There has been a broadly sceptical response from agents to the announcement by Agents' Mutual's portal OnTheMarket that it has started making exceptions to its controversial one other portal' rule for existing and potential members.
A range of comments were posted online by agents yesterday after OTM announced that Scottish letting agents would be able to list on Citylets plus OnTheMarket and one other competing portal.
As with many online activities, most posters were anonymous (and several produced plenty of spelling and grammatical errors) but the significant majority expressed disappointment with the decision.
One post reads: It's either a one other portal rule or not and the fact that this has already been loosened will inevitably lead to agents running all three next year with AM either powerless or without the will to stop them.
Another reads: There is a very simple word for this; cartel. It is no wonder to me that Rightmove are sitting back and remaining silent. They know that ultimately if the thing gets any traction a simple letter to the competition authorities will mire the AM team in litigation and the whole thing will come tumbling down.
Another post asks specifically of the situation in Scotland: Where does this leave S1 Homes.....all sorts of difficult decisions........but cannot see the logic in allowing CityLets if you wont allow S1. How does it work for solicitors of Property Centres, does that count as one portal Therefore cannot go RM or Z if they go OTM.
On Twitter, prominent social media user Chris Wood of PDQ Property in Cornwall tweeted: an exception that #AgentsMutual may well live to regret. #thinendofthewedge
There were supportive comments from a minority, including those who said this u-turn was a shrewd way of ensuring Zoopla was the most significant loser in Scotland, and another who said there won't be 1 agent at the otm launch that is only on 2 portals....just as long as they only carry Rightmove OR Zoopla....any others ...it's fine with me.
.jpg)
%20A%20property%20tale%20for%20our%20times.png)
Comments
Ha ha if they waive that rule they are just another portal......
I love the fact that all the AM sceptics are invariably accused of being on RM or Z's payroll! This 'bury their heads in the sand while shouting "LA LA LA CAN'T HEAR YOU" nonsense just further goes to illustrate the lack of rational and logical thinking by the AM flagwavers.
It just crossed my mind there could be another reason why citylets have been granted an exception by the grandees at AM. What if CityLets weren't happy at the idea of being exterminated and indicated to AM that they intended to mount a legal challenge That would have played very badly and would maybe lead to a challenge in England. Sounds more plausible than the desire to damage Zoopla (illogical and counterproductive) but who really knows
This publication should be ashamed of itself. Using quotes from a competing journal to attack agents mutual when nearly all the quotes are from people anti Agents mutual.
There are now people on twitter claiming that estate agents are all anti AM.
So the comments on another news forum from a handful of partisan and probably on the payroll anti AM posters now form the basis of a news story
It's clear as day with the effort invested by most posters that they are not casual observers and do not represent the agent community.