x

Rob Davies

9929 Profile Views

About Me

my expertise in the industry

Rob 's Recent Activity

Barely a country in the world has 100% sovereignty, even less so in this increasingly globalised, interconnected world. And I think you'll find the UK already has a significant amount of control over its borders, laws and money - you should be aiming your ire at those in Westminster rather than those in Brussels. No-one won or lost in all this - in fact, we're all losing at the moment with the absolute chaos being wrought in Parliament and chronic uncertainty. Companies upping sticks left, right and centre, both parties deeply divided, the prospect of no deal still hanging over us, and a population that is no clearer - not far off 3 years on from the referendum - about what the eventual outcome will be. But, don't worry, we'll soon have £350m heading straight for the NHS once we leave. That's right, isn't it?

From: Rob Davies 20 February 2019 09:44 AM

In what way are the EU dictating your life? Of all the reasons to leave the EU put forward by the leavers, this is by far the silliest. There is very little the government can't do if it wanted to do it. Where regulations, barriers and obstacles are in place, it's usually for a valid reason - to keep food and environmental standards high, to regulate banks, etc. The EU is far from a perfect institution (show me one that is) - but it does more good than harm. And I still haven't heard a coherent, articulate reason for how we'll be better off out. What's more, you won't get all of that £39 billion back. That's not the way things work.

From: Rob Davies 19 February 2019 15:11 PM

You make valid points, but can you not also see how Wood might be accused of hypocrisy given his anti-PB, anti 'call centres' stance. OK, so he's not offering the same services as these, but he is now embracing a model - of operating online - that he's previously disparaged. Of course, people are entirely free to change their minds, so good luck to him - but I can understand why some have taken umbrage with him.

From: Rob Davies 05 February 2019 16:17 PM

I take it you're a fan of RQ then?

From: Rob Davies 05 February 2019 15:35 PM

"It’s a ‘house-sold name’" I don't know whether to laugh or groan. It's something I can totally imagine Mr Quirk saying! To be fair, he's not wrong about Foxtons being a very well-known brand - even if that's sometimes for the wrong reasons. It's certainly something it could lean on heavily to improve its fortunes. I'm not sure how well it would do outside London, though. It feels like a brand that can thrive in the capital's dog-eat-dog market - where a more aggressive, ruthless approach is perhaps less controversial - than it would in regional cities/towns or out in the sticks. It tends to rub people up the wrong way quite a bit - and I think a Marmite brand like that is much more suited to a huge global city like London rather than somewhere more provincial.

From: Rob Davies 05 February 2019 15:33 PM

I think Rightmove relies on the fact that people are too scared to drop it just in case. It is, arguably, too big to fail. As you say, it has made itself indispensable. Some would say RM back this up with good lead generation, others - like you - would say it doesn't offer nearly enough to justify the continually rising fees. But until there is mass collective action, a mass dropping of Rightmove, I can't see anything changing. RM was the main winner from the launch of OTM - which proved such a distraction to Zoopla - and continues to enjoy a brand recognition that others just simply don't have. That, as Purpblebricks is proving, really does count for something.

From: Rob Davies 28 January 2019 13:09 PM

I'd say, whatever you think of him, Quirk is newsworthy, which is why he's covered so much. Especially at a time when the company he was so heavily involved in has recently collapsed.

From: Rob Davies 28 January 2019 09:56 AM

What's that got to do with anything? Expecting to be paid at least a minimum wage is now demanding too much, is it? It's got nothing to do with his age and everything to do with fairness. Employers should pay a living wage - i.e. one that allows people to cover their basic living costs without falling into debt - and agency should be no different. No-one should have to work for peanuts in one of the world's richest countries. I don't think it's expecting too much for people to expect a fair and decent wage if they do a decent job. If they don't, well, that's another story - but I can't really understand the defensive reaction to this story.

From: Rob Davies 10 January 2019 10:18 AM

A fair, if slightly depressing, summation of the situation.

From: Rob Davies 04 January 2019 09:16 AM

But surely you have to consider the future. Are millennials/Generation Y/whatever you want to call them using the high street in the same way as their parents? I'd say that's an emphatic no. This generation shops, banks, dates, books holidays and works online. The one after it - Generation X - are even more tech-savvy and even less likely to use the high street. The high street is having huge struggles - that's been abundantly clear for a number of years now, but has particularly come to a head this year with major retailers scaling back, restructuring, going into administration or going out of business altogether. Bank branches are disappearing and so, increasingly, are agents. The agency sector has largely bucked the trend of the dying high street, but there are just simply too many agencies and not enough instructions to go around. Brexit is only going to make this worse. We can see at the moment that people are being put off by the political uncertainty. Do you still think people will use high street agents in the same way 20 years down the line, even 10? You'd be a brave man to bet on that. That's not to say the online model is the alternative - I have serious reservations about all the main players and the smaller ones, too. I don't think they've got it right one bit. They've had a bit of an open goal in some senses, with the rising influence of the internet, but none have really showed they are in it for the long haul. But hubs, agents offering online and traditional packages (as certain Countrywide brands have) and serviced offices in shopping centres or other areas with large footfall could be the future. The high street agent will survive, in some shape or form - as the travel agent just about is - but I'd be surprised if it was still as dominant 20 or 30 years from now. I just think the younger generation will change all that, given their expectation that everything will be available for them at a click of a button.

From: Rob Davies 14 December 2018 09:44 AM

Quirk has always been a PR guy in all but name. He was great at getting his opinions in almost every news story going for a while, but he - and Emoov - really seem to have bitten off more than they can chew with this. From the uber-confidence of saying they would be the closest challengers to Purplebricks' No 1 crown to everything going very quiet now they are up you know what creek without a paddle.

From: Rob Davies 30 November 2018 10:59 AM

Agreed. It's been sold as a cure to Britain's housing ills, but has done nothing to solve the issues at play. Just look at the problems faced by the early Help to Buy adopters, who have now reached the end of their five-year interest-fee period. It's not pretty. Like Shared Ownership, it's a bit of a con that allows the government to feel good about 'doing something' even when that isn't really the case.

From: Rob Davies 19 November 2018 08:49 AM

Indeed. Running before you can crawl springs to mind! Why the need for all the international expansion when PB still hasn't made a total success of its UK operations? Yes, it can point to its brand recognition and considerable growth, but it still proves highly divisive. I don't think even its most ardent critics could deny its impact in recent years - boards are everywhere you look, across the country, and the TV adverts have helped them to enter the national consciousness in a way few estate agents do - but doubts still remain about the business model and how successful the company actually is at the bread and butter of agency.

From: Rob Davies 26 October 2018 09:10 AM

@James Walsh - but the buy-to-let market isn't declining. The stats suggest there are now more buy-to-let landlords in the UK, despite the stamp duty surcharge and the phasing out of mortgage interest tax relief. People still see property as a safe bed and a sound investment, even in these troubled times. They are preferring to put their money into housing over stocks, shares, bonds or pensions.

From: Rob Davies 23 October 2018 15:44 PM

The government doesn't have a clue what it wants when it comes to Brexit. It's just making it up as it goes along, hoping for the best and seemingly settling for the worst (or least worst) option. I also somehow doubt the government want the house bubble bursting. Things are going to be messy enough post-Brexit (if it ever actually happens; here's hoping it doesn't) without a housing market crash to worry about.

From: Rob Davies 23 October 2018 15:41 PM

Rent-a-quote Quirk! Love it. Harsh but accurate.

From: Rob Davies 21 September 2018 15:34 PM

On that point, what has happened to easyProperty.co.uk? Every so often they pipe up with an advert or claims of outrageous success, and then they go very quiet again. Haven't heard anything about them for yonks. I genuinely thought the tie-up with GPEA might work out for them, giving easyProperty the in they'd never managed to gain before. But they just don't seem to do anything. If nothing else, people know about and use the likes of Purplebricks and Housesimple. No-one I speak to has even heard of easyProperty, despite all the PR, the TV ads and the famous brand name.

From: Rob Davies 20 September 2018 12:02 PM

Wow, bit of a kick in the teeth for the online movement - which has undeniably been gaining momentum in recent times. Surprised it's taken this long for Connells to act, having acquired the agency three years ago. Have they only just realised it's not doing the business, or has there been a more sudden decline?

From: Rob Davies 20 September 2018 11:54 AM

I've never seen so many James' commenting at one time before. I feel like I've ruined the James-only party. You don't have to be called James to comment, but it helps! Anyway, I happen to agree with both viewpoints. There needs to be a balanced approach - not a free-for-all, but not denying clean, legitimate buyers either.

From: Rob Davies 18 September 2018 15:29 PM

You cared enough to comment :) Not quite sure how this is propaganda - it's not got any positive slant in favour of PB. It's not praising them to the high heavens, is it? It's just an article about where the PB name originally came from, which might prove interesting to some, just as the origins of Savills, Foxtons, Rightmove, Zoopla or OTM might. Not every single story can be hard-hitting journalism, can it? Although I agree that small independents are perhaps ignored a bit - then again, they don't have the reach or profile that a big, controversial agent does.

From: Rob Davies 10 August 2018 15:07 PM

Quite a quirky and interesting article I thought - perfect for a Friday morning. Not exactly ground-breaking, but a decent insight into the world of PB.

From: Rob Davies 10 August 2018 15:04 PM

Let me be the first to say: Who?

From: Rob Davies 09 July 2018 16:13 PM

It is a frequent complaint from people that conveyancers slow the whole process down. However, while that is sometimes the case, it is not universal - just as not all estate agents are greedy charlatans. There are definitely problems to be addressed to speed transactions up, but agents and conveyancers need to work together to create a smoother, more efficient system, rather than the back and forth blame game.

From: Rob Davies 09 July 2018 11:30 AM

What a surprise! Raab departs quicker than Sharma and Barwell. The government yet again showing how much they care about a housing. I thought it was a priority. Makes the tenure of Brandon Lewis look like a lifetime. Who will be next into the hotseat? (which is a more than apt description given no-one stays there for more than five minutes).

From: Rob Davies 09 July 2018 11:25 AM

OTM has made bad decision after bad decision - you can't blame people for criticising it for not performing or not living up to its early boasts of world domination.

From: Rob Davies 23 February 2018 13:54 PM

Sorry state of affairs - if the one other portal rule isn't there, and they start accepting online agents, surely OTM is going back on everything it said it stood for? I'm amazed it's still going, more than 3 years after being founded. That, if nothing else, is an achievement. I wouldn't be surprised if it went full circle and performed a tie-up with PB to maximise its market share. That is the only way I can see it getting out of this with any integrity intact.

From: Rob Davies 12 February 2018 10:23 AM

I'm not so sure they will ever float. Seems more like grandstanding to me. If, as rumoured, there is a link-up between OTM and Purplebricks, a lot of traditional agents are going to be left disillusioned. As you say, Simon, surely that goes against the whole point of AM in the first place? If they don't plan to float until they have at least 10,000 agents, we could be in for a long, long wait.

From: Rob Davies 12 December 2017 09:57 AM

Because they're not actually going to float? They seem determined to put it off and off until everyone forgets about it and they can quietly sweep the matter under the carpet. That's my reading of it anyhow.

From: Rob Davies 11 December 2017 15:27 PM

The slow death of OTM rumbles on. Not a satisfying spectacle. When are they set to float again? All seems to be such an unholy mess, with no structure or direction. Lots of last throws of the dice, but they don't seem to be getting very far with any of them.

From: Rob Davies 05 December 2017 11:01 AM

What makes you say that? Only one side is currently looking very foolish in the Brexit negotiations. Hint: it's not the EU.

From: Rob Davies 05 December 2017 10:58 AM

Do pigs fly? Is the Pope a Catholic? etc, etc. I fear you may be waiting a while!

From: Rob Davies 21 November 2017 14:00 PM

From my experience, AllAgents aren't exactly a bastion of honesty, integrity and fully verified reviews, but that's the difficulty with these review sites. You can never quite be sure that no dodgy, fake or manipulated reviews have slipped through the net - it's just more rife on some websites.

From: Rob Davies 21 November 2017 13:59 PM

Why did the government choose to announce the consultation on a Saturday night? Very odd.

From: Rob Davies 23 October 2017 09:26 AM

Agree in some respects, but it clearly is the future in some shape or form. Just look at the increasing number of traditional agencies now offering online-only services or investing heavily in this area. More and more things are going to become purely online - while I very much doubt estate agency will go the way of travel agents or video stores, the industry will have to adapt and evolve more than it ever has before or risk being left behind by a tech-savvy, online-first younger generation.

From: Rob Davies 17 October 2017 09:56 AM

Have to admire his bravado and gumption, but he sounds like he'd more suited to the latest series of The Apprentice - where people get by on spouting trumped-up nonsense - than in the much harsher reality of estate agency. Fair play to him for trying his hand so young, but he may want to rein in the over-confidence a tad.

From: Rob Davies 17 October 2017 09:53 AM

Also, Purplebricks are about as popular here as Boris Johnson will be at the government's next Cabinet meeting. I think some of the criticism is well over-the-top, but PB seem pretty happy to take on the agent everyone loves to hate mantra. I'm sure they see all publicity as good publicity. Then again, Ryanair used to be say something similar - and look at their current travails.

From: Rob Davies 19 September 2017 15:38 PM

I'd hardly say All Agents are known for their accurate, fair and representative reviews, but then I also don't really trust TrustPilot. I take all reviews sites - even TripAdvisor - with a big pinch of salt. They're always ripe for exploitation, for fake reviews, and for suspiciously glowing or awful accounts. Not to be trusted, in my view.

From: Rob Davies 19 September 2017 15:35 PM

Maybe because it's the future? I've endlessly banged on about hybrid - and this last year or so it's really started to come to fruition, crowned by GPEA's purchase of easyProp and CW branches offering online-only services. In this case, high street agents are actively embracing an online service. That doesn't mean they cease to be high street agents, just that they are diversifying their offerings and reacting to the marketplace. There is a greater desire for online agencies, particularly among the young, and if traditional agents can offer such a service - all the better. To me, PB is not a hybrid because it doesn't have any offices. If an agency is offering both traditional and online offerings, they're a hybrid. It's the future when it comes to cars and probably housing itself, and it will be the future of agency. Maybe those getting in first are the visionaries? I have serious issues with easyProperty - given they seem to have done almost nothing since launching in 2013 despite the high-profile brand name and PR stunts - but under new management I think they might do alright. They may be a genuine challenger to PB, which can be no bad thing. After all, easyProperty is owned by a company who has to have the best interests of traditional independent agents at heart.

From: Rob Davies 07 September 2017 16:32 PM

Hmm. Any tech advantages will be short-lived? Like the portals, social media and many day to day things now being completed online, you mean? Have a look outside, we're only going one way - towards a far more tech-led future. Doesn't mean people won't still play a part, but the success of Purplebricks suggests that the public at large don't value estate agents as much as we think they might. We have to accept that and deal with it pragmatically. Sticking our heads in the sand and saying estate agency is all about the people just ain't gonna cut it. Estate agency in the here and now couldn't function without tech. That's the hard reality of it.

From: Rob Davies 07 September 2017 16:26 PM

The guy in the Evening Standard described the OnTheMarket float as like a dog with fleas - i.e. no-one with any sense should go anywhere near it. Will be interesting to see what happens when it floats. Like Algarve, I think this looks like one last throw of the dice for something that has simply failed to live up to expectations. Rather than admit failure, they are trying to save face. Meanwhile, Zoopla recover their market share and Rightmove are bigger than ever - remind me, what was the initial purpose of AM and OTM again?

From: Rob Davies 07 September 2017 11:51 AM

Hmm, Purplebricks are the biggest hybrid/online agency operating in the marketplace and, as such, generate quite a lot of press interest. If the interest wasn't there, neither would the stories be. PB seem to have taken over the agency everyone loves to hate mantle from Foxtons - who you barely hear a peep from at the moment - and Countrywide. Another punching bag will be along soon, just as RM and Zoopla have got a kicking in the past. In my view, the criticism of PB is wildly over-the-top. With Foxtons, you could fully understand why they got under people's noses and some of their practices were openly obnoxious and controversial. With PB - ubiquity, naff adverts and colourful branding aside - I can't see why they attract so much opprobrium.

From: Rob Davies 10 July 2017 10:41 AM

I think some people here would never be willing to give PB any credit, no matter what they do. The anti-PB brigade seem so blinded by negativity that, when they hear any news regarding Purplebricks, their stock reply is always damning or pointing out a downside. There are legitimate criticisms of PB to be made, but I fear with some they can't win either way. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

From: Rob Davies 03 July 2017 10:48 AM

I think the fear of Purplebricks - and what they represent - is very real, otherwise traditional agents wouldn't get so defensive about them. Clearly, they do not herald the end of the high-street agent, but I think they will be the ones to force through a step change in the industry - a move towards a hybrid model, a move towards traditional agents offering online services to ward off the threat of the likes of PB. We've seen it already in recent months, with certain Countrywide brands offering an online service and Savills continuing to invest heavily in YOPA. Not to mention the controversial move to merge the Guild and Fine & Country with easyProperty. I was always sceptical about the influence of online/hybrid agents and their impact on the estate agency market, but PB - with their significant backing, significant investment in PR and excellent brand awareness - look set to change that. They have seeped into the national consciousness - thanks to the distinctive brand colour, the boards, the TV adverts, the hefty marketing drive - in a way that other online offerings haven't managed. They might have only turned a small profit, but they now have a presence - and the investment to push forward again - to really cause an earthquake. They already have a sizeable share of the online market, I expect that to grow even further. If the online market gets bigger, reaching, say, 10% or 15%, trad agents will have to sit up and take notice. We can all criticise PB till the cows come home for their business model, their approach and their refusal to disclose how many sales they have actually made, but that doesn't matter to the public at large, to buyers and sellers who see the boards and the adverts and believe they are getting a great deal. It's this that needs to be challenged. I have issues with PB, but they're not going away. Far from it. And they need to be taken seriously. It was easy to ignore and dismiss the likes of eMoov, Housesimple and even Tepilo, because they didn't have national brand awareness or instant recognition. PB has that. It was always going to happen at some point, an online brand filtering through. If traditional agents try to go on the defensive, and continually attack, demean and dismiss PB, they'll just get stronger and stronger. An awareness of changing consumer habits, the power of the internet and the power of branding will all be needed to face the challenge head on. By all means criticise PB for what they do (or more to the point don't do), but don't underestimate them. They're in this for the long-haul. People wrote off RM and Zoopla - how did that work out?

From: Rob Davies 30 June 2017 10:06 AM

All sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Too much backbiting goes on between agents and conveyancers - mostly playground-level he said, she said stuff - so it would be good to get a bit more consensus and unity on key issues. Would be a good thing for all concerned.

From: Rob Davies 26 June 2017 09:10 AM

Pretty good counter-argument from the Guild, but will be interesting to see how many of them are still using the easy service this time next year. I'd wager not many. In my view, the easy name will disappear before too long - it has pretty poor brand awareness and recognition anyway - and those agencies who want an online platform will simply use the licence but call their online offerings something different.

From: Rob Davies 26 June 2017 09:07 AM

Like Help to Buy, Shared Ownership and a range of mortgages offered by lenders aimed at first-time buyers, the Springboard mortgage looks good until you start to dig down into the detail of what is actually on the table. Then it starts to look a lot less rosy.

From: Rob Davies 22 June 2017 09:29 AM

Lose your seat, get a promotion. How does that work? Who's going to be the 16th Housing Minister in 20 years, I wonder? How many have we had since 2010? 7? I thought the Tories were supposed to be taking housing seriously. Like everything else they say, though, it's all hot air and bluster. It's what lost them the election - saying nothing and taking the electorate for granted. Now we have a coalition of chaos and a situation where the opposition look far more united, competent and ready to govern than Team Maybot and her reshuffled Cabinet - which is exactly the same as the old one.

From: Rob Davies 12 June 2017 13:23 PM

Blimey, and we thought the general election was getting testy!

From: Rob Davies 05 June 2017 15:17 PM

Interesting idea. Could either go really well or fall flat on its face. We will have to wait and see.

From: Rob Davies 05 June 2017 15:16 PM

Nice one, Graham.

From: Rob Davies 25 May 2017 11:55 AM

I do find the vitriol against PB a bit over-the-top. Painting them as this big enemy, this big evil that needs to be stamped out. There are things I don't particularly like about them, but the reaction from traditional agents does seem a bit defensive. I think PB are the real deal - in terms of investment, funding, brand recognition, PR, TV advertising, etc. Much more so than any other online or "hybrid" agency. That doesn't mean they won't hit the buffers in a few years, but I think it's more likely that their market share will grow. Criticism of PB is valid, but when it becomes a hatchet job I become a little uncomfortable.

From: Rob Davies 25 May 2017 11:54 AM

All surveys are a bit pointless, when you think about it. They're very rarely representative, just the opinions of a small pool of people. If lots of surveys over time start to throw up familiar sorts of results, then you can start to look for correlations, trends and patterns, but most surveys will all say something different.

From: Rob Davies 16 May 2017 12:00 PM

Great idea. Maybe the government could also be told to clean up their act when it comes to air quality, rather than burying reports and sweeping negative news stories under the carpet. Just a thought. Still, this would be a move in the right direction.

From: Rob Davies 16 May 2017 11:58 AM

That "tell me why I don't like Mondays" song by the Boomtown Rats will have to be revised for sellers across the country. "Tell me why I just love Mondays, tell me why I just love Mondays. Tell me why I just love Mondays, I wanna list, list, list, list, list all day long!"

From: Rob Davies 14 March 2017 09:35 AM

"Agents who ignore critical reviews of their services do so at their peril as new figures reveal high levels of readership of review websites, according to a social media expert." I agree they shouldn't be ignored, but they shouldn't be given too much credence either. For example, one or two bad reviews does not a bad estate agency make. If all the reviews are bad or negative, fair enough, the agency is probably one clients won't want to use. But I think consumers will look past the odd iffy review if the overall consensus is mostly positive, just as is the case on TripAdvisor and Booking. com. By the same token, any agency with purely 5 star reviews and glowing endorsements will probably be viewed with scepticism. Review sites play an important role elsewhere in life, but I'd argue we haven't reached that stage with estate agents. I haven't seen any websites out there that are reliable enough or free from manipulation and rogue reviews.

From: Rob Davies 14 March 2017 09:31 AM

Oh dear. 2017 set to be Countrywide's annus horribilis?

From: Rob Davies 09 March 2017 10:32 AM

"At the moment, online is about five to six per cent of the [sales] market. We want to see that grow to at least 25 to 30 per cent over the next three to four years." Steady on! I'm not as anti-online as some, but such statements are really ridiculous. It took online-only agents about 17 years to reach a 5% market share, and that's only doubled in the last few years because of Purplebricks (who count themselves as a hybrid anyway!). It's not going to rocket to 25% within three to four years, no matter what the likes of Attia and Russell Quirk say. Most agencies have a strong online presence anyway, with purely online vehicles now eager to paint themselves as hybrids. I seem to remember Mr Quirk saying something similar not so long ago. Online-only will continue to make up a very small part of the market, to say otherwise is just deluded. Hybrid agents might grow considerably, but that's a different kettle of fish. That said, I do quite enjoy the YOPA adverts in a silly, tongue-in-check way. Much, much better than the cringeworthy to the extreme "Commisery" adverts recently launched by PB. They make me want to chuck things at the telly!

From: Rob Davies 06 March 2017 16:24 PM

"The authority says another company, Annagram Estate Agents Limited (trading as ‘C J Hole’), will not be fined" There must be a punchline in there somewhere, or am I just being childish? Anyway, the incident itself is no laughing matter. I agree that 1.5% is not exactly hefty and their actions were far from the worst in the world, comparatively speaking. But they still broke the law, and knowingly at that, and might have got away with it had the above agency not admitted their part in the cartel. At the very best, it's underhand and shifty, which is not the perception we want to be putting across of agents. The fine is probably a bit too excessive, but they clearly want to dissuade others who might be thinking about doing something similar. I can certainly understand why it's so high.

From: Rob Davies 02 March 2017 16:24 PM

"world’s top estate agency mentors" Hmm. I'm all for proper training and qualifications in our industry, but I'm not sure selling and letting homes is something that you can train into people. It can't be drummed in. You either have it or you don't. The talent and spark can be honed, built upon and crafted, but I don't really think people can be mentored on how to do it properly. Could just be my natural cynicism coming into play, mind. I'm always very wary of motivational speakers, property pundits and "life" coaches. Load of old tosh if you ask me. If you need someone else to motivate and inspire you, you're in the wrong job.

From: Rob Davies 14 February 2017 09:55 AM

If it's not one thing, it's another... Countrywide can't stay out of the headlines for love nor money at the moment. I bet Foxtons are laughing, their mantle as the estate agents everyone loves to hate/mock has firmly been taken by CW in the last year or so. I'm sure it's all part of a wider restructuring plan from Platt and her team, but they are making a bit of a pig's ear (to say the least) of all this. Retail and estate agency aren't natural bedfellows, surely someone had the foresight to understand this?

From: Rob Davies 14 February 2017 09:50 AM

“This latest milestone is a fantastic achievement given that the portal has been live for just two years. It is a great start to 2017” says Ian Springett, chief executive of OnTheMarket." Ah, Springett, where have you been? Always available for comment when things appear to be going well (there is, of course, nothing concrete to suggest this is actually the case), but tends to go missing in action when less positive news stories regarding OTM hit the headlines. No comment on the various Agents Mutual legal battles, for example. Strange.

From: Rob Davies 02 February 2017 16:11 PM

Not a surprise.

From: Rob Davies 02 February 2017 16:08 PM

From: Rob Davies 17 January 2017 09:36 AM

Will this campaign include more naff adverts of those two actors pretending to be the Bruce brothers? Let's hope not!

From: Rob Davies 17 January 2017 09:34 AM

What about OTM? All seems very quiet on the OnTheMarket front in recent times. Hasn't their 2-year anniversary been and gone? I see little fuss was made of that. Not much to celebrate? Anyway, that shoehorn aside, as Rookie says this isn't exactly surprising, but I do still find the idea of property browsing being so popular over the festive period hard to get my head around. Makes no sense to me.

From: Rob Davies 16 January 2017 14:25 PM

One of the better mannequin challenges, it has to be said. I also really like the Dickensian vibe going on in Ashington Page's window. Although the actual images remind me more of Tim Burton than Dickens.

From: Rob Davies 13 December 2016 09:43 AM

"Car parks: the answer to Britain's affordable homes shortage?" One word: no. Nice idea, but not feasible at present. And too gimmicky. We need houses, not gimmicks. We've had enough of those to last us a lifetime.

From: Rob Davies 13 December 2016 09:06 AM

Cheer up, it's Christmas (nearly)!

From: Rob Davies 02 December 2016 10:32 AM

Is that desperation I can smell?

From: Rob Davies 02 December 2016 10:31 AM

Uh-oh spaghetti-o! Can we now count 2016 as Countrywide's annus horribilis?

From: Rob Davies 02 December 2016 10:30 AM

No surprise. Expect more of this, particularly in the prime market.

From: Rob Davies 01 December 2016 16:44 PM

Can't say I'd heard of either of the companies before, but both seem to have decent reputations. Will be interesting to see what Zoopla has in mind for them. We have seen't much from Bricklane.com, or whatever it's called, and I fear the same could be the case here.

From: Rob Davies 01 December 2016 16:43 PM

Very nice effort. If you're going to do it, do it well. Problem is, it looks more like the entrance to a Winter Wonderland than an estate agent, so people might be left disappointed!

From: Rob Davies 01 December 2016 16:41 PM

"There’s some good news at last for London’s troubled housing market" Define troubled. If we're talking about endless house price rises and high rents - which we're always being told are the most important things when it comes to property - then the London market is doing just fine, thank you very much. There are far more problems elsewhere. The London market, by contrast, is a haven of stability and strong activity compared to some.

From: Rob Davies 24 November 2016 09:17 AM

Not been a great year for CW, has it? They have tried to soften the blow by talking about the positives and the progress, but the figures speak for themselves - even allowing for stamp duty changes, EU referendum uncertainty and other variables.

From: Rob Davies 24 November 2016 09:13 AM

A good idea in theory, but another here today, gone tomorrow app I fear. So many of them are out there now, how can any of them possibly make any money?

From: Rob Davies 01 November 2016 09:54 AM

Should be interesting. Don't envy her.

From: Rob Davies 01 November 2016 09:53 AM

Surely they are already? You might get half a garage for that amount. A house? No chance. A one-bed flat? Nope.

From: Rob Davies 18 October 2016 11:00 AM

More good news for OnTheMarket. Where's Springett's take on this? He was quite happy to talk plenty when things were going reasonably well a few months after launch, but he's been suspiciously quiet ever since.

From: Rob Davies 18 October 2016 10:59 AM

From: Rob Davies 18 October 2016 10:57 AM

Can't disagree with this. I do find the defensive nature of many landlords a bit surprising, given they've had it so good for so many years. Why, when things were so sweet for them, didn't they reward tenants with cheaper rents? It's like Unilever's battle with Tesco. When the pound was strong, Unilever didn't reflect this by cutting prices. Now the pound is weak and their profits are likely to be bit, they wanted Tesco to inflict price rises on the customers to make up for the higher cost of imports. You can't, as they say, have your cake and eat it. Landlords have had it good for a number of years - even the stamp duty changes haven't affected them that much - so it's hard to feel massive amounts of sympathy for the buy-to-let brigade.

From: Rob Davies 17 October 2016 14:04 PM

"Have you been impressed by Purplebricks' fast growth and digital marketing success? Yes. They've done a great job of raising money and spending it." Love this answer. Might be a Marmite figure, Mr Quirk, but he's good value.

From: Rob Davies 17 October 2016 11:54 AM

Spot on, Smile Please. There's changing with the times, and then there's changing with the times. If it ain't broke, don't fix it has never rung truer. I can't see what they're gaining from all this. No-one seems to think it's a very good idea, other than Platt and her cohorts.

From: Rob Davies 17 October 2016 11:53 AM

"Retail, retail, retail." "But it doesn't work, Alison. The share price shows that, all the senior management jumping ship shows that." "Retail, retail, retail. That's where it's at!" CW have been heading down the wrong path for a long while now. How long until Platt realises that? All the CW bigwigs who have resigned in the last year or so are all saying the same thing. But are they being listened to? Of course they're not. Very dangerous course of direction for CW, but it may take something catastrophic for them to change their ways.

From: Rob Davies 17 October 2016 11:51 AM

There are no words!

From: Rob Davies 27 September 2016 09:32 AM

Of course it's possible to build enough new homes. They managed it perfectly well after World War II, when we were completely broke. What is lacking, however, is the will. Much easier to throw up a load of luxury apartments and swanky penthouses that appeal to rich investors and the buy-to-leave brigade. Much more difficult to invest in social housing and affordable homes. The government like gimmicky schemes; decisive action, not so much. We can't carry on as we are forever - with prices continuing to rise at astronomical rates. Surely we will reach a breaking point? Prices being this high is good for no-one in the long-term - not even sellers and landlords. And certainly not estate agents. Lots of agents and experts talk about massive house price rises as a good thing - a sign of a market performing very strongly - but that doesn't show the whole picture. Everyone talks about a housing crisis and how we need to solve it, but at the same time everyone is delighted with prices rising by alarming rates year on year and home ownership becoming a distant pipe dream for many. Can't be both.

From: Rob Davies 27 September 2016 09:32 AM

I agree with this. There are plenty of brownfield sites that could be built on, abandoned or derelict homes brought back into use and disused office space that could be repurposed. Near where I live there are a number of empty or boarded up shops that have been that way for years. Whole parades of shops in some cases, just sitting there, wasting away. What is the point of that? Either they can be converted back to past glories - when they were cafes, shops and offices - or they could be re-used for housing. The idea that there aren't already existing buildings ripe for refurbishment and conversion is nonsense - there's plenty! We need to speed up the planning process to make this possible. I can't understand why many of these old shops are left to rot away, entirely redundant. What's more, clamping down on Buy to Leave and empty homes would also have a major impact. There are homes that are either out of use - or being used very, very sparingly (or not at all) by overseas buyers who are only interested in seeing its value rise - that could be used for new housing. Let's have a look at second home ownership, too - people who own a holiday home in Cornwall, Devon, the Lake District or the Cotswolds and use it for a couple of months of the year; could this be used for rental purposes at other points? Despite this, however, I don't entirely disagree with the point made in the article. As far as I understand it, there are parts of the green belt that can be barely considered green belt at all. In some cases, they aren't even green. If this is the case, then it makes sense to look at ways of utilising these spaces - alongside brownfield sites, bringing empty homes back into use and clamping down on Buy to Leave - to help improve the housing crisis. For environmental and social reasons, the green belt should be protected at all costs, but with some innovation, clever planning and a more flexible system in place, other alternatives can be sourced. It doesn't feel as if all avenues have been exhausted as of yet. I also think developers and house-builders are guilty of sitting on land to ensure its value goes up. It's in their interests to slow the whole house-building process, no matter how much they say otherwise.

From: Rob Davies 27 September 2016 09:26 AM

Graham Graham, so good they named you twice! Interesting. Not heard of that company before. I'll take a look. I think it's a good, forward-thinking idea, and a natural progression for auction houses across the country. Not many things are escaping the clutches of the internet; auction houses won't be any different.

From: Rob Davies 21 September 2016 08:38 AM

I like it. I think it looks sleeker, more stylish and more 21st century than their previous logo. The change in colour is good, but I'm not so sure about the house and arrow icon.

From: Rob Davies 21 September 2016 08:35 AM

What are you objecting to? The slogan or the fact that Rightmove don't make it possible for property browsers to find their happy home? The slogan does seem a bit off from a grammatical point of view. And, some might argue, a bit twee and naff, but it's quite punchy, to the point and memorable, which is what a good slogan should be. "Just do it", "Every little helps", "I'm lovin' it", "Because you're worth it", "The best a man can get", "Always Coca-Cola", "Never knowingly undersold", "Does exactly what it says on the tin", "The world's local bank", etc, etc. Most are no more than three words and most stick in your mind, no matter how hard you try and shift it. That's clever marketing and advertising in my book.

From: Rob Davies 21 September 2016 08:33 AM

Countrywide not having a great time of it, are they? What's going on with them? Seems the new direction being taken by Alison Platt and co is alienating a lot of people. Risky strategy, in my book. As Bob Scarff mentioned in his Q & A, retail and estate agency don't mix. They are two totally different beasts.

From: Rob Davies 20 September 2016 11:53 AM

From: Rob Davies 20 September 2016 11:43 AM

Will it be fruitless, though? They seem to think they have a pretty good case. I don't know the ins and outs of it, but it doesn't seem as if AM are totally blameless in all this. Obviously there are issues over the contract, but GH must have something in their locker to take it his far. Surely?

From: Rob Davies 20 September 2016 11:43 AM

Oh dear. One bad news stories after another for AM and OTM.

From: Rob Davies 20 September 2016 11:41 AM

Not convinced Terence? :)

From: Rob Davies 15 September 2016 08:39 AM

Quirk telling porkies again? Surely not?

From: Rob Davies 15 September 2016 08:36 AM

Maybe some agents are perfectly happy with Rightmove and Zoopla. Have you ever considered that? Your "take back control" mantra is eerily reminiscent of a recent big referendum we had, where plenty was promised by the winning side but we are now starting to find out that much of what was promised won't actually be delivered. OTM haven't succeeded because their ambitions were far too great. They were never going to overhaul Zoopla within a year to become the second biggest portal. It was absurd. They dented Zoopla, but only briefly. And even then, they made Rightmove even stronger. Rightmove have barely blinked at OTM's arrival; it's barely come up on their radar. The only time they would give any thought to OTM is to congratulate them for weakening Zoopla and making their own operations even stronger. Now RM are bigger than ever and Zoopla are bouncing back, while OTM is left to flounder. More than 18 months in and their brand awareness and customer recognition is still appalling, despite those million pound ads. If they'd been a bit less bullish from the start, and a bit more humble in the way they went about doing things, they might have fared better. As it is, they just seem to be clinging on, without direction, without purpose, without making any impact.

From: Rob Davies 14 September 2016 15:09 PM

Shame they're not very good then, isn't it? The one other portal rule was a disaster, their ban on online agents was ill-thought out and they've been embroiled in all sorts of scandals and legal battles for saying one thing and providing another. OTM/AM aren't some bunch of moral crusaders jumping on an ethical bandwagon to change the world for the better. They have just as many vested interests as Rightmove and Zoopla. That's fine, but to pretend otherwise - or to pretend they are the great hope of the estate agency world - is nonsense. They've been poorly run, mismanaged and have made no discernible impact on the portal market - people still don't know who they are, their brand awareness is poor and all the money spent on PR and TV ads clearly hasn't done the trick. Agents have backed them, their website is decent, and you see the OTM logo in plenty of estate agent windows, but those outside the industry have no idea what that logo stands for. It probably looks to them like the bullseye on an archery board. They shouldn't be above criticism, and they've had plenty to be criticised over. They wouldn't be getting themselves into all these battles with agents who signed up if everything was fine and dandy. They've been around for long enough now. The honeymoon period was finished a long time ago, they no longer deserve the benefit of the doubt and they need to start delivering on their promises or they will be rightly called out on it.

From: Rob Davies 14 September 2016 15:03 PM

Well said, Algarve. The likes of Beard do us estate agents no favours. He got caught out, he should had admitted his mistake and moved on. Instead he tried to squirm his way out of it and blame Channel 4 for editing out his lecture on money laundering. Yeah, right. He'd have got more credit from me if he'd have owned up and sought to redeem his actions.

From: Rob Davies 14 September 2016 14:00 PM

Fully agree with this.

From: Rob Davies 13 September 2016 12:17 PM

Interesting. Maybe we will see more and more of this as the years go past. PropTech is growing in influence, and the coverage it receives is also going up. For me, it's the future of the industry.

From: Rob Davies 06 September 2016 10:54 AM

Well, given that Brexit means Brexit, but still no-one is actually sure what that actually means - all of this unsettling of the market and general uncertainty seems to have been for diddly squat. What was the point of the referendum? What have we gained from it? What will actually change? No-one seems to know, it's all such a mess, and no-one seems to have benefited from it. Don't worry, though, David Davis and his merry band have got it all under control. Honest.

From: Rob Davies 06 September 2016 10:52 AM

All about the hybrid.

From: Rob Davies 06 September 2016 10:36 AM

Shelter jumping on another bandwagon? I don't believe it's not butter!

From: Rob Davies 01 September 2016 17:18 PM

Their TV advert was awful - and I'm not so sure what a prime residential property group gains from a TV advert, given most people watching are unlikely to be high-net worth individuals. Channel 4 might be a property-heavy channel, but I doubt that lots of people watching More 4 and 4oD (or whatever it's called these days) would be able to afford the sorts of properties Fine & County offer. Most people probably watch Location, Location, Location and the other property shows for a bit of escapism or to educate themselves on how to buy or sell a home, not for TV adverts of prime country properties. Could be wrong, though.

From: Rob Davies 01 September 2016 17:18 PM

Doesn't look good, does it? Just goes to show that appearances really can be deceiving. I've always thought that Purplebricks have overreached themselves, gone too big too soon. A more gradual, slowly does it approach would have worked better. You can't deny the success of their brand recognition, but that only gets you so far if the service you actually offer doesn't match up. I see plenty of big claims from Purplebricks, but not a great deal of evidence to back these up with.

From: Rob Davies 26 July 2016 08:53 AM

Is it any surprise, when rents are so high, cost of living is so high and the chances of ever buying a home - or even getting close to scraping together a deposit - are so very low? No, I think it's about as surprising as Louis Walsh making a comeback on the X Factor (again) and Simon Cowell trying to flog his dead horse for one more year!

From: Rob Davies 25 July 2016 16:08 PM

OTM seem to have gone very quiet. You don't see their adverts on the TV any more and this massive roll out of PR, ad campaigns and press coverage to rival RM and Zoopla doesn't seem to have materialised. Maybe they've all just given up the ghost?

From: Rob Davies 25 July 2016 15:54 PM

What about if you signed up to a contract expecting one thing and got entirely another? I know contracts are to be respected and all that, but if you've been sold a false line then surely you have the right to cancel that contract if you so wish.

From: Rob Davies 25 July 2016 15:53 PM

Fair play. Whatever you think of online agencies or their long-term viability, they certainly know how to attract investment. Clearly, many high-worth investors see them as the future. I, like many others, don't necessarily agree with that - hybrid agencies, as is increasingly the case with major agencies, will be the way forward - but it would be complacent to say the online market is having no effect whatsoever.

From: Rob Davies 18 July 2016 09:06 AM

Do you show bad reviews on your own website? Because that's the point of the story - that Tepilo don't highlight bad reviews on their own site, not that they've tried to block Trustpilot from doing so. Fair play to you if you do - and I respect your honesty and transparency - but most agencies won't do the same. And I think they're right not to. One bad review can have more of an impact than ten good ones, in my view.

From: Rob Davies 12 May 2016 17:15 PM

Shock horror - a firm doesn't put bad reviews on their own website. Whatever next?

From: Rob Davies 12 May 2016 17:13 PM

It's a massive non-story. The idea that Tepilo - or any agency - would put one-star reviews on their website is nonsense. You're not going to put bad reviews on your testimonials page, are you? That entirely defeats the object. And, as Tepilo pointed out, they linked directly to Trustpilot's website anyway. I don't think they have been misleading or dishonest, they have just done what any company worth their salt does - promote themselves with glowing reviews. It's like with books or films. You don't read a load of bad reviews on the inside cover of a book, do you? There aren't reviews saying "this film is awful/atrocious - one-star" on film trailers. I don't think either Tepilo or Trustpilot have done anything wrong here, it's just the Times making a mountain out of a molehill on a slow news day. If Tepilo had asked Trustpilot to take down or hide negative views on their website, they might have a point. But the idea that Tepilo would promote bad reviews on their own website is quite frankly ludicrous.

From: Rob Davies 12 May 2016 17:12 PM

Steady on, Zoopla. I'd still say Rightmove was more instantly recognisable, but both the main portals have good brand recognition. It's what sets them apart from OTM - who, no matter what their supporters say, very definitely don't. That's not exactly unexpected, given they've been around for less than 18 months, but I doubt they will ever achieve the brand awareness of Rightmove and Zoopla. That just isn't gonna happen.

From: Rob Davies 12 May 2016 17:00 PM

The UKIP of portals. Very apt, Simon. Tim, as a conveyancer and home owner, I'm fairly sure you must have visited Rightmove at least once. And even if you haven't, many others do. Nowhere near as many as Zoopla - which is why the idea that their brand awareness is better is a little bit silly - but way more than OTM.

From: Rob Davies 12 May 2016 16:58 PM

That's part of the problem, though, isn't it? Especially in London. Too many luxury flats popping up, not enough genuinely affordable homes to buy or rent. It's all very well these luxury towers increasing the prices of nearby homes, but that doesn't really solve the issue does it. Khan's got a heck of a job on his hands in the capital, because Boris has left a right mess behind when it comes to housing. His housing legacy is the proliferation of luxury flats and skyscrapers that are springing up all over the shop. Swish and fancy? Yes. Affordable? No. A blot on the landscape? A matter of opinion.

From: Rob Davies 10 May 2016 16:50 PM

From: Rob Davies 10 May 2016 16:48 PM

Absolutely. Well said.

From: Rob Davies 10 May 2016 16:47 PM

With so many people coming and going from Countrywide in recent weeks, it's hard to keep up with who's who!

From: Rob Davies 18 April 2016 11:41 AM

Nothing like stereotyping the young there, eh Richard? Where are all these young people going on 2 holidays a year? I have one a year, if I'm lucky, and I'm sure many other people of my generation (I'm a 90s baby) would be the same. You also seem to be painting all young people as gadget obsessed and materialistic, when that couldn't be further from the truth. I'm sure some people are keen to have a new iPhone and a new car and the biggest telly, but far from all. And are young people not allowed to have a car and an iPhone and not also expect house prices and rents to be reasonable. You say that interest rates are almost zero and it's never been cheaper to borrow money, but it's not that simple, is it? It really isn't. I work in the industry, I know how bloomin difficult it is for young people to get on the property ladder. Deposits of £20,000+. £80,000+ in London. Despite what you might think, very few people are on salaries of £50k plus and can afford to save for such ludicrously high deposits. Plus, of course, rents are so expensive that it's almost impossible to rent and save at the same time. And it just ain't that easy to get mortgage lenders to lend to you, even if you can cobble the deposit together by living off cereal for three years. Because the competition is so intense, and sellers want to get as much as possible for their home, and because the BTL and Buy to Leave Brigade come sweeping in to hoover up all the stock. It's easy for you to sit there and sneer at young people and say they should live like paupers in order to save for their own home. Truth is, it really ain't that easy. Young people are being screwed over by this government with house prices and rents. The fact you can't see that says it all. It's not about champagne lifestyles. Most young people just want to know that they might one day own their own home even if there wages are nothing to write home about. Your stereotyping does you no favours, Richard. It's like me saying all baby boomers are greedy, in it for themselves money hoarders. It just doesn't ring true.

From: Rob Davies 18 April 2016 11:37 AM

OTM seem to be having as bad a week as Cameron! Well, not quite, but they do seem to be lurching from one bad PR story to the next.

From: Rob Davies 08 April 2016 14:12 PM

More stating of the obvious, no? Rightmove remains incredibly strong, Zoopla remains very firmly in second place and OTM is quite clearly not a long-term major player. Tell me something I didn't know!

From: Rob Davies 08 April 2016 13:54 PM

That's alright, Terence. I understood. No doubt some people do think I just post a load of old tosh, but less said about that the better!

From: Rob Davies 07 April 2016 16:03 PM

Ah, right. Went straight over my head. Too subtle for me. Although his subsequent comments slightly make me doubt his witty intent in the above :)

From: Rob Davies 07 April 2016 16:01 PM

Everyone loves cake, that's a given, but what do you think about this latest AM/OTM story?

From: Rob Davies 07 April 2016 10:38 AM

The deposits needed for a home, particularly in London, are getting ever more ridiculous. Something needs to be done to change that. More homes being built - and genuinely affordable ones at that - would help. No point in building a load of new homes if no-one can afford to buy any of them.

From: Rob Davies 07 April 2016 10:00 AM

OTM getting a tad desperate?

From: Rob Davies 07 April 2016 09:58 AM

I'm sure they'll get it - these online companies seem to do pretty well out of crowdfunding and the like - but whether they can continue their success (assuming you believe the PR and hype) is something that remains to be seen. "Settled says its new research of 1,000 homeowners shows 58 per cent believing they could as individuals do a better job at many tasks traditionally done by agents." This is definitely an issue for high-street agents. It's a small sample and we shouldn't place too much importance on it, but there is definitely an anti-estate agent feeling out there, and the public perception of greedy, good-for-nothing agents is still there. It is, in the vast majority of cases, untrue and unfair, but a stereotype exists for a reason. And it's something that high-street agents can't be complacent about, especially if they continue to charge what is seen as higher fees.

From: Rob Davies 05 April 2016 17:56 PM

Osborne seems to have gone off grid in the last few weeks - where's he disappeared to? With the government currently facing intense pressure over the steel crisis and the PM facing even greater heat over his tax affairs, maybe Mr Osborne is lying low so people will forget how quickly his disastrous Budget unravelled. But I agree, Osborne will be paying no attention to Pickles. He's made his mind up and he won't be forced to climb down until the pressure becomes too much. As the public condemnation won't be anywhere near as strong as that seen for the tax credit and disability cuts, Osborne won't be performing a u-turn anytime soon. I guess he's hoping his attempts to lure the young vote with gimmicky schemes like Help to Buy, shared ownership and Lifetime ISAs will cancel out the votes he'll lose from the BTL brigade and landlords (people, you would have thought, who would be more inclined to vote Tory). It's a very risky and calculated gamble from Osborne and one that I think will backfire quite spectacularly. Quite why he is biting the hand that feeds him in such a draconian way is a mystery. Throughout all this, of course, the big question remains - why aren't enough houses being built and what is being done to address the huge supply/demand imbalance?

From: Rob Davies 05 April 2016 17:50 PM

I think you'd probably be right. I wonder what Springett and co would have to say on the matter?

From: Rob Davies 17 March 2016 09:43 AM

I think he's going to leave a lot of people very unhappy with this latest budget. Serves him right for the hubris he showed in his last Budget. The economic recovery - if you can even call it that - was always on a knife-edge, and as we've seen since even the smallest little thing has been enough to knock off course. This, as the Chancellor continues to carry out swingeing cuts on public services and government departments, continues to borrow ridiculous amounts of money, and continues to fail in his attempts to pay down the deficit. He's let his leadership ambitions cloud his judgement. His play for the top job has been badly hit by the many U-turns he's had to carry out in recent months, over Google, tax credit cuts and Sunday trading hours. I'm sure he'll find some way of spinning this latest budget of belt-tightening and cuts into something positive, but people will see straight through his lies and rhetoric. This stamp duty surcharge is typical George - biting the hand that feeds him.

From: Rob Davies 16 March 2016 11:29 AM

Shocking from the OFT. How did they get it so wrong? Clearly they wanted to go out with a bang, a last hurrah before they went defunct, and they didn't care who they took with them. Good on Jackson Grundy for standing up to them and getting their business back on track. The reputational damage would have been huge, but it seems like they have weathered the storm and are now starting to grow again. I'm all for compliance and good practice, but this was clearly a case of administrative errors rather than the actions of a sophisticated and duplicitous money laundering operation. I hope Jackson Grundy get the appropriate amount of compensation for this miscarriage of justice. Those from the OFT who did this should hang their head in shame.

From: Rob Davies 16 March 2016 11:22 AM

Richard, maybe the financial services need those laws to prevent things like the global financial crisis. Because we know, when that industry is left unregulated, it only causes misery for the rest of us.

From: Rob Davies 02 March 2016 09:31 AM

*Cheap steel even. But you get the point.

From: Rob Davies 01 March 2016 18:16 PM

"We are better off out in every way." Environmentally, politically and economically, no we're very much not. Our food production standards would diminish, our industry would continue to flag (it's not the EU who is allowing the Chinese to dump cheap oil, is it?) and our attempts deal with climate change will be seriously hampered. Our beaches will threaten a return to the 1970s, when we had some of the dirtiest in Europe. Now we have some of the cleanest. Our science and technology industries will be badly hit. Our human rights and workers rights will be more at threat. You can call this scaremongering, but there is genuine reasons to believe these would be at threat. You say we need our democracy back - well, how about we look at our unelected head of state and our unelected second chamber. How about we look at our unfair FPTP electoral system. As to your point on trade agreements - do you really think those in Europe are going to make that easy for us? Norway have to pay in to the EU, they have to agree to the free movement of people, they have to adhere to EU regulations when it comes to dealing with them - and they have none of the say in any of this. Genius. The Norwegian PM herself wants to join the EU - I wonder why. In the case of immigration, we already have a points-based system for non-EU citizens. The free movement of people in the EU is a two-way street. Plenty of Brits live, work and study in Europe.

From: Rob Davies 01 March 2016 18:14 PM

As for the property market, most key industry figures are coming out saying that Brexit would be a disaster. We already saw what happened to the pound last week. It'll be like the lead-up to a general election, for two whole years (or however long it takes us to strike a deal to leave the EU). Obviously that's not reason enough to stay, but there are plenty of compelling reasons to stay put and lots of reasons why an Out vote would cause an extended period of uncertainty, volatility and turmoil. The Out side are calling it project fear - well, that's just a lazy retort. Rather than just shouting "fear" and sticking their fingers in their ears, why don't the Out side put forward some positive steps as to how we'll trade with our European partners when we leave, how the economy will look, how the housing market will look. At the moment, they're just saying we need to leave to take back control, to take back our sovereignty, to stop us being ruled by a bloated, corporate elite (as if Westminster is any different). They're not giving any actual answers or solutions. They're not setting out their vision for a Britain outside the EU. Unfortunately, both sides are guilty of scaremongering and half-truths. Rather than any reasoned debate about the pros and cons of the EU - and there are many pros - we're just going to get MPs sniping at each other, the Tories tearing themselves apart, and meaningless phrases like "Project Fear", "Leap into the dark" and "Taking back control". Soundbites, sensationalism and emotional blackmail - modern politics in a nutshell!

From: Rob Davies 01 March 2016 14:35 PM

We already control our own laws. We already have control of our own borders. We're not in the Schengen Zone. We're an island, in case you hadn't notices, so we don't have any actual borders. If it was a free-for-all, why are all those people in the camp at Calais? I don't see the EU stepping in much to stop the government from making or passing laws. I don't see them having any say over the NHS, defence, the economy, education and public services. So what exactly is Brussels doing to control us? The EU is imperfect and needs reforming, but far better to do that from within. To have a say. To keep the peace. To help deal with the issues that are affecting the world right now. Yes, the EU can be criticised for excessive red tape and bureaucracy, but so can Westminster. So can so many government departments. Not everything is the fault of the EU. We have self-determination and control as it is. The reason prices are so high is that there aren't enough houses being built. It's been that way for decades. Successive governments have failed to solve the issue. And you do realise, if we left the EU, that around 2 million Brits living and working on the continent would suddenly be facing very uncertain futures. What happens to them?

From: Rob Davies 01 March 2016 14:25 PM

Is it fear if it is also the truth? A Brexit would inevitably lead to more volatility in the housing market. To say otherwise is naive. It would also cause issues with the economy, investment, trade and the jobs market. And for what? Well, the Out side don't seem to be able to answer that, other than saying we'll wrest back control and become the greatest nation on the earth again. What sovereignty don't we currently possess? What are the EU forcing on us that we don't want to be enforced? If we weren't in the EU, our government would have even more freedom to overfish, abuse workers rights and push through TTIP. Our food production standards would go down, our attempts to combat pollution and climate change would be affected (it's only because of the EU that we even have pollution limits in place, which we still don't stick to) and our ability to have a voice in the world's second largest economy would be compromised. So we'd still trade with the single market, but we wouldn't have a say in it. What's the point in that? The EU is an easy scapegoat to be used. We are not ruled by Brussels any more than I'm a Premier League footballer. That's scaremongering, there and then. And, Richard, if you really think that Duncan-Smith, Gove, Grayling and Farage are committed Europhiles, I suggest you need a long lie down in a darkened room with a cold flannel on your head.

From: Rob Davies 01 March 2016 14:19 PM

Wouldn't surprise me. The RTB stock was all swallowed up by investors, I can see the government's latest gimmicky scheme going the same way.

From: Rob Davies 29 February 2016 11:34 AM

Interesting idea. Fair play to them if they do. Can't then argue about transparency and stats being manipulated if they take this approach. I'm sure it has something to do with keeping investors and shareholders on side, as Terence alludes to above, but it's not a bad idea. Maybe our banks could do something similar?

From: Rob Davies 29 February 2016 11:31 AM

Was supposed to say "what planet does that man live on", but "what man does that planet live on" kind of works as well, in a weird way :)

From: Rob Davies 26 February 2016 14:54 PM

They are an absolute behemoth in the property world. You can dislike them as much as you like, but it's hard not to admire their business model or the way they conduct themselves. You very rarely hear of RM getting into spats or coming under pressure as a result of PR disasters. It's a pretty steady ship, for the most part. Of course, criticism of their fees and pricing structure is valid, but RM have now transcended the property world. They are a massive brand in their own right. People intuitively associate property with RM and, to a lesser extent, Zoopla. Their brand awareness is superb. They are now the go-to place for people browsing for property. I know people like to bash them, but I find it hard to see how they're doing too much wrong. Stats and figures can be misleading, but in the instance of the above the findings are pretty hard to dismiss.

From: Rob Davies 26 February 2016 11:40 AM

From: Rob Davies 26 February 2016 11:35 AM

Maybe Russell could reveal how much he and his staff earns? Practice what he preaches and all that.

From: Rob Davies 26 February 2016 11:29 AM

I think that's Mr Quirk's middle name. He's a very shrewd and canny operator - he knows how to get his name in the press, he knows how to get column inches, he knows how to ruffle the feathers of those he's eager to annoy, and he does all this in such a shameless manner. The way he conducts himself in the press brings to mind a certain Katie Hopkins. Obviously Quirk isn't as bad as her - is anyone? - but is equally brilliant at self-promotion and making crass, ill-judged, untrue and sweeping generalisations whenever he opens his mouth.

From: Rob Davies 26 February 2016 11:28 AM

Looks like Mr Quirk's words have gone down as well as they usually do! Seriously, what man does that planet live on?

From: Rob Davies 26 February 2016 11:23 AM

Nice advert, but surely their target market is very small, is it not? How many people viewing this ad will realistically be able to afford the sort of properties that Fine & Country advertise?

From: Rob Davies 25 February 2016 15:06 PM

Interesting point about Foxtons, Kelly. They do seem to have gone off the radar recently. They've reined in their more aggressive and obnoxious ways in the last few months. They're either taking a backseat because they're not doing so well and they've not got as much to shout about, or they've cottoned on to the fact that annoying residents, the public and the media with their attempts to take over the whole of London isn't exactly the world's best business model.

From: Rob Davies 25 February 2016 15:03 PM

Agreed, T Dap. It would be nice to know what Countrywide are actually for these days - they seem to spread themselves so thinly that no-one seems to know what exactly their main MO is. Is it retail, is it agency, is it hybrid, is it online? I'm all for expanding and diversifying, but I fear they've let their ambitions get carried away and are now trying to be all things to all people. It's perhaps not surprising that they are seeing profits slump - maybe people are just as confused as us about what exactly CW offer.

From: Rob Davies 25 February 2016 14:46 PM

Exactly. There are good, bad and really terrible, just like it is in most professions. That doesn't make it right, but I think some of the anger in the comments here is a little extreme. I don't think it's right to be completely dismissive of what a conveyancer does or to simply say their work is simple and straightforward when that is patently not the case.

From: Rob Davies 24 February 2016 12:46 PM

So it's always the conveyancers fault and never the agents? From my experience, I'd say that was inaccurate and unfair. It's true that some are slow, cumbersome and inept, but not all. I think your rant against the conveyancing profession - and your belief that agents do all the key work while conveyancers just tick boxes - is harsh in the extreme. "No idea of customer service, no idea of communication and and attitude of arrogance and working completely to their own agendas and timescales" To be fair, this is something that could also be aimed at certain agents. I understand your anger, but I think some of it's misplaced. Maybe it's not the norm, but I have worked with conveyancers who are professional and efficient. I've also worked with ones that aren't. But again the same can be said for estate agents. I've worked with good ones, average ones and really, really bad ones.

From: Rob Davies 24 February 2016 12:41 PM

Is it really that much of a big deal? It's never been a major issue with the buyers I've dealt with. I know it's a sun trap and keeps the garden warmer and brighter for longer, but I didn't realise it was quite so much of a deal-breaker. Surely garden space - even if it's north-facing - is better than no garden at all?

From: Rob Davies 17 February 2016 14:02 PM

Whatever the ins and outs of it, she's right about the Big Two being consumer friendly. It's why millions of people use them on a daily basis to search/browse for homes, while no-one uses OTM. Those are the simple facts, unpalatable as they may be to the more ardent OTM supporters out there.

From: Rob Davies 17 February 2016 09:53 AM

Quelle surprise. Who would have thunk it?

From: Rob Davies 17 February 2016 09:50 AM

Oh dear. And more criticism of Zoopla from OTM? Never. Because that's worked out so very well up to now, hasn't it?

From: Rob Davies 10 February 2016 09:41 AM

Refreshing approach. And, rather than putting people off, it had the opposite effect. Goes to show that honesty really does pay (most of the time).

From: Rob Davies 10 February 2016 09:36 AM

But doesn't she have a vested interest, as a buying agent? She's saying don't use the portals, because they're not very efficient, use a buying agent instead. So she's guilty of her own PR rhetoric. I'll never understand all the animosity towards portals. I find it all very strange.

From: Rob Davies 09 February 2016 09:58 AM

From: Rob Davies 09 February 2016 09:56 AM

And who could blame them? If my employer came to me and said you will be working 14-hour days - and will be on call for all these hours - I'd politely tell them to do one. There is such a thing as work/life balance, even for estate agents. I really don't see the point of this. Is there any evidence to suggest that people want to visit an estate agents at 7am in the morning or 8pm at night? You could argue that this makes things more flexible for those who work during the day and can't make meetings/visit the branch in person, but I'm not buying that. If you're committed to buying/selling a home, you make the time. You take time off to deal with things. The branch I work in has many dead hours as it is, no need to add even more to that. I'm fed up of this 24/7 world we live in, where everything must be open and switched on at all times. It's exhausting. And it's making people far more impatient and short-tempered. People want it all, they want it now and they want it quickly. It's not sustainable. Unless Countrywide are going to hire a load more staff and rota the shifts, I just can't see how this can work. I'm sure there are people who are willing to work 14-hour days to advance, but that doesn't make it right. Poor form, Countrywide. Very poor form.

From: Rob Davies 09 February 2016 09:54 AM

More excuses and weasel words from housebuilders/developers. Truth is, they'd rather sit on land and watch it rise in value rather than actually go about building genuinely affordable homes. Maybe the government should employ some housebuilders who are actually willing to, you know, build homes. I know, I know, a sacrilegious thought. Fully behind Khan on this. London has become completely unaffordable - to both buy and rent in - since Boris took over City Hall. Something needs to change. It won't be easy, and there will be plenty of barriers placed in his way, but we can't keep saying no, no, no every time someone suggests a large-scale housebuilding programme. We managed it in the 50s when we were broke, why can't we manage it now? The present set of affairs - with house prices (especially in London) rising at silly rates and rents growing twice as fast as wages - is not sustainable for the long-run, and does no-one in the property industry (buyers, sellers, tenants, landlords, estate agents, letting agents, conveyancers, etc) any good.

From: Rob Davies 03 February 2016 12:20 PM

Big money agency expanding to a place where obscene wealth is seen as a virtue isn't exactly surprising, is it?

From: Rob Davies 03 February 2016 10:15 AM

Very true, Smile Please. They don't need any more help than they already have.

From: Rob Davies 03 February 2016 10:13 AM

And we wonder why we've got a housing crisis!

From: Rob Davies 28 January 2016 10:07 AM

“Any common sense person would say that a highly-paid private equity executive paying less tax than a cleaning lady or other low-paid workers, that can’t be right” Well, maybe if he didn't find loopholes to dogde the taxes he really owed that wouldn't have been the case. It's like Google saying they've done nothing wrong because their tax avoidance was legal. You could argue that they had a point - that a better tax system wouldn't be manipulated or abused so easily - but you also have to question the morality of a massive corporation paying a fraction of the tax they owe or a high-flying executive paying less than his cleaner. I'm sure Mr Ferguson will fit in very well to the high-end world of Savills, though.

From: Rob Davies 28 January 2016 10:06 AM

Ah, fair enough. Still, an £80,000 deposit for an average house seems very steep, no? House prices are spiralling out of control and the government are doing nothing to stop it. Cameron and Osborne know full well that high house prices are propping up the economy - take that away and recession here we come. It means they can say the economy is growing even when it isn't. They are restricting further supply to keep prices high. They say they are doing things to solve the housing crisis, but gimmicky rubbish like Help to Buy, Right to Buy and starter homes don't really cut the mustard. They're just there to make it seem like the government is taking the bull by the horns. House prices rising to astronomical levels is seen as a good thing by the government, but it's nothing of the sort. It's not good for the economy, it's not good for agents, it's not good for sellers or buyers in the long-term. It's not sustainable. Until the government realise that it's only going to get much worse before it gets better.

From: Rob Davies 27 January 2016 13:55 PM

"It’s understandable for them to think, if I pay my money upfront, how committed will they be to selling my house?” That's the main difficulty online agents have. Having said that, some do prefer the pay upfront model. Horses for courses and all that.

From: Rob Davies 27 January 2016 10:08 AM

A sad indictment of our times. A ludicrous amount of money. Who can afford to cobble together £80,000 unless they have very rich parents, a very well-paid job, a very large inheritance or a lottery win? But I suppose the government would deem this as "affordable". You can't even think about buying unless you're in a couple these days, it's just too expensive to do it on your own. No wonder people are living at home well into their forties, because rent isn't exactly kind on the wallet at the moment either.

From: Rob Davies 27 January 2016 09:24 AM

They are certainly expanding at a rapid rate. Good luck to them (so long as they don't become the new Foxtons!)

From: Rob Davies 26 January 2016 10:27 AM

Quirk and OTM - a match-made in hell? Only joking (sort of). Quirk might have far too much to say for himself, but on this he's pretty much spot on. OTM hasn't died out yet, but they certainly seem to be going out with a whimper. I think, if they settled for lower ambitions and tried to secure their place as the third biggest and most-used portal, they could start to get somewhere. The problem was their initial ambitions. They were too unrealistic, too bullish. Springett should take the lion's share of the blame for that. Like easyProperty, he talked the talk but clearly hasn't walked the walk. They were never going to overtake Zoopla as the no 2 portal within a year. It was ridiculous to think they might. If they'd had lower expectations to begin with, they might be able to qualify their success better now. Slow and steady wins the race. All-guns blazing very rarely works as a long-term strategy.

From: Rob Davies 26 January 2016 10:25 AM

Yes, I think you're probably on the money in this case.

From: Rob Davies 21 January 2016 11:19 AM

Yes, I think this is an important point. It's not going to be the big agents who came up with the idea in the first place who will suffer from this but all the smaller, in some cases one or two branch offices who can't afford to lose out on the leads generated by Rightmove and Zoopla while they wait for OTM to get things together.

From: Rob Davies 21 January 2016 11:17 AM

Hmm, not looking too good for OTM, is it? Maybe if they revised their ambitions a little bit and aimed to become the third biggest portal instead, things would be looking a little rosier. Problem is, they promised too much from the very beginning and haven't delivered on that promise. After the initial bounce post-launch, when they appeared to have Zoopla on the ropes for a bit, they've not been able to make up any ground on the Big Two. In fact, they've only succeeded in making them stronger. The anti-online stance, the one other portal rule and the constant sniping against Zoopla were all especially bad calls.

From: Rob Davies 21 January 2016 11:15 AM

Cameron's legacy was decided a few months ago when that salacious story broke! But yeah, findings as expected. I also think they have a point. There would be a lot of upheaval and uncertainty, not least in the property market. This hasn't really been thought through by Cameron, whose party are ready and waiting to tear themselves apart over Europe.

From: Rob Davies 19 January 2016 11:34 AM

Pretty impressive, has to be said. They've certainly become a "name" in recent years, and they don't seem as obnoxious or overbearing as some other big names that could be mentioned... cough...Foxtons...cough...Knight Frank...cough...Savills...cough

From: Rob Davies 19 January 2016 11:32 AM

This is all a bit strange. Given how much they're growing, it seems very paradoxical that so many of their top team are leaving. It can't be the whole deserting a sinking ship argument, because they're not sinking. Unless there is something we don't know about. Very odd. On the other hand, might just be a case of someone leaving for pastures new and we're looking for controversy where there isn't any. Who knows?

From: Rob Davies 18 January 2016 15:01 PM

And only going to rise ever higher. Osborne's not stupid - well, more that he's a crafty and sly so and so - and he knows that high house prices are propping up the economy. A slump in prices will be disastrous for the economy so the government will continue to do all they can to restrict supply while pretending they are actually dealing with the housing shortage - see their announcement of 13,000 new starter homes, Build to Rent, Help to Buy ISAs and their continuing insistence on pushing Right to Buy. All smoke and mirrors, as per.

From: Rob Davies 08 January 2016 09:52 AM

Indeed. Not so rosy in the Purplebricks universe anymore! Maybe they could do another of those annoying adverts telling us all how great they are and how they're open 24/7 and how we'd all be fools not to use them, blah, blah, blah. Thing is, I think Purplebricks have the potential to be quite good - they're certainly the biggest and most successful of the online agents to enter the market in recent years, and they do actually seem to sell and let houses - but they do also appear to run before they can walk at times. A slower, more gradual growth would be more advisable.

From: Rob Davies 08 January 2016 09:46 AM

Bizarre move. Other online agencies do this, and seem to have had some success with it, and of course it's common practice in other professions, but it's certainly a risky move on Tepilo's part. I think, with the emergency of Purplebricks, Hatched and HouseSimple, they are realising that they have to stand out from the crowd and really shout from the rooftops about anything new or innovative. Good luck to them, but I'm not sure if the move is that well-advised.

From: Rob Davies 05 January 2016 12:02 PM

I'll believe it when I see it, given this government's frankly appalling record on housing! And, of course, what constitutes affordable these days? The government says these starter homes are affordable, but the government's definition of affordable and the definition of that of the public at large seem to differ quite wildly.

From: Rob Davies 05 January 2016 10:54 AM

*Caused from raising interest rates.

From: Rob Davies 22 December 2015 13:29 PM

But they keep putting it off every few months. What makes you think it will be any different in 2016? Osborne and the Tories know that the economy is not in as rude a health as they would have us believe. The smallest little thing could knock it off course and plunge it into recession. Much better to keep interest rates historically low than have to deal with the issues that will be caused from it.

From: Rob Davies 22 December 2015 13:29 PM

Yes, have to agree with this. Terrible news for savers, excellent news for those with mortgages. Surely interest rates will have to rise at some point, though, which is when the problems could start in earnest.

From: Rob Davies 22 December 2015 10:56 AM

Well said, Frances. Does seem to be quite a lot of bitterness against conveyancers/solicitors here. No, the service they offer isn't perfect, but neither is that of an estate agent. I'm sure - in fact I know - that they have a very difficult task, with time pressures from all sides, and to lay the blame for delays entirely at their door is harsh in the extreme.

From: Rob Davies 22 December 2015 10:55 AM

Bit harsh on solicitors there, Ray. They do a hard, thankless job when it comes to house sales and I think they are too easily criticised. Yes, they can be very slow at times. But, as we know, tarring a whole profession with the same brush is neither fair nor right. We don't like it when it happens to estate agents, why a different set of standards for solicitors?

From: Rob Davies 22 December 2015 10:52 AM

"Prime Central London’s residential values have risen 4.3 per cent over the past 12 months and now average £2.3m per property according to Cluttons - but price growth is forecast to slow slightly next year." Still looks pretty healthy to me. We keep hearing of the PCL market slowing down because of Osborne's measures, but I'm still not seeing much evidence of that. An average price of £2.3m per property? Alright for some, I suppose.

From: Rob Davies 16 December 2015 10:45 AM

I think it's quite a good idea. A single, independent, PR-free House Price Index sounds good to me. We might no longer get a hundred different variations from Halifax, Nationwide, RM, Hometrac, Home, etc, all telling us something different. But I do agree with Paul Davey above. A single definitive official government house price index isn't going to stop those above from releasing data, so the waters will still be muddied and house price data will continue to be as muddled and confused as it is now.

From: Rob Davies 16 December 2015 10:40 AM

Agreed. Quite shocking, if true.

From: Rob Davies 14 December 2015 17:22 PM

What has Rob Ellice been smoking? Ludicrous suggestion. Surely he knows it's a ludicrous suggestion? Or, more worryingly, maybe he doesn't. He's trying to put a brave face on all this, but I agree with Daniel above. It's all bravado and bluster. Distraction techniques being used to steer people away from what looks like a sinking ship. Thing is, they could be really successful if they actually put their minds to selling and letting homes rather than simply being a PR hype machine. They've got tonnes of investment and backing, but they don't seem to actually be having any success with the nitty-gritty of buying and selling homes. A bit sad, really.

From: Rob Davies 14 December 2015 17:22 PM

There are some impressive Christmas jumpers going on in the second pic. The blue reindeer one, in particular, is either brilliant or garish depending on your viewpoint.

From: Rob Davies 09 December 2015 14:48 PM

Thought you were talking about the football team for a minute there. I was thinking, I know they've got a lot of money these days, but it would still be weird for them invest in a tech start-up in the British property industry. Looked it up on Google and realised you were talking about The Property Software Group. Yes, should be plenty of competition between all these new start-ups. Will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

From: Rob Davies 09 December 2015 14:46 PM

Interesting. Maybe we could get Springett's opinion on that as well? I'm sure he'd find some way to spin it to OTM's advantage. A master of PR, that man. Just a shame that OTM's results really don't add up, which makes his bullishness and hyperbole all the more embarrassing.

From: Rob Davies 01 December 2015 10:22 AM

Don't bet on it!

From: Rob Davies 01 December 2015 10:20 AM

"and while it says OnTheMarket has successfully disrupted the portal sector it will ultimately be merely a “blip in the growth trajectory” of Rightmove and Zoopla." Yep, pretty much. Even then, it was only a blip for Zoopla. RM remained completely unaffected by OTM's arrival and still do.

From: Rob Davies 26 November 2015 10:27 AM

Osborne tries to privatise everything, so that's no big surprise. Good to see there is a petition against it. As you say, The Land Registry does a vital job while costing us nothing. But if there's money to be made by placing it into private hands, the Tories will try and make it so.

From: Rob Davies 26 November 2015 09:45 AM

Sorry George, I don't believe a word of it. The Tories have had 5 years to build affordable housing and they've so far achieved diddly squat. In fact, house building has been at its lowest level since the 1930s, buy-to-let and Buy to Leave has soared, the number of empty homes has gone out of control and the Tories answer to a severe lack of supply is the revival of Right to Buy, the policy that helped to cause this mess in the first place. More weasel words from the government, no actual action will be taken. Brandon Lewis seems to have disappeared off the face of the earth again in recent months, so I don't suspect will see much action on this. And since when did £250,000 become classed as affordable? Big clue, George, it isn't. You're still looking at a sizeable deposit and at least two people clubbing together to get anywhere close to said deposit. This whole affordable rubbish is just more spin from the masters of spin.

From: Rob Davies 25 November 2015 14:11 PM

@David OConnor - yes, that might be the case. But maybe some people want a choice. Some agents do charge high fees for poor service. At least with an online agent, you wouldn't be left so out of pocket if things went wrong. Not all traditional agencies are brilliant, value-for-money geniuses. Just like not all online agents are cheap and cheerful charlatans. Shock horror, many online agents are run by ex estate agents who have become disillusioned with the traditional model. There is space for both in the market, when will traditional agents understand that? Ultimately, the public will decide. I'm a big advocate of the hybrid model, which more and more agents are embracing. Taking the best of the online and traditional models and fusing them together.

From: Rob Davies 24 November 2015 13:22 PM

What on earth is a brand incubator? Anyone???

From: Rob Davies 24 November 2015 13:16 PM

Purplebricks seem good at making lots of noise and getting their name out there, but not so good at the nitty-gritty, everyday tasks that come with being an estate agent. I'm sure cases like the one David Redman outlines above are not isolated. I'm not as anti-online agent as some, but the endless exposure Purplebricks seems to be afforded is a tad tiresome. Are they really worthy of all this attention? Have they actually achieved anything yet? Or is their PR hype machine just as good as Russell Quirk and eMoov's?

From: Rob Davies 24 November 2015 13:15 PM

From: Rob Davies 19 November 2015 11:45 AM

I think you're probably right, Roger. Will be interesting to see what happens when OTM inevitable airs its dirty washing in public at some point in the not too distant future.

From: Rob Davies 19 November 2015 11:45 AM

Because it's interesting. Before just now, I wouldn't have known how many estate agents there are in the UK. Now, thanks to this article, I do. A nugget of information. Not life-changing, but still useful. That's what articles are there for, to inform. You seem to be claiming that this site mainly has articles that no-one gives a damn about, yet you took the time and effort to log-in, read the article and then post your inane comment underneath it. Who you kidding, Ray? We all know you love it here.

From: Rob Davies 19 November 2015 11:42 AM

A fellow Rob D. Welcome to the boards! Yep, you raise a valid point. With the swarm of new agents - both online and traditional - entering the market, it must be hard work keeping up with them all. Not to mention keeping the dodgy, bogus, only in it for the money agents at bay. Because agents with loose morals definitely do still exist.

From: Rob Davies 19 November 2015 11:39 AM

It always amazes me how these people think they will get away with it. I'm sure many of them do, depressingly. The sheer arrogance and treachery on display from the above conveyancer makes you despair. An isolated incident, yes, but still depressing.

From: Rob Davies 18 November 2015 10:19 AM

@ Cat Lamond - Interesting. Thanks for the heads-up.

From: Rob Davies 18 November 2015 10:17 AM

Joy of joys. The endless, and unsustainable, rise in house prices continues unabated. When £286,000 is the average house price - triple that for London and parts of the South East - you know something's gone seriously wrong. No wonder a whole generation will be priced out of the housing market. You're looking at over £28,000 for a deposit. Affordable? Get out of it!

From: Rob Davies 18 November 2015 10:16 AM

"Rightmove now 'portal of choice' thanks to OnTheMarket say analysts." Tell us something we didn't know.

From: Rob Davies 12 November 2015 13:07 PM

"Foxtons founder is now worth a cool £1.186 billion" Enough to make you cry, isn't it? An absurd, ludicrous amount of money for one person to have. Before people come on here saying "you're just bitter and jealous, he's earned his money, get off your high horse!", just ask yourself why these mega-rich people need so much money. Another car, another house, another property investment. Redistribution of wealth, trickle down? Pah! Anyway, that's my Monday morning rant over. I can get on with the rest of my week now!

From: Rob Davies 02 November 2015 10:05 AM

Terrible few weeks for nobody's favourite portal. Their PR team must be doing overtime at the moment, trying to spin all these negative news stories into something more positive. Maybe they'll change their stance on the one other portal rule when things start to get really bad. They may even stop excluding online agents. Who knows?

From: Rob Davies 02 November 2015 10:01 AM

From: Rob Davies 26 October 2015 09:30 AM

This is a great point. They were created to challenge the duopoly of RM and Z, but there plan all along has been to just replace this duopoly with a new one, with them in second place rather than Z. Given Zoopla's recovery and OTM's struggles, definitely doesn't look like that's going to happen. All the while, of course, Rightmove have quietly been growing and growing, allowing the competition to have playground spats while they get bigger and stronger. It's ironic, really - OTM was set up to challenge the dominance of Rightmove and yet they've only made them stronger. The one other portal rule and the no-online agents rules were two absolutely rookie errors from OTM, errors they are unlikely to recover from.

From: Rob Davies 22 October 2015 10:36 AM

Yes, it's all getting a little bit tedious. It seems complaints are being made left, right and centre for absolutely everything!

From: Rob Davies 21 October 2015 11:33 AM

Always said it - hybrid is the way forward!

From: Rob Davies 21 October 2015 11:32 AM

From: Rob Davies 21 October 2015 11:31 AM

Very brave move, but it won't catch on.

From: Rob Davies 19 October 2015 11:19 AM

@Harry NoName - too much!

From: Rob Davies 19 October 2015 11:17 AM

*Brand spanking even. I win the prize for dodgy typing.

From: Rob Davies 14 October 2015 15:48 PM

It's a bit mealy-mouthed, but makes perfect sense to me. Your prize, Richard, is a branding spanking "affordable" home. Oh wait, they don't exist, despite the government now classing £450,000 as affordable. In what world is that affordable?!

From: Rob Davies 14 October 2015 15:47 PM

Sounds a bit out there, but it's probably not far from the truth. Given most of the ultra-prime properties are going to super-rich overseas investors, it doesn't take a massive leap of faith to believe this money isn't coming from entirely ethical sources. It's a ridiculous situation that is only going to get worse before it gets better. Sky-high doesn't even really cover it anymore - astronomical or another planet would be more appropriate.

From: Rob Davies 14 October 2015 15:44 PM

I really hope so, Richard!

From: Rob Davies 12 October 2015 17:15 PM

Agreed. They seem so outdated in this day and age but a slow removal of them, rather than a blanket ban, seems like the way to go. The best thing you can say about them is that there is an immediate connection between For Sale/To Let boards and estate agents - an instantaneous link. But they are also a scourge to look at, seem to take forever to be taken down and don't seem to actually encourage people to buy or let in the way they once did. In this technological world we live in, they stand out like a sore thumb.

From: Rob Davies 12 October 2015 17:14 PM

Smile Please, where did you get your magic crystal ball from? Can you also predict the football scores? It would save me a lot disappointment and false hope. Who knows if this idea will get off the ground? Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Give it a chance, at least.

From: Rob Davies 12 October 2015 17:11 PM

A bit of healthy competition to keep you on your toes is always good, Glenn!

From: Rob Davies 07 October 2015 16:17 PM

Agreed, Trevor.

From: Rob Davies 07 October 2015 16:15 PM

Interesting findings, although not exactly surprising given how popular flats are in London and how high prices are in the capital. I suppose it makes sense. People having families later means there is less of a need for space, which means that a flat rather than a house is more suitable. As Halifax points out, demand is still massively outstripping supply, which is merely forcing prices up higher. Until this is resolved - and I don't expect Mr Cameron's latest move to pander to the whims of developers will help with the supply issue - then our ridiculously unbalanced and over-inflated housing market will continue to remain so.

From: Rob Davies 07 October 2015 16:15 PM

Are the Purplebricks adverts supposed to be funny? Because they just come across as irritating and try-hard. What were the main goals of the advertising campaign? To be fair, they certainly stand out, but that has more to do with the colourful purple branding than the content.

From: Rob Davies 06 October 2015 11:31 AM

Shouldn't they focus on getting things right in this country first? Running before you can walk springs to mind! I commend their ambition, but I think they've jumped the gun way too early on this.

From: Rob Davies 05 October 2015 09:23 AM

Oops. Bit of an own goal here from The Red Brick. Losing a massive client in Savills to take a big old gamble on a venture that hasn't yet got off the ground. I thought the stunt was actually pretty funny and well done, but it didn't have the impact they were hoping. The national press didn't even stir, it was purely trade publications who took up the story. There is obviously a lot of money being pumped into easyProperty - given the name more than anything - but it doesn't yet seem to be translating into any actual results. They seem to pop up every so often, to announce a launch of something here or a PR stunt there, and then they vanish off the face of the earth again for 6 months. Not surprised Savills have taken this step. They don't want to be associated with a PR company who are themselves associated with easyProperty, the company that has just announced the death of high-street agents. Rookie error from the PR company here, I think.

From: Rob Davies 02 October 2015 15:46 PM

From: Rob Davies 01 October 2015 10:58 AM

You make some very valid points. An interesting, and convincing, argument that should definitely be voiced more often. We can't keep burying our heads in the sand with regards to the UK housing market - it's in a mess, it will take a very long while to fix, but the longer we leave it the worse it's going to get. We need the government to act - no laughing at the back! - but it seems more likely that pigs will fly before that happens, so I won't be holding my breath.

From: Rob Davies 29 September 2015 14:42 PM

Yes, congratulations eMoov, although the figure is hugely skewed by Caan's investment and the family and friends period of investment. Still, you can't really sniff too much at the final figure raised. Crowdfunding does seem to be the in-thing at the moment. Whether it is just a short-term thing or something more permanent remains to be seen. But it's certainly an excellent way for small and medium sized businesses to accrue funds and a good way of drumming up publicity - something Mr Quirk is expert at!

From: Rob Davies 29 September 2015 14:10 PM

Indeed. Sounds like something you'd expect to see on a Friday night in Chatham, not in the hoity-toity surrounds of Sandbanks Yacht Club, darling. Disclaimer: Chatham was the first name that popped into my head. I've been on a night out there and it's really not that bad, before anyone criticises me for falling into the trap of lazy stereotypes.

From: Rob Davies 28 September 2015 12:22 PM

And there was me thinking Sandbanks was a classy area! Really, it's hideously overpriced and full of people with more money than sense. As evidenced here.

From: Rob Davies 28 September 2015 12:17 PM

From: Rob Davies 25 September 2015 14:08 PM

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest, depressingly. If they think they can get away with it, they will do all they can to make that possible. It always amazes me when super wealthy people do everything they can to find loopholes so they don't have to pay what they owe. Is it really going to make that much difference to their already over-inflated bank balances? It's greed and self-interest, pure and simple. It's why I had little sympathy for the critics of the mansion tax. People crying foul about those with £1m homes having to pay a little bit more - seriously!?

From: Rob Davies 23 September 2015 09:49 AM

Do you realistically believe you can challenge Rightmove as the No 1 portal? Or have you resigned yourself to playing second fiddle for the foreseeable future?”

From: Rob Davies 06 September 2015 20:07 PM

Sounds interesting. These everything goes Q & A sessions often give some honest insight into what goes on behind closed doors. Hopefully this will follow suit. Not a bad shout from Zoopla to make themselves more open and accountable. I look forward to seeing the questions and, even more so, the replies.

From: Rob Davies 01 September 2015 09:43 AM

Exactly, Fake. When they start actually building enough homes to keep up with demand, which hasn't happened for the last decade or so, then they can start patting themselves on the back. Until then, well... A step in the right direction, granted, but let's not get carried away with ourselves here. 130,000 new homes isn't going to solve the housing crisis, especially if many of those homes are unaffordable (as I'm sure many of them are),

From: Rob Davies 24 August 2015 15:50 PM

Saw that too, John. Everything that is wrong with the world, in a nutshell! Might sound like sour grapes, and it probably is, but you can't honestly tell me any home is worth $100m. Surely?

From: Rob Davies 17 August 2015 11:41 AM

Ridiculous. Thatcher's RTB legacy, ladies and gentleman! And the current jokers we have in charge want to bring it back. You couldn't make it up.

From: Rob Davies 17 August 2015 10:05 AM

Hardly surprising. We're not all bad, you know!

From: Rob Davies 17 August 2015 10:04 AM

"Local man Sebastian Hipwood - describing as hailing from “a well-known polo playing family”" Christ, he couldn't sound more like an upper-class stereotype if he tried! Are you sure he's not a Harry Enfield character having you on, Graham?

From: Rob Davies 14 August 2015 11:48 AM

@ Peter Green - which anti-competitive measures have RM introduced? Oh, that's right, they haven't. Unless they've secretly implemented a one other portal rule in the last few weeks, they certainly can't be accused of anything. It's OTM, and their ideologically driven attempts to look out for themselves and not their customers, who have made RM the dominant portal. They shouldn't be investigated because they haven't done anything wrong. You can be anxious about the duopoly turning into a monopoly in the portal market, but we have our friends at OTM to thank for that, too.

From: Rob Davies 10 August 2015 10:00 AM

Good. Let's hope they keep dipping until the housing market resembles something approaching normal, which hasn't been the case for at least a decade. The way we're going now is just unsustainable. Report released the other day suggests the average house price by 2020 will be roughly £320,000! Barmy!

From: Rob Davies 07 August 2015 11:06 AM

Because, Richard, the whole OTM/AM venture smacks of self-interest, for the benefit of the agents rather than the customer (the very people who keep them in a job!). The one other portal rule is, quite patently, a nonsense. Plus, it's been regularly flouted. The exclusion of online agents, too, is a regressive and anti-competitive step. I can totally understand the frustration agents have with RM and Zoopla and the fees they charge, but they're not the big bad wolves OTM would have you believe. To me, there is an ounce of jealously behind the whole formation of OTM. Almost as if they are so frustrated that they didn't think of RM or Zoopla or the portal idea first, and are now trying to do all they can to bring them down. When, of course, all they've done is make RM stronger. Zoopla, the only realistic challenger to RM's monopoly, have been weakened as a result of OTM. They've bounced back well after the initial hit, but they won't be challenging RM anytime soon. The idea that OTM is some kind of honourable, "standing up for all poor little agents out there" movement is what gets to me most. They're all in it for themselves as much as the board members at RM and Zoopla. It's often forgotten that Springett himself founded PrimeLocation, so it's more than a little bit hypocritical for him to then hold portals up as the big bad evil.

From: Rob Davies 05 August 2015 11:39 AM

From: Rob Davies 03 August 2015 09:27 AM

It does look desperate. And who has the time of inclination to go through 146 different images?

From: Rob Davies 03 August 2015 09:27 AM

Former Countrywide chief executive Harry Hill says the company is going backwards. Alison Platt, new chief executive of Countrywide, thinks differently. Who is right? There's only one way to find out. FIGHT!!! (Sorry.)

From: Rob Davies 31 July 2015 11:24 AM

I've always said it, the biggest problem with OTM is they aren't there for the best interests of the customer, the public, the people who keep them in a job. OTM is there to protect traditional high-street agents from what they see as the unfair fees charged by RM and Z. Vested interests at the very top, but it won't be the larger agencies who lose out. It'll be the smaller agencies that suffer when OTM crashes and burns. Yes, a conversation needs to be had about portals and traditional agencies, but AM/OTM turned it into a toxic issue from the very start, particularly with their one other portal rule and the exclusion of online agents. Zoopla haven't exactly been angels in all this, but they were only defending themselves against attacks from OTM. All in all, pretty tawdry. And, at the end of the day, RM will still be the top of the pile, by an even bigger distance than before. Brilliant.

From: Rob Davies 28 July 2015 14:58 PM

"Analysis of Britain’s three rival property portals shows that Rightmove is strengthening its position, Zoopla’s loss of agents has stabilised, and OnTheMarket’s impact on the portal landscape is reducing." I think most of us could have told you that. The question is, how long will OTM last before they try and slip away unnoticed. A lot of big egos are going to be bruised if this goes to pot, so I'm sure they'll do all they can to cling onto a sinking ship for as long as possible, convincing themselves that the portal can still be a success.

From: Rob Davies 28 July 2015 09:53 AM

In fairness, even though I think OTM are doomed to fail, their search facility wasn't that bad, although I haven't tried it out for a few months. The problem being, it was trying so hard to be a copycat version of RM and Zoopla that it brought nothing new or fresh to the table. Given OTM doesn't produce anywhere near as many search results as the two main portals, what's the point in using it? They were never, ever going to topple RM and Zoopla on SEO or getting towards the top of the first page of Google. They don't even beat PrimeLocation and other portals some of the time. Even typing in 'on the market' isn't guaranteed to bring up their website. That's a fatal flaw, and why their name was such a disastrous idea. On the Market can mean so many different things, it certainly doesn't shout property at you straightaway. The slow demise of OTM might take a year or two, but it seems the writing is already on the wall. Ian Springett seems to have given up the ghost, their spat with Zoopla has quietened down, and it just seems a matter of time before the whole idea is quietly shelved and deemed a very expensive failure.

From: Rob Davies 27 July 2015 11:31 AM

Interesting insight, Peter. I thought Brandon Lewis was doing an alright job before the election, although he didn't actually take much decisive action. As a landlord himself, he should have known better than most the biggest issues in the PRS and the property industry as a whole. Since the election, though, he seems to have vanished off the face of the earth, making about one comment on a property-related issue. Obviously, given his lack of a Cabinet position, his hands are probably tied as the government focuses on other things they consider more important while attempting to push through the new wave of RTB. Maybe we're doing him a disservice and he's actually doing some sterling work behind the scenes, but that seems highly unlikely. The government had about five different ministers responsible for housing last time out - including the one and only Grant Shapps/Michael Green - this time they barely seem to have one.

From: Rob Davies 23 July 2015 12:00 PM

Haha! Very good, Kelly. In London they want to blight the landscape by allowing more extensions to go upwards rather than outwards, as if this will somehow solve overcrowding. No, what it will do is allow rogue landlords to find more space in which to extract more money from poor, vulnerable tenants with nowhere else to go. You talk about brownfield sites as if they're the miracle cure for all this country's housing ills. It's a step in the right direction, yes, but there are nowhere near enough brownfield sites to satisfy demand. Bringing all the derelict buildings in the country back into use still wouldn't help. Besides, there is every chance these could be turned into residential/entertainment units rather than housing, or remain out of reach of ordinary buyers (see what's happening at Battersea Power Station). More worrying than all this, though, is your misguided faith in this government's ability to take housing in any way seriously. Does Brandon Lewis have a cabinet position? Have we heard a peep from this since May? Have the Tories focused more on their ludicrous RTB scheme than the actual issues that need addressing? No, no, and a big fat yes. The Coalition government presided over the lowest level of house-building since the 1920s, what makes you think the Tories on their own will change that? Were the Lib Dems holding back their housing policy that much? They can make all the wild promises they like - fast-tracking regeneration of brownfield sites, building 140,000 new starter homes, giving housing association tenants the RTB, putting loads of cash into Build to Rent. But we won't see any actual action on it, because housing is clearly seen as too unimportant despite being one of the most important issues the UK faces.

From: Rob Davies 22 July 2015 15:17 PM

@ Rachel Stone - very well, let's extend it to tenants in the Private Rented Sector too then. Why should it be one rule for housing association tenants and another for tenants forced into the PRS because there isn't enough social housing? And there isn't enough social housing because of RTB. Housing sold off, never replaced. There were always serious question markets over whether the government could force housing associations - independent, not-for-profit organisations - to sell off their biggest assets. This amendment will make that even harder. Maybe now the government will have to think of some actual housing policy rather than election bribes and schemes thought up on the back of a fag packet. I don't hold out very much hope...

From: Rob Davies 22 July 2015 09:15 AM

I thought Veyo would do quite well. The concept seemed to fill a gap in the market and it looked set to be a surefire hit, but since they've launched we've barely heard a peep out of them, which suggests all is not well. There obviously isn't the same demand for a conveyancing portal as there is for a property portal like RM and Z, but I thought they would be doing better than they apparently are. Of course, they could just be keeping things very low-key until they have enough to shout about, but that seems a tad unlikely.

From: Rob Davies 21 July 2015 10:23 AM

I think Cooper, no matter what she does, will always be associated with Balls. Unless she divorces him! She will forever be tainted by her association with him, which is unfair, but that's the hard old world of politics. Typical from Burnham - he's always very quick to change his tune. Have some conviction, man! Let's hope Corbyn wins, that way we might get some genuine opposition rather than career politicians that are barely distinguishable from the Tories. As for the mansion tax, I don't think it should be dismissed out of hand. The idea behind it is right and proper, but there might be too many difficulties over implementing it. A radical overhaul of council-tax bands is perhaps a less divisive and more sensible approach.

From: Rob Davies 21 July 2015 10:18 AM

The bubble keeps going until it bursts, then we're all in trouble.

From: Rob Davies 15 July 2015 09:25 AM

Nice and affordable then. Thanks, Lord Sugar. Then again, he is a barrow boy done good and is now more than happy to cosy up with the elite. What's the bet these homes are hoovered up by investors and never actually lived in? And still the supply/demand imbalance will be ignored.

From: Rob Davies 15 July 2015 09:24 AM

Yes, the film looks very slick and glossy, but over £25,000 to shoot it! Really? As you say, could be done on half or even a quarter of that budget. There are plenty of video companies in the UK capable of shooting something similar for a lot less. It certainly whets the appetite, but whether these sorts of videos encourage people to book viewings or show an interest remains to be seen. For the vast, vast majority, the property on offer in the video is way, way out of reach. Maybe these kinds of film only appeal to high-end customers, while for the rest of us it's merely a pipe dream that will never come true unless we win the EuroMillions.

From: Rob Davies 14 July 2015 12:20 PM

If people are stupid enough to pay £25,000 for a parking space, let them get on with it. Unless someone plans to use it on a near daily basis for the next 20 or so years, it makes no financial sense whatsoever. It's a rip-off, a con, but you can bet some foolish people will fall for it. Exactly, John. It's ludicrous. At a minimum, you're paying out £50,000 for two sodding parking spaces. Why can't the parking spaces being given to people who actually need them? You know, like the people who actually work at the airport or something. Just a thought.

From: Rob Davies 14 July 2015 11:35 AM

Good to see. Looks like this programme has highlighted a very tawdry, underhand side to estate agency. The way much of the public sees estate agents anyway. We can't really complain about the bad reputation we are given if people in our industry are willing to do stuff like this. We need to do all we can to weed out illegal practices like this, so it's refreshing that RICS are taking the allegations so seriously.

From: Rob Davies 13 July 2015 09:46 AM

Ah, easyProperty, where have you been? We've barely heard anything from you for the last few months, is that because you've got nothing to crow about or you're deliberately trying to keep a low-profile? I'm not sure online agents are more resistant to scams, corruption and money laundering - these people can find ways around anything - but I see where Rob Ellice is coming from. Need to catch up with the programme at some point. Sounds interesting, if a little sensationalist and unrepresentative.

From: Rob Davies 13 July 2015 09:43 AM

Is this really any surprise when it's made so bloomin' difficult for them?

From: Rob Davies 03 July 2015 09:18 AM

Yes, Robert, room for both, which some high-street agents don't seem to understand. If they are no threat, why do many traditional agents get so defensive about it? Hybrid agencies are the way forward, and I'd say many high-street agents are already heading this way. The best of both worlds, offering the most successful attributes of online and traditional in one big package. Estate agency is one area that doesn't seem to have been affected by the financial crisis and global austerity - see also rich people, bankers, politicians and house prices - but surely we can't have all these new agencies popping up forever. I walked down my high street earlier and counted 11 different branches! Surely that's not sustainable?

From: Rob Davies 02 July 2015 10:56 AM

Never, ever thought I'd say this, but I agree with Boris. Right, I'm off to have a thorough wash! Of course, the whole idea should be scrapped completely because it's so utterly ludicrous. But if that's not going to happen, BoJo's idea is slightly more palatable.

From: Rob Davies 02 July 2015 10:30 AM

I think Knight Frank and Savills do as they please and don't really give two hoots. That's certainly how it comes across.

From: Rob Davies 01 July 2015 18:04 PM

"activity and prices in the prime country house market have been “subdued” ever since." They should just sell all these big country houses to the National Trust and be done with it. Have to say, I find it very hard to feel too much sympathy when I hear the prime London market is struggling. Could be sour grapes, but I think they'll cope, don't you?

From: Rob Davies 01 July 2015 17:54 PM

The CMA being kept very busy in the last few weeks.

From: Rob Davies 30 June 2015 14:30 PM

Interesting stats, Trevor. This goes to show the problems OTM are having. If they're not even ahead of ebay, Twitter and Facebook - websites who don't even specialise in property, far from it - then that's got to be worrying for a portal that has designs on being the 2nd biggest of its kind in the UK. It's a pipe dream at the moment, total fantasy, and I can't see that changing anytime soon. Unfortunately, no supporter of OTM seems able to admit that.

From: Rob Davies 29 June 2015 17:40 PM

They'll become like those awful insurance companies/lawyer firms that are played incessantly on daytime TV. 'Have you had an accident at work? Then you could be due compensation. At "name of lawyers firm" we operate a no-win, no-fee policy. If you don't win, you don't pay!" To be fair, he is trying to address the main flaw of online agents, but I'm not sure this is the way to go about it.

From: Rob Davies 29 June 2015 09:36 AM

Well, yes, Rightmove will be laughing. All they've had to do is sit back and watch OTM and Zoopla tear each other to pieces. Zoopla was hit hard to begin with, but seems to have recovered ground as OTM struggles to make any impact and has been left to deal with boardroom resignations and investigations by the CMA. RM, by virtue of doing nothing, have only got stronger and stronger. The very thing OTM sought to change. You couldn't make it up! Great strategy from the brilliant brains at AM.

From: Rob Davies 29 June 2015 09:33 AM

Only going to get deeper, I'm afraid.

From: Rob Davies 26 June 2015 12:15 PM

No deposit houses sound brilliant, but I'd be interested to see how it works in practice. As you say, Simon, 100% mortgages were also flawed, as is the current system. There is no easy solution, unfortunately.

From: Rob Davies 26 June 2015 12:14 PM

@Hasfid Jalal - you cynical thing, you! Having said that, I do concur.

From: Rob Davies 24 June 2015 10:45 AM

"The Scottish government says around half of all the privately-owned land in Scotland is controlled by just 432 people and it has launched proposals which include ending tax relief for shooting estates and forcing the sale of land if owners are blocking economic development." Too right this should be challenged. As usual, wealth is concentrated in the hands of the few, to the detriment of the many. Unsurprisingly, there has been a backlash from land owners, but they've had it good for too long. Time to start sharing the pie out a little bit.

From: Rob Davies 24 June 2015 10:42 AM

RM and Zoopla way out in front? Never. We keep being told OTM are well on their way to being the second biggest portal in the country.

From: Rob Davies 23 June 2015 09:19 AM

No, Andy, no it's not! Anti-aspirational and spiteful, what a load of old tosh. I quite like Burnham, but he's judged it completely wrong on this. Labour didn't lose the election because of the mansion tax or an anti-business slant, they lost because they didn't offer enough of an alternative to the Tories and people didn't trust Ed Miliband as a future prime minister. Quite how placing a small tax on owners of £2m plus home is spiteful, I don't know. It's not like they can't afford it, is it? No, we'll just continue with Boris's vision of turning London into the biggest tax haven in the world, where only billionaires and the super-rich can afford to live. We won't question it, or have a serious conversation about housing, we'll just bury our heads in the sand and hope it all magically gets better. What are the government going to do about the supply/demand imbalance or brownfield sites or bringing empty homes into use, or stopping wealthy overseas investors buying up property and then leaving it unlived in? On that point, where has Brandon Lewis disappeared to? Since he was returned as housing minister, I don't remember him commenting on any property-related issues whatsoever.

From: Rob Davies 23 June 2015 09:17 AM

Nice work, David Simpson. This is the positive side of the review system, showing how it can work to an agent's advantage and really enhance their reputation. Being able to say we are "Hertford's most positively reviewed estate agency' is a fantastic weapon in the locker. Sadly, the review system is also ripe for abuse. As we can see in the above article, 17% of reviews are fake. This is a potentially major problem and something that needs to be clamped down on as much as possible. It's something TripAdvisor, Booking.com and other review websites have to deal with on a regular basis, separating the genuine from the fake, and it's something all these new agent-rater websites will have to learn too.

From: Rob Davies 22 June 2015 09:39 AM

Brilliant! Giving Foxtons a taste of their own medicine.

From: Rob Davies 22 June 2015 09:35 AM

Who said it had anything to with whether the role is paid or not? Not me, you're just making that up. You haven't actually given me an explanation, you've just copped out by pretending I'm the ignorant one and should go and do some reading up on the subject. You said yesterday that he would be replaced - well, today's announcement would suggest otherwise. So, as I asked yesterday, what happens if one by one each member of the AM board resigns? Will OTM go with it? AM/OTM supporters get very defensive against criticism, always have. It's almost like nothing is wrong and everything is going swimmingly, despite all recent evidence pointing to the contrary.

From: Rob Davies 17 June 2015 09:27 AM

Hmm, stand named after Olympic hero and national treasure or estate agency no-one's ever heard of. Tough choice.

From: Rob Davies 17 June 2015 09:06 AM

Paul House, care to explain this? You seemed certain yesterday that he would be replaced. What do you say to this?

From: Rob Davies 17 June 2015 08:22 AM

@Paul House - to be replaced by? I get that people might step down after a certain period of time, but if they never get replaced then who is in charge of running things? If, as you say, you expect them all to step down at some point, what will happen to Agents' Mutual and OTM? It seems like a lot of fuzzy thinking and a make it up as we go along mentality. Serious question: do you think OTM is living up to expectations or do you think it is in trouble? The superior, we know best attitude of AM might come back to bite them quite hard in the next 6-12 months.

From: Rob Davies 16 June 2015 15:45 PM

Very diplomatic, Hannah, but OTM are falling apart at the seams much quicker than even I predicted. The fact AM have made no response to this news speaks volumes.

From: Rob Davies 16 June 2015 11:04 AM

"30-buyers-to-one-property ratio for every £2m-plus home in the borough of Kensington and Chelsea." Madness! Where are these people getting their money from? Actually, I don't think I want to know.

From: Rob Davies 16 June 2015 09:26 AM

Of course it's news, Kelly. Given OTM's recent struggles, how can one of Agents' Mutual board resigning not be major news? It might suggest, might it not, that all is not well at AM Towers.

From: Rob Davies 16 June 2015 09:24 AM

Well, Robert, they might not have flopped, but this story would suggest they are making a pretty poor impact. If landlords don't know who they are, that's clearly a big problem, given how much financial might they put behind their PR campaign.

From: Rob Davies 15 June 2015 11:59 AM

Blimey, they've had a shocking couple of weeks from a PR perspective. Then again, their in-house team must be pretty expert at it, they have to deflect bad press and negative headlines on a nearly weekly basis. Thing is, I really don't think they care that much. They'll plough on, being obnoxious and superior, until their profits start to slide to drastic levels. Then they might have a rethink. It's a slippery slope when your brand becomes completely toxic, though. Just look at the struggle of Tesco. Blackberry too. McDonald's even, to a certain extent. All big players who haven't posted great results in recent years. If Foxtons carry on with this path, they could be heading into dangerous territory.

From: Rob Davies 12 June 2015 10:23 AM

Well said, Glenn. The complaint in this case was ridiculously petty.

From: Rob Davies 12 June 2015 10:19 AM

It's a decent idea - a kind of TripAdvisor for the property industry - but at the same time I'm a bit wary of the concept. What will the agents be judged on? For example, you could have a small agency which sells 3 properties in a month but does a fantastic job with selling those 3 properties. You could then have a larger agency which sells 15 properties in a month, but only does a half-hearted job on most of them. If we were judging purely on performance and satisfaction, the smaller agency would win. If we were judging on volume and profit, the larger agency would come out on top. I'm just worried it would unfairly benefit bigger, richer agencies with much larger PR teams.

From: Rob Davies 10 June 2015 08:50 AM

I'm sure they'll cope.

From: Rob Davies 10 June 2015 08:45 AM

"they have been civilised, bright-ish, borderline trustworthy" Damned with faint praise or what? The whole article comes across as a little patronising and sneering, as if estate agents should be praised for being slightly less bad than people think. As John says, we could turn all this round on Lucy Kellaway and come out with a load of cliches about terrible, unreliable, make it up as they go along journalists. I'd say, in the wake of the Leveson Inquiry and the phone-hacking scandal that has dogged the Sun and the Daily Mirror, that the stock of journalists is lower than it's ever been. Maybe an estate agent should go visit the offices of a newspaper and write an article about the journos not being as bad as everyone thinks. Fair's fair.

From: Rob Davies 09 June 2015 10:04 AM

Where do I sign up?

From: Rob Davies 09 June 2015 09:45 AM

The point is, Trevor, buyers having to pay extra money (basically a bribe) to get agents to take their property most seriously. If not exactly immoral, it's certainly unethical. And then, if you use the firm's preferred solicitor or mortgage broker, you get a discount. That doesn't sound very fair and above board to me. This sort of activity is an open goal for journos and anti-estate agent bashers. Why give them the ammunition? The reputation of the industry is bad enough as it is, things like this are hardly going to help.

From: Rob Davies 08 June 2015 10:08 AM

That's neither here nor there, Trevor. In this case they're spot on. The practice is completely wrong.

From: Rob Davies 08 June 2015 10:04 AM

Well, Tim, you could. How many people are actually benefiting from this? It says young first-time buyers are being helped, but if many of these can't even afford to cobble together a deposit in the first place, what's the point in stamp duty being slightly cheaper? You need to tackle the problem at its root - bring house prices down to sensible levels by introducing more stock to the market. But the government don't seen to understand that. They're just gonna keep burying their heads in the sand, merrily doing nothing to cure the housing bubble until it goes pop. When it does, it won't be them who suffers, it'll be ordinary people. We can't carry on with ludicrously high house prices for ever, it's not sustainable! Our whole economy is built off the back of house prices and the financial services sector. As we saw, when one of these goes down the pan, things quickly go downhill. But, of course, we haven't learn our lessons from the last financial crisis. That would be too much like good sense.

From: Rob Davies 04 June 2015 11:35 AM

@JohnBamonte - OTM challenging Zoopla? Hmm, that's debatable. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that isn't happening and that OTM has actually been going backwards since launch. Do you agree with the one other portal rule or the anti-online agent stance? To me, we need to make the industry more inclusive, encourage healthy competition not divisions. That's what OTM is doing - effectively saying we think nothing of online agents and RM and Zoopla, we've been doing this for years, we know best, we won't shaft you like these evil portals who have helped us get so many leads and instructions in the last few years, come and join us! Smacks of arrogance to me. OTM isn't trying to improve the industry, they're merely looking out for the best interests of the agents that formed that. That's the thing that most sticks in my craw.

From: Rob Davies 04 June 2015 11:27 AM

Well said, Simon. Their anti-online stance is ridiculous, their one other portal rule is even more ridiculous. Let's hope the CMA come down hard on them.

From: Rob Davies 04 June 2015 10:15 AM

Tut-tut. There could be trouble ahead for OTM.

From: Rob Davies 04 June 2015 10:10 AM

Nice story, in the sense that they get to return home and open a branch, but shouldn't they be focusing on making a success of it in England first. I haven't seen much evidence of that so far. On a separate point, do the brothers play themselves in that awful Purplebricks advert?

From: Rob Davies 03 June 2015 09:11 AM

This is going to make Foxtons even more popular. As if their brand wasn't toxic enough. I'm also a bit surprised that the use of the building can be changed so quickly if it's not of high enough value to the community. Again, if Foxtons continue to go after listed buildings/conservation sites, they'll make themselves even more unpopular.

From: Rob Davies 03 June 2015 09:08 AM

Am I the only one who finds this obscene?

From: Rob Davies 02 June 2015 09:50 AM

The boom before the bust?

From: Rob Davies 02 June 2015 09:47 AM

Probably a good thing. Our reputation is bad enough, if we start inhabiting historic pubs and annoying local residents, it's not going to get any better.

From: Rob Davies 01 June 2015 11:21 AM

Good to see not all agents are living in the dinosaur age.

From: Rob Davies 01 June 2015 11:19 AM

Does seem like quite an antiquated system these days. I know people who are very pro it and I know people who are very against it. Like the OTM/Zoopla argument or the online v traditional debate, there is very little middle ground - you're either for it or you hate it. Having said that, I still haven't fully made my mind up yet - so I'm one of the few sitting on the fence. I can see arguments from both sides, but I think I'm definitely veering towards the consignment of sole agencies to the annals of history.

From: Rob Davies 29 May 2015 17:30 PM

Wouldn't have anything to do with the mansion tax, would it? Those looking to buy £2m plus properties can now go about their business in the gleeful knowledge that they won't be hit by a 'draconian' and 'unfair' annual charge. Yipee!

From: Rob Davies 29 May 2015 08:47 AM

Worked well with the letting side, didn't it? What happened to easyProperty's takeover of the industry?

From: Rob Davies 29 May 2015 08:44 AM

Oh, this again. I really thought they would let it die when it was received so badly in nearly all quarters, but I clearly underestimated their incompetency. It's a ludicrous policy that will do nothing to solve the housing shortage and the Tories know it. They know their rich mates will be able to hoover up a load more stock a few years down the line, as they did after the Thatcher sell off, and then we're simply back to a situation where people are having to pay sky high rents on houses they can never afford to buy. If we're going to have this Right to Buy, it's only fair that it's extended to the PRS, right? Bet quite a few people on here wouldn't be too happy with that. But it's only fair.

From: Rob Davies 28 May 2015 09:50 AM

Exactly, Trevor. Spot on. Fair's fair, and I hope he's held to his word over that. Because it sure as hell isn't going to be the UK's number 1 portal in 12 months time!

From: Rob Davies 28 May 2015 09:27 AM

This does seem a bit petty on behalf of Spicerhaart. I'm not sure the ASA had good enough grounds to ban the advert outright - the wording could just have been changed slightly.

From: Rob Davies 28 May 2015 09:26 AM

So MMR hasn't actually obstructed activity in the mortgage market? Strange, but that would seem to be what the stats point to.

From: Rob Davies 27 May 2015 10:18 AM

Love this sort of innovation! No-one's saying it's going to replace an actual viewing, where the buyer physically visits the property in the flesh - Bradbury even says as much - but it's another way of making things more interactive and simpler for busy, time-poor people. Top stuff.

From: Rob Davies 27 May 2015 10:12 AM

Wrong move from Lewis. How exactly does greater regulation, which would improve trust between estate agents and consumers, make the industry anti-competitive?

From: Rob Davies 26 May 2015 09:30 AM

So does this mean 15 years of boom and then a massive bust? Because that doesn't sound very promising.

From: Rob Davies 26 May 2015 09:26 AM

Take it easy, Kelly. Estate agency isn't a closed shop, we welcome opinions from everyone. This trend will be around for a while yet. Until supply and demand are brought closer together, high house prices are here to stay. It's almost a bit of an insult to first-time buyers that mortgage rates are so low but house prices/deposits needed are so high.

From: Rob Davies 22 May 2015 10:17 AM

The SNP effect?

From: Rob Davies 22 May 2015 10:13 AM

Pretty shocking statistics. Buyers or sellers getting cold feet, gazumping, issues with mortgages, conveyancing and surveys - all possible reasons for a sale falling through, but I didn't expect it to be quite so high. Strange that there is such a dichotomy between the pre and post recessions levels. I understand why sales were falling through immediately after the global financial crisis, but should we still be feeling the effects of that now. Certainly, with the introduction of MMR and a lack of supply, buying/selling a house isn't going to get any easier in the short to medium term.

From: Rob Davies 21 May 2015 10:12 AM

Russell, where have you been? Still trying to take on the whole industry, I see.

From: Rob Davies 21 May 2015 10:05 AM

Hmm, that's debateable. Zoopla have come out with plenty of other data in recent weeks to suggest that OTM aren't having the impact they would like to. While RM are laughing, completely unaffected by this whole charade, I don't think the predictions for Z are quite as dire as some make out. As well as this, there's the whole 'one other portal rule' which, according to some, is being widely flouted. So how many of those 23% are still on Zoopla/have returned to Zoopla since OTM launched?

From: Rob Davies 20 May 2015 10:21 AM

A shameless election bribe that was routinely dismissed as ludicrous by nearly everyone outside the little Tory HQ bubble. And now we have Mr Hollinrake endorsing it, I'm sure against his better judgement. At least I hope he doesn't think it's the right solution, otherwise I'm afraid he's in the wrong profession. Maybe he should become a full-time MP. Right to Buy being extended to housing associations is a disastrous policy that will benefit a small number of people to the detriment of many others. It's a giveaway that does nothing to solve the housing shortage we currently have, it merely reduces available stock further. It's utterly brainless. I'm not totally sure it's legal either - I'm sure the housing associations (who are supposed to be not-for-profit organisations helping out those most vulnerable in society) will be too happy about their properties being sold off by the government. And where have most of the Right to Buy properties since Thatcher ended up? That's right, in the hands of landlords with large portfolios who subsequently charge extortionate rents on the properties they snap up. The whole idea of a property owning democracy is ludicrous, because this does the opposite of that - it further reduces supply.

From: Rob Davies 20 May 2015 09:20 AM

I agree. Does come across as a bit petty.

From: Rob Davies 19 May 2015 17:13 PM

Is that you, Gordon? Still bitter at losing the last election and being blamed for the financial crisis? No need to take it out on the party you used to represent. Either way, your point is ridiculous and indicative of the hyperbolic world we live in where fear and scaremongering wins out over rationality and sense. Not saying Labour would have been perfect for the industry, not by any stretch, but the Tories record on housing has been absolutely woeful. How many houses have they built over the last five years? How's their flagship Help to Buy scheme getting on? (From those who have used it, not very well at all). How are they getting on with helping first-time buyers onto the market? How are they getting on with dealing with the issues of Generation Rent? How are they getting on with bringing empty homes back into use? The housing minister doesn't even have a position in Cabinet, that's how much it matters to the government. And you kind of are condoning vandalism, aren't you? On the basis of your dislike of Labour, mansion tax, rent controls and bans on letting agent fees. Labour were certainly going to do no more damage to the industry than the Tories will. The longer the government continues to ignore the housing shortage, the longer we all bob merrily along in this little housing bubble that is about to go pop. I didn't get into estate agency to watch prices go up and up, out of the reach of most ordinary buyers. That's not a good long-term policy. Our whole economy seems based on high property prices - if it suddenly crashes, what's Plan B? I think too many of us in the industry are blind to that eventuality, brushing it off as extremely unlikely. I wouldn't be so sure.

From: Rob Davies 19 May 2015 10:04 AM

You can't argue with their ambition. Loving the environmentally sustainable element too - can the government follow suit? The mock-ups certainly look good. Will be interesting to see if it's finished by spring 2016 - that's not quite as long away as it sounds!

From: Rob Davies 19 May 2015 09:46 AM

Ooh, Savills won't be happy. One of their former employees - Head of Sales, no less - coming out in favour of one of the portals they are trying to bring down.

From: Rob Davies 19 May 2015 09:43 AM

Also, turns out I don't know the difference between their/there. Back to school for me. And Kelly, do you disagree with my points or not?

From: Rob Davies 18 May 2015 17:58 PM

They've been struggling for ages. But no-one likes to admit it. A lot of people have been sold a dud, and no amount of glossy TV adverts and Zoopla bashing can change that fact.

From: Rob Davies 18 May 2015 14:46 PM

Not sure the economic recovery is quite as resolute as you make out. Certainly, there is evidence to suggest otherwise. A low wage, low productivity economy is not going to work well in the long-term. Neither is one built on high house prices and the financial sector. I'd wait till Osborne's emergency budget - if we're in such rude health, why is an emergency budget being called at all? - to see just how well we're doing. Anyway, moving away from economic matters, I agree with you about the desirability of Cornwall and Devon. Both spectacularly beautiful places. But there is one small caveat you neglect to mention - the issue of empty second homes. A big problem, particularly in Cornwall, where locals are unhappy at wealthy people buying up holiday homes and leaving them empty, whilst at the same time pushing up house prices for those living their all year round. Also, Cornwall relies heavily on tourist trade. Outside of that, I don't believe their local economy is looking too healthy and their are issues with unemployment and poverty, etc. Not to rain on your parade or anything, but it's not quite as rosy as the picture you're painting. I agree with your general point, though. The Poldark/Broadchurch effect has focused more attention on areas of stunning natural beauty.

From: Rob Davies 18 May 2015 12:14 PM

@Kelly Evans - not bitter, just a realist.

From: Rob Davies 15 May 2015 14:58 PM

Haha! So much for the 24 hours service - thought that was their unique selling point. Yep, they seem to be going down like a lead balloon.

From: Rob Davies 15 May 2015 13:29 PM

Were only high-end brands invited? A clean sweep from Knight Frank and Savills - what a surprise! Still, Alexander Armstrong might have made the super-rich love-in bearable.

From: Rob Davies 15 May 2015 11:35 AM

Wonderful. More reasons for people to hate on estate agents. And in these two cases, they'd be absolutely right to. What is wrong with these people? Pathetic behaviour from these supposed professionals.

From: Rob Davies 15 May 2015 11:30 AM

Their adverts are very annoying!

From: Rob Davies 14 May 2015 10:18 AM

@Trevor Mealham - you may not like her policies on property, but she's clearly a very good MP. You only need to check out the size of her majority to see that. The awards stunt was misguided and petty, and some of her views on letting agents and fees are far too aggressive and simplistic, but I do think she has the best interests of her constituents at heart and she stands up for what she believes in. We need politicians like her - who are going to challenge the status quo and hold people to account - otherwise nothing will ever change. As unpalatable as she may be to some, we shouldn't be so arrogant to assume she'd be a disaster as Labour deputy leader. There is a lot of frustration and anger about housing and the PRS - these concerns shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. Sometimes those of us in the property industry can be too inward looking, and we get far too defensive against outside criticism.

From: Rob Davies 14 May 2015 09:51 AM

I'm saying nothing!

From: Rob Davies 13 May 2015 13:25 PM

Good points, Robert May. As you say, many estate agents have embraced technology in a big way - glossy websites, social media, the portals, virtual tours - but not every single product is going to be useful. I'm a big advocate of the hybrid model - which most agencies virtually are now anyway - where the best attributes of traditional and online are moulded together. I'm always very sceptical of those who say online agencies are going to take over the world and that high-street agencies are going to become obsolete, because it's utter nonsense, but there is an argument that some of the more old-school ones are too resistant to change and would much prefer the status quo. These are the ones that will be left behind. Unfortunately, many agent websites look like they've been transported from the 1990s. Some are very good, but some are very, very bad. I agree that the majority of agents aren't luddites, but equally the over-the-top dismissal of online agents (by some) shows how out-of-touch they are.

From: Rob Davies 13 May 2015 13:24 PM

Awful choices. A relative unknown who's got a black mark against his name because of the expenses scandal and a former universities minister with no background in housing. Recipe for success? Methinks not. As the article states, the housing minister not being part of the Cabinet says it all about how much importance the Tories place on one of the key issues facing the country. Also, the fact that they've now had five different ministers in this role speaks volumes and suggests they lack a clear vision. Lewis was doing pretty well, why get rid of him? The fact Cameron put Grant Shapps in charge of housing is all you need to know. I can barely even remember the other two before Lewis. They obviously made a major impact on me.

From: Rob Davies 12 May 2015 09:55 AM

Won't have to worry about the mansion tax now. Overseas buyers will have free rein to buy up more and more of London's stock, turning the city into even more of a haven for the super-rich. Not sure it's possible for London to become even more affordable - there was research the other day that suggested you need to be earning a wage of £40,000 to be even be close to buying - but the PCL market booming is not going to help that. Seems much of our economic recovery is being based on the property bubble centred around London, which makes me very nervous. If it goes pop, what then? There could be trouble ahead...

From: Rob Davies 11 May 2015 10:42 AM

@Simon Shinerock - so, basically, the risks far outweigh the benefits. Seems a stupid and unreasonable measure to take and I'm glad to see Brian Cox have been called out on it. As the poster above says, it does nothing for the reputation of estate agents even if the reactionary headlines don't necessarily tell the whole story.

From: Rob Davies 11 May 2015 10:38 AM

We keep hearing about how successful OTM have been but we still haven't seen any actual evidence for it.

From: Rob Davies 08 May 2015 12:51 PM

Yeah, because the Tory party have done a wonderful job of solving the housing crisis in the last five years. It's not like they've presided over the lowest level of housebuilding in decades, it's not like prices have gone up to ridiculous levels well out of the reach of most ordinary buyers, it's not like Help to Buy has been a bit of a gimmicky disaster, it's not like more and more people have been pushed into the PRS, it's not like Generation Rent has become a serious issue, it's not like first-time buyers are finding it nigh-on impossible to cobble together a deposit and get a mortgage approved to finally get their foot on the ladder. Yeah, the Tories have done a good job of making London a haven for the super-rich, but that's about it. Not saying Labour's plans are perfect - although, as commenters on here will know, I'm very pro the mansion tax (I won't bore you all again!) - but to say the Tories have been any good on housing is a load of rubbish. They've done nothing to improve the issue of social housing and they've done nothing to tackle the biggest problem this country faces when it comes to property - we haven't got enough of it! Build more. And he talks about clamping down on rogue landlords - surely that's what Labour's policies on rent controls and three year secure tenancies is hoping to achieve?

From: Rob Davies 06 May 2015 09:14 AM

Yep, a very difficult market. I'm not surprised by this. The island's reputation as a tax haven doesn't seem to be lucrative anymore, with so many other tax havens all over the world. Some would argue London is the biggest of them all, and it's certainly becoming the go-to place for the super-rich. Guernsey relies heavily on overseas investment and tourism, so hopefully the current crisis isn't unworkable.

From: Rob Davies 05 May 2015 14:39 PM

That should read 'rogue landlords exploiting vulnerable tenants' of course. Edit button, please.

From: Rob Davies 05 May 2015 11:03 AM

If more and more people are going to be forced into the PRS over the next few years - which they almost certainly are, thanks to sky-high house prices and a lack of social/housing association property being made available to those who need it - then the PRS will need to be better regulated, to reduce the risk of rogue landlords exploiting vulnerable landlords. Of course, Shelter's findings were exaggerated and over-the-top. Such hyperbole doesn't help. But to completely dismiss the concerns of Generation Rent is absurd. You talk about a free market - a free market shouldn't mean a free-for-all where those at the top screw over those at the bottom. That takes us back to Victorian times. You're not advocating that, Simon, are you? You also talk about Labour proposing these changes as a cynical vote-winner. Well, what do you think the Tories have been doing with their Right to Buy nonsense? Shameless electioneering that will only benefit a small minority. That's what happens during an election campaign - both sides make lots of promises, a lot of the time they don't keep to them. You clearly don't like the proposals - I have reservations about aspects of them too - but to say that if Labour get in untold damage will be done to the PRS is nonsense. And you have to bear in mind that some people wouldn't see that as such a bad thing. The boom in buy-to-let, the decline in homeownership, the lack of affordable housing - all these will be sticks to bash landlords and the PRS with. Not fair, no, but these concerns have to be taken seriously.

From: Rob Davies 05 May 2015 11:01 AM

Definitely a cleaner, swisher look. It will take some getting used to, like anything new, but the design is very modern and 21st century. A few small things. A reply button would be useful - it's good to be able to agree/disagree with fellow posters. And you don't seem to be able to edit comments like you could on the old site. Plus, the picture at the top left of the article is a bit too large and distracting. These are only minor points, though. Other than that, pretty good job.

From: Rob Davies 05 May 2015 09:22 AM

Breaking News