NFoPP has thrown its weight behind Agents’ Mutual, the new owned-by-agents-for-agents portal due to go live at the end of next year.
Yesterday, NFoPP’s own portal, PropertyLive, was being killed off.
NAEA managing director Mark Hayward said that a number of offers from companies to take over and run PropertyLive had been considered, but none had been viable.
He said that a “substantial” sum of money has been written off to cover the losses made by PropertyLive since its launch in October 2008.
The support for Agents’ Mutual by NFoPP will deliver up to 14,000 individual members belonging to the NAEA, ARLA, plus the auctioneers’ association NAVA and the commercial association ICBA.
It is not known how many branches the members have between them or what the cross-over is between ARLA and NAEA.
All NFoPP agents will have to join Agents’ Mutual in the normal way, but they will be offered branded listings denoting their membership of, for example, the NAEA.
NFoPP – which is not handing over any money to Agents’ Mutual – is also taking an immediate seat on the board of Agents’ Mutual Ltd, where it will play a full role in its governance, representing the interests of NFoPP members who have already joined Agents’ Mutual or will do so.
Hayward said: “We fully recognise that our members have a free choice in their selection of portals, according to the needs of their own business model.
“Agents’ Mutual’s proposal for a member firm-owned portal offers a credible alternative to the launch-build-float ‘all for profit’ portal alternatives currently available.”
He added: “Furthermore, by attaching the membership logo to their online listings, this will enable consumers to clearly identify those firms from whom they can expect a comprehensive and professional property service.”
Noel Flint, head of London Residential at Knight Frank and one of the founding directors of Agents’ Mutual, called the deal with NFoPP “a huge step in the right direction”.
He said: “This gives us an immediate, and very significant, boost in agent numbers and puts us well on our way to being in serious competition with Zoopla – although, as yet, not Rightmove, which obviously we recognise as being the number one site.”
The recruitment of NFoPP to Agents’ Mutual represents a major breakthrough for the venture.
In June, Ian Springett, brought in to devise the Agents’ Mutual business plan, made it clear that he was not interested in taking over PropertyLive, saying: “They [NFoPP] would probably have to close it first before we’d be interested in offering a collaborative deal.”
In a statement about the deal, NFoPP said: “NFoPP has long warned of the risk that the growing power of the major portal groups could ultimately lead to the corporatisation of the residential property market, such that a small number of very large businesses control the end-to-end transaction process, reducing choice and pushing up costs to the public.
“NFoPP believes that a diverse and highly competitive independent agency industry, underpinned by strong professional standards, is the best model to support the UK residential property market.
“NFoPP believes it to be essential to the future health of the agency industry and to the consumer interest that alternative portal solutions should be encouraged to challenge the status quo of restraining spiralling online advertising costs and returning control of their property data to the agents instructed by owners to sell or let their properties.
“Agents’ Mutual is a company limited by guarantee with no shares or shareholders. Each firm, irrespective of size, advertising on its portal, will be a member with one vote and an equal interest in the business. There are strong protections in the agreement between members and Agents Mutual against any future sale of the business.”
A key feature of Agents’ Mutual is that agents who use it must agree to put their properties on only one other portal.
.png)
Comments
Incidentally when are Savills, Knight Frank, Strutt & Parker, Chesterton Humberts, Douglas & Gordon, Glentree Estates and Thamesview de-listing all their properties from one of the big two?
'RM , has to be' - " I buy and sell, and trust me if an agent is not on RM he wont be selling any of mine.
That said as I only use RM for speed, I wont be buying from them anyway, just the ones that do the job right and ring me with new stock."
Congratulations for the most confusing post of the month.
You wouldn't care to enlighten, would you?
@Michael - Also, with the amount of data skimming that goes on that requirement needs to be worded to exclude the sites that you find you are on without always realising it.
Exactly, So Zoopla's API can be used by any portal that wants to add some listings to their site, how will AM police that?
Then all those data-feed companies who are paid by agents to feed listings to multiple portals, I think they'll be a bit peeved and may not listen, how will AM police them?
Then what about those portals that scrape listings how will AM police that?
Looks like they are going to need to employ a very large team to keep an eye on where you are all listing your properties.
I wonder who is going to pay for all those staff?
Of course if they are simply going to trust you all to abide by their rules, then you've got nothing to worry about.
I buy and sell, and trust me if an agent is not on RM he wont be selling any of mine.
That said as I only use RM for speed, I wont be buying from them anyway, just the ones that do the job right and ring me with new stock.
I read that Foxtons directors has just made £100 million is shares by floating. I say that all us sellers get together and take down this angry beast.We will form our own estate agency and sell homes , insisting that all our vendors limit the amount of advertising that they can take for their homes.That £100 million is ours and we split that back out it equates to around £50 per household , lets insist that you can never swap agents and can only use us , maybe one other ......got any legs
Utter jibberish because the general public just dont care less about what they make, they want them to sell their house ....
If anybody wants to trial "leaving" a portal, just stop feeding your stock through to RM for a few days. Then put it back on and do the same with Zoopla.
Or if that is too much, just try it with certain properties.
RM and Z can advertise all they want, but if they haven't got [our] stock listed, the public will go elsewhere. If all of a sudden we only promote AM, AND take our stock off the main players, where will the public go? As someone else commented, Joe public just want all the stock listed in one place. They care about nothing else!
if you lose 1 instruction from not being on rightmove so what. You need to lose about 10 instructions (not all of them will sell anyway) to care as it costs you £8000 a year to be on it anyway.
I might come off portals all together. Who needs them?? The market is off again and shock horror..i have my own web site, £800 plus £400 saved = my X6 new car and some new golf clubs,,laters losers
Has it occurred to anyone what the reasons for the restrictions imposed might be, and what the net effect might be?
My guess is it's because we already have a ridiculous situation whereby the vast majority of agents plough all their stock on to RM and Z. Why? One is enough.
@Michael, well said! I feel exactly the same.
It all sounded pretty good to me till the last line ... only allowed to use then & one other portal. That got my goat, I don't relish being told by someone I'm to advertise with that I must only do such & such. A portal like eBay is very successful and could impose all sorts of similar restrictions but they don't, unlike some lesser online sales sites.
Also, with the amount of data skimming that goes on that requirement needs to be worded to exclude the sites that you find you are on without always realising it.
Further, whilst I have stopped newspaper advertising, if I took it up again it may well come with a bundle of sites via a newspaper portal .... I'm not having AM restricitng my marketing in this manner, I am an independent after all.
Lift that draconian rstriction and I will give it serious consideration, but leave it in and I won't even contemplate joining them. Sadly.
Scott Creasey hits the nail on the head - consumers dont give a monkeys.
And, as PeeBee says, the media would have a field day if agents withdrew properties from RM or Z (and potentially prolonged a sale) just because it costs a few quid a month to list a property on the biggest and best known property sites in the UK.
How many of you would consider using an alternative to Amazon or Ebay when buying just because another site was charging sellers less commission? Could you give a monkeys? Would you even try to find those alternative sites? What would be the benefit?
That is excactly the problem AM faces - where is the benefit for Joe Buyer and Joe Seller?
On behalf of Nick Alex Sohail Simon Andrew Scott etc...
Good luck Ian S.
“NFoPP believes it to be essential to the future health of the agency industry and to the consumer interest that alternative portal solutions should be encouraged to challenge the status quo"
And
"A key feature of Agents’ Mutual is that agents who use it must agree to put their properties on only one other portal."
Surely that is a contradiction in terms.
“Furthermore, by attaching the membership logo to their online listings, this will enable consumers to clearly identify those firms from whom they can expect a comprehensive and professional property service.”
Got to be honest guys I am not an agent I am a consumer. I bought my first house in 1992 and have bought and sold 5 since then. In all that time it wasn't until I started working for finders and sellers a year ago, that I'd ever heard of the NFoPP.
I would hazard a guess and say consumers don't give a monkey's.
I SAY, you will have to shout a bit louder than that. The only things NFOPP add to the board of AM is the lifetime supply of 'LA, LA, I'm not listening ears' that PBK issued to all staff while he was at Arbon House.
Where is the comment fron the Surrey Agents, the only people in the country who got seriously behind the Pink Portal.
My initial reaction to the news that NFoPP will have a seat on the board was not a favourable one – and I was a massive supporter of PropertyLive!
However, I have a lot of respect for what the people behind Agents' Mutual are accomplishing, and have concluded that I must respect their judgement on the matter. I will certainly continue to support them.
A PUBLIC SLOGGING
If you add up all the funds that have placed rightmove and zoopla in the top spots, then take away all the vertical property searches they power for newspapers that are no doubt in long contrtacts. Then NFOPP and AM best have around £100m+ behind them.
Zoopla are taking valuable advertising spots at tubes, on buses, and taxis as are rightmove. add several £million pounds on TV adverts and top place SEO longtail.
It may be better to give the money to charity and do some good with it. £3.6m is a splash in the ocean to the task ahead that will fail.
Zoopla and Rightmove will simply pour more effort and funds no doubt around agents who pull away from them.
If every inch of advertising shows the big portals, then how will agents explain that AM is way down the ranking and that the agent who isnt on the likes of RM or Z should win their instruction.
I bet that RM and Z can't wait as it will make a public slogging as an example of those who don't advertise with them.
Good luck, any agent who supports, best start doing the lottery in the name of AM. You may need a few extra £millions in the pot. Correction. YOU WILL NEED EXTRA £MILLIONS IN THE POT
@ Buy RM shares, thanks NAEA on 2013-10-23 09:06:1
'...The NAEA was set up as trade body for unqualified people in the industry...'
Qualifications cover many spheres and should be ‘qualified’
When the NAEA was 'set up' there were no 'qualified' people for selling & marketing the booming owner occupied residential market emerging at the time.
The RICS had not an entrepreneurial clue about marketing & selling, (better now but still not in a lot of cases) although I believe they tried to corner the right to legally be a closed shop organization to handle residential property.
I was in sales of another kind, was a qualified Marketer (MCIM) and recognized the opportunity so I set up my own successful Sales, Lettings & Management Company (retired now) as many others did at he time.
The NAEA has been seriously mishandled in recent years but looks to be improving under the new management - give them a chance!
If either the Agents Mutual portal or Property Live were considered sound foundations to build a competitive agent owned / controlled portal, then surely by combining forces this objective is approaching reality. Onwards and upwards ! No point in bitching about the past ....
Rebel - "AM should be organising a boycott of RM & a PR campaign to get the message out to the government, media & public about RM's obscene charges & margins."
Matey - you and I are usually in synch... but I have to pull you up on this one I'm afraid.
NO-ONE is going to give a rat's @$$ what RM are charging the Agents. SOME will think it's not enough!
1. All vendors want is to see their home on the site.
2. All buyers want is to see the homes on the site. It's their one stop shop.
3. The Government are loving the taxes that Rightmove brings them.
4. The media would LOVE the opportunity to turn it into a negative story about how Agents are denying their paying customers the best marketing tool there is simply because it costs a few quid per month per property.
WE helped create the monster. WE fed it; nurtured it - and grew it into what it is now. WE patted it on the head and told it - publically - what a clever thing it was.
Now that it is bugger than us, it bites our hands.
We have to accept that WE are to blame for its bad behaviour.
Just when I thought I was out............ they pull me back in!
BTW
I don't think that I would sign up to AM because I pay for RM, Zoopla, plus a couple of local websites, plus a local newspaper website, plus a local magazine website, etc.
Whilst I can see the point from AM's point of view, I am just not convinced that it is a good idea from my point of view.
What a crazy move by Agents Mutual.
I can see how it might seem like a good idea from the point of view of the general public (only barely however).
However, considering how poorly the industry views NFoPP, it is likely to really dent interest from the people who are going to pay the bills.
I read this and my heart sank.
United we stand; divided we fall
The industry faces the age old problem of being fractional with circa 18,000 sales & lettings businesses all going off at different tangents, much to the joy of the Rightmove owners, Directors and pension funds who also own the shares.
As a united group ‘Agents Mutual’ or any other entity for that matter could be a portal force to be reckoned with, and could easily raise £7m - £8m annually (£35 pcm each) to adequately fund its operations. The members ultimately control the flow of site listings, therefore indirectly controlling what and where consumers search online for property.
However, by restricting agents’ choice and the number of portals that they can subscribe to is an admission by AM that there is a fear of open competition – possibly music to the ears of the Rightmove management team. When or if 18,000 agencies are united, then they can collectively decide by proxy where they advertise their pool of listings thus part controlling the choice of the consumer.
In the meantime, is the initiative worth the extra little monthly investment?
I would suggest that it is. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Unbelievable.
Why TF should anyone from (the joke that is) NFLoP get a seat on the board?
AM has blown it.
Why is the strategy (in effect) to kill off Zoopla, when it is Rightmove who rip us all off, and are our main enemy?
AM should be organising a boycott of RM & a PR campaign to get the message out to the government, media & public about RM's obscene charges & margins.
I am withdrawing our support. Berks.
The NAEA was set up as trade body for unqualified people in the industry, it lacked standards as they had to gain membership, they let anyone in however they acted, it never recovered.
Even when they introduced “entry exams” they failed to make them meaningful. Hence the use of NAEA after someone’s name to fool the public was what it became, few value it for anything else.
That’s why they could not get support for their own portal which should have blown RM etc out of the water, even preventing their entry at all. The power they had was completely missed and now gone
that Knight Frank- declaring Rightmove as clear market leader- will drop Zoopla? will the rest of the founding 6 follow?
Laugh all you like re the failure of PropertyLive...surely the more impotant thing is that this tie up wil assist Agents Mutual considerably, not least presmably through all the datafeeds that have been established.
I'm out.
Dear Messers [SIC] Bolton-King and Turnbull.
I appreciate gloating isn't very endearing but here at last is the product of all that money, effort and arrogance.
YOU FAILED!
but take heart that failure in itself is an truely amazing achievement. With a captive audience of 14,000 agents, with no pressure on time or money you guys managed to produce a Portal that you could not give away, Well Done! (14,000 members have been although that figure was a lot higher when all this started)
Oh my God...
All the time, it was...
You finally really did it.
[falls to knees screaming]
YOU MANIACS! YOU DID A DEAL WITH THE NAEA & NOW THEY HAVE A SEAT ON THE BOARD!
OH, DAMN YOU! GODDAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!