With the profession as we know it perceived to be under constant threat from the internet, it is sometimes easy to forget that the traditional model of estate agency continues be how most practitioners operate.
As such, the varying approaches adopted by such operators are less scrutinised than they might otherwise be.
However there are two clear agency organisations working high streets across the UK - the small local firm comprising no more than a handful of branches and the multi-agency giants.
But which set up is best for both clients and the agencies themselves
Clearly the larger organisations benefit from scale both in terms of helping to reduce overheads and also the amount of data they are able to access but do they lose out on the genuine local market knowledge that has been built up sometimes over decades by the small local operators
Is size everything or is small indeed particularly beautiful in the estate agency world
Comments
Is this actually an article What has happened to EA today Might as well just post 'estate agents - discuss'
Thank you, Hound - no-one's ever accused me of explaining [b]anything[/b] 'very well' before!
I'm touched... ;o)
There are no significant economies of scale for a large chain, as PeeBee explains very well below, the infrastructure required for a large chain increases the overheads.
The theory that a large chain creates more exposure may sound good in principal, but as anyone that has ever worked for a corporate well knows, because of the pressures to hit targets, and the way their commission structures work, offices don't share instructions, even with the neighbouring town, so it still all comes down to what that one office in the locality does for their seller.
The prop still gets exactly the same listing on exactly the same portals... and as the Yougov survey shows, the portals are where it is at.
Agree with Peebee on the more mouths to feed.
'Easy' - you state "Greater Exposure, Greater Viewings, More offers ......... think multi offices is the way forward!"
Okay - WHY do you believe that multi-office chains offer the customer "greater exposure"
HOW can they produce "greater viewings"
And, from those "greater viewings" you claim they will achieve, WHAT GUARANTEE is there of "more offers" being received as a result
Over to you...
See above
From the "article":
"Clearly the larger organisations benefit from scale both in terms of helping to reduce overheads..."
REALLY What about all the Area/Regional/Divisional/National/Group Managers/Directors/hangers-on that the offices of these "larger organisations" have to pay for
"...and also the amount of data they are able to access..."
"Data" which results in exactly WHAT nett contribution towards the operating costs of producing it
"...but do they lose out on the genuine local market knowledge that has been built up sometimes over decades by the small local operators"
Complete, utter billshut. Many of the offices you refer to have been there decades also; manned by staff that have, in many cases, MORE "genuine local knowledge" and certainly MORE ABILITY than some "small local firms" that you describe.
There are good, bad and indifferent in ALL models of Estate Agency. That includes "online" and "hybrid" Agents.
"But which set up is best for both clients and the agencies themselves"
AGENTS decide what THEY want to be. The CUSTOMER doesn't give a rat's @$$ WHAT is 'best' for the Agent.
All they care about is what is BEST FOR THEM.
And, to that point, what is best for the CUSTOMER is the Agent that, in their particular area, will 'do the best job*' for them.
And even THAT* is subject to interpretation...
Ridiculous 'story'. Why the Hll are we being subjected to this MDT
Greater Exposure, Greater Viewings, More offers ......... think multi offices is the way forward!