying and selling process.
Some 94 per cent of buyers and 83 per cent of sellers said that there wasn’t a high level of trust within the overall property buying process.
And 70 per cent of sellers and 84 per cent of buyers said they would like to feel more knowledgeable and confident about the house buying/selling process.
When it came to transparency, 100 per cent of buyers and more than two thirds of sellers said they would like to see more.
“Our research confirmed what you already know, that we lack the trust, confidence and control required in the process buying, selling and managing our homes. Portals are doing nothing to address that – they are simply profiteering” he says.
He says the past week has seen Rightmove, Zoopla and OnTheMarket attempt to beat each other with what he calls “tokenistic cuts” adding that “it only goes to show that portals are putting profit ahead of people.”
Codling continues: “Portals do not sell property, people sell property. Estate agents and house builders have done, are doing and will continue to play the most important role in the cycle of renting, buying and selling homes. Twindig is here to support the industry rather than cream excess profits from it.”
.png)
.jpg){kind=logo}
.jpg)
%20-%20IMAGE%20Client%20Accounting%20%E2%80%93%20what%20are%20your%20options.jpg)
.png)
.png)
.png)
%20(002).png)
%20(002).jpg)
.png)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
What frustrates me with petty articles like this, is he seems to forget, portals are also businesses and cost an awful lot of money to function too. I guess he didn't see the portals offers, and do the math on how much money this will cost them too? This is clearly just a bit of personal PR.
If selling/renting etc a property is just about “Portals do not sell property, people sell property...", then why do agents use portals in the first place? Because, it is beneficial to do so. It is also a personal choice if agents do or do not use them, as it should be.
Without listings, and leads, the majority which come from portals (the most agents), many agents would simply not be able to compete and exist. Don't agree with portals, it's quite simple, do not be on them then. Or just sign up with the cheapest.
Quite the numptie, aren't you?
Let me see 1.6M properties are listed a year, so that is maybe 2.3M vendors and 2.3M buyers, call it 4.5M people 'doing property' a year. Add in 1M to 1.2M completions a year, so some vendors and buyers not in 4.5M number above, let us call it 6M people 'doing property a year.
So a sample of 300 out of 6 million vendors and buyers, as a % is, well too many decimal places to put down, and maybe Twindig's former trading name Cimmple, might have been a better name for this straw poll.
As to trust and transparency, maybe taking a swipe at the property industry, when it comes from a person who has little hands on knowledge of the real estate or proptech sector might not be the best strategy, time will tell. But if you duff up the potential client base you want to sell your admin management tools to, do not be surprised if they are not too receptive.
On the portals do not sell properties, we do know that Purplebricks who has not a single 'negotiator' or 'sales manager' in its team - and no sales targets - does in fact rely on property portals to generate it's sales. So on that point also I would take exception, and this is one of the great areas of contention, onliner's are combine-harvesters - listing industrial amounts of property, with in Purplebrick's case no focused sales team.
Yes they have or had Local property experts - but they are targeted and paid on listings, not agreed sales or exchanges.
Do you understand the principle of sampling? They can't interview the massive number of participants you suggested clearly. The results are presented as found, deal with them, no idea why you're trying to shoot the messenger here. Unless there is history between you two?
Please login to comment