x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Written by rosalind renshaw

Lettings chain Martin & Co is entering the estate agency sales market with a pricing model that threatens to disrupt the traditional ‘no sale, no fee’ system – and could, it is claimed, undercut it by up to 90%.

Martin & Co will charge no sales commission.

Instead, it will charge vendors on a menu basis, with sellers able to pick and mix the services they want.

The basic charge of £299 is an upfront fee for property details, including EPC, floor plan and photos, plus listing on Rightmove, the other major portals and Martin & Co’s own site, with Martin & Co branches also stocking the properties. A monthly fee of £29 is payable to maintain the listings.

All leads can be passed direct to the seller to do their own viewings, negotiation and sales progression.

Alternatively, vendors can choose to pay Martin & Co to handle all or any of these services.

Martin & Co managing director Ian Wilson said that the new ‘price busting’ service would cut selling costs for vendors by up to 90%.

The expansion of Martin & Co into sales was announced in February, with franchisees able to buy an additional sales franchise for just £1.

Wilson said yesterday: “Our sales service is primarily aimed at residential property investors.

“Our feedback from them is that they are a fairly canny lot, who object to paying a full estate agency fee when they can handle much of the process themselves.

“The one thing they cannot do, however, is list their properties on Rightmove, and that is where we started to put our pricing model together.

“Online letting agents do offer something similar, but none have high street offices where people can go in and discuss their requirements.

“I cannot see why our pricing model should not work. Yes, it will set the cat among the pigeons, but I am a great believer in innovation.”

He added: “While the new service is aimed primarily at investors, we think it will also attract ordinary residential vendors – partly because they know they won’t have a large fee to pay at the end, and partly because they know that if the property doesn’t sell, then as agents, we can let it for them.

“The current no sale, no fee system is outdated and over-priced and we believe that a different charging system is in the interests of consumers.”
 
Wilson said that the Martin & Co model would also encourage realism about asking prices, with agents not motivated by a sales commission, and sellers keen to conclude a deal.

He said: “No sale, no fee penalises motivated sellers, as those who do sell have to subsidise all the over-priced properties that the agent has to market.

“However, our service favours motivated sellers by encouraging them to have realistic price expectations, because the faster they sell, the more they will save on our fees.”

Every property for sale with Martin & Co will be marketed with a rental valuation and a buy-to-let mortgage quote. The firm says it has an ‘extensive’ database of property investors keen to buy and who are unencumbered by property chains.

The sales service is expected to launch properly on September 1 when Wilson is hopeful of having 1,000 sales properties to list. However, there are already 130 properties for sale with Martin & Co, and of the 187 franchised-owned offices in the UK, nearly half have already signed up and are ready to launch.

Wilson said: “It’s a new venture and we expected an understandable degree of caution by our franchisees.

“In fact, in just four months 80 offices have completed a very rigorous sales training programme and we expect to enter 2013 with the majority of our offices offering a sales service.

“Unlike businesses which depend on estate agency for their lifeblood, we already have a proven, stable business model with dependable income streams. We will be offering joint lettings and sales franchises to the public later this year.”

Comments

  • icon

    Hey Nipple Nut (Happy Chappy to those who don't know him as I do).

    As I keep telling you. You have absolutely no idea of what is involved in being an Estate Agent. You prove this time and again with your endless twittering on subjects you have absolutely no knowledge of whatsoever. Your comments are of no use to agents. Are you entertaining yourself? If so! there is a word for this.

    Unfortunately, you also prove consistently that when presented with information on why you may be misguided or misinformed about the profession and how it works you make petty arguments to the contrary in attempts to justify your ideas. You consistently prove your ignorance of this subject.

    I cannot help you. You ignore all information and reasonable information provided to you.

    This leads me to what you think are insults, they are in fact observations about you. You are an idiot, you are misguided, you are a Nipple Nut. If it were PMA it would be absolutely correct.

    I truly believe you would be better off commenting on Airfix models

    To the other gent on 660 viewings idea. The numbers are generic. I never mentioned going out to do the viewings, just the phone calls to arrange them. 4 is the minimum (you work it out) It could be 6 or 7 when one party says Friday 5pm, the other says "cant do that, how about Wednesday 2pm, and back and forth you will go, just to arrange a viewing.

    Also.. trust me on this....

    As soon as you advertise an Agency business you will receive about 30 unsolicited phone call inbound, trying to sell things to you. Advertising, phone systems, copiers, copier inks, insurance, health plans, so on and so on. That will be a further 600 telephone calls to deal with each month.

    On top of that, agents will receive inbound calls from surveyors looking for comps, solicitors, mortgage brokers and owners looking for progress updates on sales agreed. You cant duck them and say its not part of the service, they are inbound calls.

    The average month has 22 working days in it. How many calls can we handle and still be effective.

    • 09 July 2012 13:26 PM
  • icon

    Sorry;

    "I can use google to look up your quotes specific to this site as easily as the next poster. "

    • 08 July 2012 19:04 PM
  • icon

    I can use google to look up your quotes specific to this site up as easily as the next poster. Save them? Nah.....

    Sorry, you're ducking the question again, with lots of ifs, shoulds, coulds and can bes...... you're very light on specifics

    Lots of FBA's costs 'can be' reduced, and some are 'start up costs' - yeah, so? Which? How do you pay for the start up costs, other than with ongoing business?

    • 08 July 2012 18:58 PM
  • icon

    Sundays Child - Ok i didnt mention it specifically....but I didnt need to, because not every client will want the menu payment method. Many will not be able to fund an upfront fee and monthly payment. Of course you should advertise it and if everyone does want it rather than the traditional method. hey you put the competition out of business because everyone will instruct you.

    I didn't mention the list of costs i said your variable costs would be lower (An example of the variable cost was given by Big Ted) this may result in a higher instructions to staff ratio than if you used the traditional method everytime.

    As alex said "why be afraid of it, or dismiss it! - embrace it!"

    Cost containment is essential in any business and many costs on FBA's list can be reduced and some a start up costs anyway.... but your suggestions are bit extreme :0)

    Wow you been keeping my quotes since 2010 i am honoured.

    Hope the viewing went well!

    • 08 July 2012 18:11 PM
  • icon

    Happy Chappy;

    In mid-2010, you wrote, toward FBA;

    "Yet you duck and dive, avoid the question and throw insults as a defence mechanism"

    Don't duck and dive and avoid the question yourself. Where's your business costing?

    Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a viewing to go to.... yes, at 1pm Sunday. I'll check in with you later....

    • 08 July 2012 12:19 PM
  • icon

    Happy Chappy;

    FBA has provided a 'starter for ten' list of expenses necessary to run the business, and an outline costing of where he sees your business model going.

    If you disagree with this, if you see items on the list which aren't necessary, where savings are to be made, don't just tell us to 'take a good look at them' - provide us with your version of a similar costing, and a similar list so we can see what to make of your version of a business model.....

    • 08 July 2012 11:45 AM
  • icon

    Happy Chappy;

    "I said why not try a menu pricing policy along side the traditional method"

    Can't find anywhere in the thread where you said this.

    "I also said the menu pricing policy should be available to "motivated vendors"

    So how would you refuse this pricing option to someone who you didn't perceive to be a motivated seller? If you tell them as such, they'll be insulted and walk away from you. Do you advertise the availability of this pricing policy? If not, it's not a selling point. If you do, everyone will want it and you'll have to deny it to some.....

    "You are not offering the same service as you are for the traditional method so your variable costs
    would be lower for these types of instructions i.e who said all viewings are accompanied "

    How is anything in the list of costs given by the previous poster reduced by menu pricing? Do you save money on staff costs? Do you use a cheaper computer system? Get better rates from the accountant?

    "Now as for your costs which of those add value to the customer"

    Yes, we know that paying an accountant doesn't add value to the customer. We know that the customer won't perceive any value from upgrading the computer system. We know that the customer sees no benefit from improved pension plans for permanent staff, but what would you suggest? Resort to abacuses and pocket calculators? Hire minimum-wage staff who don't care about pension provision? Skimp on filing proper accounts and forget about VAT returns?

    • 08 July 2012 11:40 AM
  • icon

    first time i have posted on here, and seems to be such a volatile arena! great to hear both positive comments about them giving this pricing model a go, as well as neagitve comments (which i have seen many times before on here about similar pricing models)

    lovely to see the funny, and the serious, the trolls and the nice guys! and a seemingly unmoderated comments section - fair play to EAT and RR for supporting free speech, as it were!

    I have been in the industry for over 5 years (not as long as some of you i am sure, but probably longer than others too!) - i have worked for a low priced agent, i have worked for the same agent whilst being the highest charging agent int he area too - how? a vendor does not buy the 'agent' or 'firm/company' generally. they might research their local agent, they might go with one they have used before, they might call three to four agents from the local phone book or google search results or righmove listings - but ultimately, if they hate you when you see them and they dont trust you - they wont use you.

    You can charge high commision, low commission, no comission, upfront fee, no upfront fee, monthly subscritptions, a million quid or do it all for the goodness of your own heart - if the home owner doesnt like you or your business or your fees, you will not get their business. no likey, no lightey!

    Having said that, you could have a tight ass with £million home who detests you that would happily pay £299 to get their home on rightmove etc, as well as someone who has a £40k home too - if the agent has 'sold' themselves to that home owner.

    But lets remember that old addage of the business - ITS A NUMBERS GAME! - you might get a few home owners that sign up to your cheap upfront fee, but without the buyers 'you aint gonna sell shit.'

    Foxtons may get more listings than other agents in London, but there arent many agents that truly monopolise an entire local market. And housenetwork may save you money and have over 1600 homes on the market, but that doesnt even equate to one home per town! - locally they have a total of 3 out of over 1500 homes for sale - hardly a strong market penetration. even the top three agents for stock level do not command more than a third of the total market.

    If you have buyers for a home, go gain a home owners trust, agree a fee that you are both happy with and get the deal done.

    any agent that panicks about cheap agents and thinks how am i going to compete aginst that, shoudl seriously look at what value they are really giving to their customers and what really sets them apart from the competition! (give me five reasons why i shoudl use you over any other local agent...GO!)

    It seems to me (locally anyway) most agents are grabbing every instruction they can, and dropping their fee to get the instruction. Competeing on price alone never wins out in the end - there will always be some other upstart coming along who will do it cheaper!

    Time to think a bit more stragtegicaly me thinks! - if a home is only worth what a buyer will pay for it, then have as many buyers as possible for that home and have on your books as many similar value homes too to attract more buyers to enquire from your marketing - most lower priced homes will be bought by investors or first time buyers that are mainly local - so MAC do have a fair strategy here (they aim to dominate that market!) - most higher value homes are bought from out of area buyers who have a larger geographical buying area (again a 'niche' market) -

    MAC have the buyers (they have investors from their rental business) - go target homes for those buyers, engage those home owners and gain their trust (or work the penny pinching vendors), get the instructions, sell the houses, gain the market share, gain the rep, dominate that part of the local market, push up the fees - then try to quash the next competitor that tried to do the same.

    Its a cycle afterall!

    other national online only agents like nationwide depend on the 'find the cheapest deal' home owners, or those that will sell at a low price (like those that choose express estate agency) - but if you dont have several homes on the books in a particular area you wont attract a decent level of accumulated buyers for homes in that area. (you just depend on new rightmove enquiries) - its like a needle in a haystack!

    like somenoe else said about tepilo/TipC on other articles - the more of these 'national' online cheap/no-fee sites that pop up, the less buyers will regard them as a place to go to find a home to buy, as there will be bugger all to buy compared to a goliath like righmove.

    to gain an instructon from a home owner, you have to offer and communicate to them that you are known, trusted, different from the competition and charge an agreeable fee: and maintain that continously as well.

    The places you do this include your website, your marketing material (portal listings as well as newspaper, leaflets, newsletters etc), where your customers past and present talk about you (review sites, facebook, twitter etc), but also through your people in the business as well - this is a people business/service industry afterall.

    but hey, i digress! - the fee issues remains! - why be afraid of it, or dismiss it! - embrace it! - offer it! be flexible! there is more than one way to skin a rabbit! now there's more than one way to win an instruction!

    • 07 July 2012 22:03 PM
  • icon

    @ FBA I thought they had named a brand of bread after you earlier today but when I read it again it actually said "Thick Cut".

    The Mac model does not do viewings. So, why are you prattling on about 2600+ phone calls and 660 viewings ?

    • 07 July 2012 18:55 PM
  • icon

    Again more insults, it really does show you for what you are and you do nothing to improve the image of your profession. With opinionated Ego's like yours within the ranks it is no wonder EA is one of the most hated professions in the UK .

    Now It appears you are the one who does not listen.(Are you the type who shouts at the foreigners when you are on holiday because they claim they are not listening to you)

    1. I said why not try a menu pricing policy along side the traditional method.

    2. I also said the menu pricing policy should be available to "motivated vendors" . Having motivated sllers who market below the comps should mean the property sells itself quicker reducing the variable overheads. If you attarct motivated sellers you will sell more this will enhance your reputation and improve your figures.

    3. You are not offering the same service as you are for the traditional method so your variable costs would be lower for these types of instructions i.e who said all viewings are accompanied

    4.. Your maths were flawed you were missing out the monthly fee...i know its probably difficult for you to get your head round, thats why you like the old simple method

    5.. Now as for your costs which of those add value to the customer. Go away and think about it when you have worked it out concentrate on reducing the other ones, so that you can be either more competitive or make more profit.

    Now, I'll go back to my airfix model and website you seem to have dreamed up in your little fantasy.

    • 07 July 2012 16:59 PM
  • icon

    lol...if ever there was a need to to have a 'like' button on comments its now.

    • 07 July 2012 12:23 PM
  • icon

    Hey, Nipple Nut (That is Happy Chappy to those who are not aware of his idiot posts)

    You clearly demonstrate (once again) your lack of understanding of running an estate agency business. Your comments are of no use to man nor agent. But if I indulge you just for a moment, here we go! Let's set Nipple Nut (Happy Chappy) up in his utopic estate agency business.

    How much will it cost Nipple Nut to be in business?
    About £20k per month is the answer. Some agents have lower costs, some higher, but this impacts on the service levels they can provide.

    "Why so much?" screams Nipple Nut.

    Well... let's see what you will need.

    Membership professional bodies, Ombudsman, NAEA, ARLA (fees)
    Office rent, rates, utilities, insurance
    Other insurances, employee, public liability, etc
    Computer system hardware
    Computer system software hire or buy?
    Portal costs, monthly billing and cost of feeds
    Advertising in newspapers, leaflet drops, window displays (TV’s or paper)
    Phone system rent or buy + maintain
    Satff wages, NI, health insurance, pension plans
    Accountancy services , vat returns, tax returns, book keeping.
    Postage, franking machine?
    Printer/copier/fax buy/lease, paper for the beast
    Stationery, from pens and paper clips to filing cabinets (day 2 day is expensive)
    Office furniture repair, maintain, replacement
    Brochure printing (expensive)
    Tools = photography equipment, sonic tapes, etc
    Cars (how many?) buy/lease petrol, tax, insurance

    This is not everything, but you get the idea.

    This is what poor old 'Days Child' was trying to explain to you Nipple Nut, but you simply will not listen will you?

    Right: £20k... you need, how many sales to cover that? Nipple Nut’s plan is...

    £20k @ £300 each = 66 instructions

    On the basis that most Vendors get 3 vals, if Nipple Nut is average he would win 1 in 3.

    66 x 3 = 198 vals per month may get 66 instructions

    On the basis that it may take an average 10 viewings to get a sale and Nipple Nut has 66 instructions in his 1st month in business that is 660 viewings to arrange. Each viewing would take minimum 4 phone calls to arrange, that is a minimum of 2640 phone calls just arranging viewings in month 1.

    So now Nipple Nut agent is doing 198 Vals and arranging 660 viewings to earn his £20k to keep his business afloat..

    When will Nipple Nut sleep, what service will he give? What happens in months 2,3,4 to the viewings to be arranged figure as only 10% of Nipple Nut’s listings sell and applicants keep ringing to arrange more and more viewings on his ever growing stock?

    Alternative:

    48 vals a month = 16 instructions, 50% might sell = 8 sales @ £2500 each = £20k doing approx 160 Viewings.

    Please Happy Chappy, go back to your Airfix website where you can comment with some authority and perhaps knowledge of what you are talking about.

    • 07 July 2012 11:52 AM
  • icon

    Yes and No :0)

    You need to consider economies of scale and marginal costings.

    For example a builder who has just started his business would not try to recover all the fixed and variable overheads incurred in the first job, he would never win any business!

    • 06 July 2012 13:17 PM
  • icon

    So it's OK to build an allowance into a monthly rate to cover this, but when an agent's charging commission at conclusion, only on successful sale, it's not?

    • 05 July 2012 23:28 PM
  • icon

    Thursdays Child "There is an initial £299, that more than covers the cost plus a small (easy) profit. The £29 is pm thereafter. There are no viewings etc the leads are passed direct to the vendor." Do you agree?

    In reply to your arguments, a builder goes and pitches for business do they charge for it? they travel to peoples homes once they have won they business do they charge for it? Builders go and buy material and have vans do they charge for it? they advertise do they charge for it...nope they charge a daily rate for time spent doing the job...so your monthly fee should cover all your fixed overheads just like a builders daily rate does.

    • 05 July 2012 20:48 PM
  • icon

    Thursday's Child- Step away from the keyboard...

    • 05 July 2012 19:21 PM
  • icon

    ...and even in a garage that's a Sales operation, not service - you pay an overhead on the price of 'your' car for the dealer to maintain the showroom, advertise, keep staff (even the ones you don't deal with), be part of a manufacturer network, etc

    The manufacturer has to build a number of general stuff into the price they charge the dealer. Advertising, PR, etc. They can't just charge the dealer the assembly cost and parts cost of 'your' car.

    Once you buy it from the dealer, you can't just pay the material cost of your car, and only pay the salesman for the time he spent with you. All of the above and the time their staff spend with customers who don't buy, has to be factored into the dealer's profit margin

    How far do you think you'd get if you tried to argue that you only pay for the materials used and the assembly cost ONLY for your car ...?

    • 05 July 2012 18:07 PM
  • icon

    Happy Chappy -

    "Why should a vendor pay for other activity....you dont go into a garage and pay for for time spent on other peoples cars that cant be fixed do you? and why should a vendor pay more just because you choose to have higher fixed costs than your competitors? "

    Your analogy is flawed - when you pay the garage, you're already paying the non-specifics factored into the labour rates - I'm talking about maintenance of the workshop, purchase of new tools, purchase and maintenance of a computer system, access to manufacturer and parts supplier databases - these are the kind of things that can't be allocated to one customer, the type of thing I meant - not the labour on other customer's vehicles.

    If the garage offered "Free MoT" or "Free Vehicle Check" or "Free Oil Change" in the same way that agents offer Free valuations, Free buyer advice, Free viewings, etc, then the labour rates would be different because this would then be factored into the rate you pay - and you wouldn't be paying 'just for the work on your car'

    • 05 July 2012 17:31 PM
  • icon

    Happy Chappy -

    "Solicitors’ conveyancing fees (in fact most services) are usually based on time and activity; time spent and work done from the beginning of the home purchase/sale process to the end when final contracts between both parties are drawn and signed.

    Why are agents not the same? "

    You;re comparing apples to oranges.

    Solicitors don't, in the main, travel to people's homes to pitch for business. They stay in their offices and clients go to them.

    Agents go out to valuations, some of which they secure listings for, some of which they don't. This leads to more expense of time, petrol and effort. This is why agents aren't the same as solicitors. A significant percentage of the work done can't be allocated to one particular property

    Solicitors don't travel to client's homes, in the main, to progress any part of the transaction - the clients go to them.

    Agents travel to viewings, spend time at viewings, sometimes with buyers who don't buy - in the case of London agents, they seem to be required to provide a taxi service, taking viewers from their office to the properties.

    Agents also spend time with prospects that don't match up on a one to one basis with one property.

    Agents do promotional work on an ongoing basis - solicitors don't

    etc
    etc

    • 05 July 2012 17:24 PM
  • icon

    @Thursdays Child, the MAC model is not based on £29pm.

    There is an initial £299, that more than covers the cost plus a small (easy) profit. The £29 is pm thereafter. There are no viewings etc the leads are passed direct to the vendor.

    • 05 July 2012 16:50 PM
  • icon

    Why should a vendor pay for other activity....you dont go into a garage and pay for for time spent on other peoples cars that cant be fixed do you? and why should a vendor pay more just because you choose to have higher fixed costs than your competitors?

    Solicitors’ conveyancing fees (in fact most services) are usually based on time and activity; time spent and work done from the beginning of the home purchase/sale process to the end when final contracts between both parties are drawn and signed.

    Why are agents not the same?
    Why knock it give it go along side the traditional method, you may actually get more instructions from motivated sellers thus increasing your stock turnover, which increases your reputation and thus means you can command higher initial fees to reduce your risk

    What about if Rightmove said they would charge you per property instead of per branch would EA's consider it?

    ps I think £299 and 29 per month is a little cheap but hey ho

    • 05 July 2012 16:27 PM
  • icon

    Happy Chappy - the total income has to cover expenses, and yield a profit, else the business fails.

    If the menu pricing income doesn't cover the cost of even those listings, then they have to be subsidised from other areas of the business. Whether or not the clients are motivated sellers or not is a side issue

    My point is that menu pricing can't include pricing for general expenses or marketing the business, or running the business, unless that can all be financed from the ongoing £29 per month, which I doubt.

    I refer back to my earlier post - who will pay the agent for non-specific work, if all the listings are on menu pricing, where the client only pays for activity on 'their' property?

    • 05 July 2012 15:28 PM
  • icon

    With a traditional fee of 1.5% on £500K property = £7500. With the Martin model the same property could be on the market for 248 Months and still not cost that amount.

    • 05 July 2012 15:15 PM
  • icon

    @Thursdays Child - I have worked with a few, they are motivated sellers (normally with a lot of equity) who want to sell there home as quickly as possible at an acceptable price...not kite flyers trying to get the maximum price possible. Often they are prepared to go to market at 5% below the comps to achieve this and accept reasonable offers.

    So you start with menu pricing and get a clause added in that the total fee is a maximum of say x% of the sales price

    The fees received from motivated sellers do not have to cover the the expenses the non-sales (these will be born by the unmotivated sellers or sellers with poor or overvalued properties)

    • 05 July 2012 14:57 PM
  • icon

    Happy Chappy -

    " in my opinion this is exactly the type of service motivated sellers want."

    Based on what? How many sellers have you surveyed to determine this?

    You reckon that motivated sellers WANT to pay an ongoing fee of £29+VAT per month......

    • 05 July 2012 13:16 PM
  • icon

    J T - this 'will work' because you can go back to listing at 1% for some of your clients?

    It sound like you're saying you're going to subsidise this from the rental income stream.... is that what you're saying? In which case I agree - you won't make money from menu pricing, and you'll have to make up your losses from other areas of your business.

    • 05 July 2012 13:03 PM
  • icon

    Fair play JT - but really, MAC are just trying to undercut everyone else. The concept isn't new - its been tried many times. The only people who have had any semblance of success are the on line boys with hardly any overheads.

    All it will do is cause the age old complaint of "As soon as they got my money, they lost interest" - whether true of not - this will happen.

    • 05 July 2012 11:25 AM
  • icon

    JT - respect for being honest - but it makes Ian Wilson look pretty silly if you are charging 1%

    • 05 July 2012 11:20 AM
  • icon

    Well as a MAC franchisee , this will work because we are not tied to the pick and mix system, I have some landlords that are looking to sell but can sell with the pick and mix and pay from the rent collected, the tenants are aware so everyone happy. The Owners who wish to sell but want to pay the traditional way, fine I just charge 1% of the selling price for the top end service, ..

    BTW you will suprised how MAC offices have sales experienced staff as well as professional lettings staff, its nice to have an income stream and beable to offer our Landlords and other property owners the options,

    • 05 July 2012 11:13 AM
  • icon

    @ Specialist

    Shame that over 140 people took the time and trouble to post horrid reviews of MAC specialist service.

    I bet your staff are elated at the thought of the rich pickings of your new sales venture.

    As a 'specialist' in sales as well as lettings - I wish you luck.

    • 05 July 2012 10:57 AM
  • icon

    They'l be running permanently at a loss then.

    The trouble with menu pricing, payment by the hour, or variations on them, is that it only involves payment for work done directly on the individual client's property. Who will pay the agent for all that they do which isn;t directly related to a property?

    Who will pay them for going to a valuation where they don't get the business?

    Who will pay them for spending time with buyers who don't view and don't buy?

    For general marketing work related to promoting the business, not the individual properties?

    Yes, the fees from the successful sales have to cover the expenses and work on the non-sales and general activities - but with menu pricing, they'll never cover these.......

    • 05 July 2012 08:39 AM
  • icon

    Martin & Co are ranked 8217 out of 9488 in UK on Allagents and that's just on the lettings side! I think they should get their house in order first before they start jumping into sales

    • 04 July 2012 23:02 PM
  • icon

    Odd one

    This Martin & Co lot have done a pretty decent job with the franchise chain, brands pretty good and the bloke from our local one seems like a decent chap that knows what he's doing, then they cook this up??

    yes, you can do all this 'new way' and I'm quite sure some vendors wiill like it a lot and give it a punt and after all these Martin & Co offices are presumably making money just from the rentals so for next to naff all on their costs they can put houses up for sale but for what? Sod all money with the same demands and expectations to deliver to vendors as the rest of us and a distraction from the core business

    Anyway, time will tell, be interesting to see how many franchisees go with the plan properly, of course it might just mean they have a few old dogs on their books that don't sell or the might revolutionise the way houses are sold but the good ones could build on the brand and do it for 2% and make some real money couldn't they - especially the bloke below with ex regional managers and so on as negs.

    Jonnie

    • 04 July 2012 21:51 PM
  • icon

    I think he has been listening, If his customers do not want this he will go under, but in my opinion this is exactly the type of service motivated sellers want.

    • 04 July 2012 18:39 PM
  • icon

    Just to pick up on a couple of later posts which may or may not have been a dig at my comment.

    Brian, I appreciate that your post might have been ironic, because the point is that, as every estate agent knows the milkman can't just go out and do it. However, unlike the milkman I've got staff with estate agency experience, training from our Head Office, premises, the brand, the local presence etc.

    Ray Evans - much the same, I agree that estate agents with little knowledge training and experience have made a mess of lettings. We've picked up the pieces (and the business) many times when that's happened. The point is that within my business I've already got those three things where sales are concerned.

    Note too that I didn't just say I could "do" estate agency, I said I believed I could "do" it professionally which is the important bit.

    • 04 July 2012 15:40 PM
  • icon

    Human nature folks - Human nature!
    £358.80 up front plus £34.80 per month with a Letting Agent who has decided to "do" (lovely term) Sales! They may get "seconds" but most will try the trad. agent first - for it costs nothing.

    BTW, Many of the Sales agents who decided to just "do" lettings with little or no knowledge, training or experience only "did" their clients.

    IMHO Sales and Lettings are very different animals and if offered by the same firm need separate trained, dedicated staff and departments.

    • 04 July 2012 14:44 PM
  • icon

    Specialist
    Please can you email me: fourfingers.nick@gmail.com

    I would like to discuss some new clients for you.

    Thank you.

    • 04 July 2012 14:39 PM
  • icon

    “The current no sale, no fee system is outdated and over-priced and we believe that a different charging system is in the interests of consumers.”

    Maybe they have stumbled upon a niche or maybe they have invented one, I really don't know but fair play to them for trying.

    Only time will tell whether they will be successful or not but at least they have been brave enough to accept change.

    We can't rely our history and tradition forever...

    • 04 July 2012 14:12 PM
  • icon

    Agree with Steve, as there are no barriers to entry to become an Agent, no qualifications or experince needed whats the issue, anyone can do it, the milkman is ready to go!

    • 04 July 2012 13:10 PM
  • icon

    Hey Specialist - I'm usually the Martin & Co franchisee who bangs our drum on here! Good to have someone else fighting our corner from within though.

    To be honest I've been surprised by the amount of positive remarks on here.

    I reckon with the staff I've got (some of whom have estate agency experience), the shop windows, the local presence etc I can "do" estate agency professionally at little cost and therefore little risk.

    True I lose the USP of being a specialist letting agent but that doesn't seem to have harmed the many "specialist estate agents" around me who now do lettings.

    Low cost, low risk, potential for a decent extra revenue stream. From my point of view, what's not to like?

    • 04 July 2012 12:43 PM
  • icon

    Specialist....Wardy is right, no worry on my part more bemusement.
    If it aint broke don't fix it......why lose your USP of being a specialist in lettings just so you can dabble in sales for short change.
    I'm genuinely really miffed!

    • 04 July 2012 12:29 PM
  • icon

    @Specialist
    I bet MAC are delighted with your response.
    So let me get this straight. A regional manager now works as your office manager. A group manager with 17 years experience now works for you as a neg.

    I spose Harry Hill makes your tea in the morning?

    I think you may have misread these comments. I can’t see any worried agents? What I can see is agents that are very use to dealing with cheap alternatives and are happy to continue doing so.

    Maybe could get George Osborne to collect all those £299 payments for you?

    (where’s PeeBee?) I can smell the MDT from here.

    • 04 July 2012 12:24 PM
  • icon

    I am the owner of a very well established and successful MAC letting agency. My Lettings manager was recently a regional manager of an estate agency for many years looking after 36 branches. My senior Negotiator has 17 years local estate agency experience and was a group manager for a number of those years. So for those of you (Very Worried sounding) estate agents that are naive enough to think that Martin & Co are just a bunch of letting agents that have no idea, do me a favour and just keep thinking that, but don't come running for a job when we put you out of yours. We don't need attitudes like that. We all know that lettings can more difficult than sales, that is why when estate agents decided to go into lettings because you couldn't sell your properties anymore, complaints to the ombudsman rocketed by 200% in the first six months.. that’s the ombudsman’s figures not mine. So, we are trying something different. Why don't we just wait and see... You know that old saying... If you do what you do you get what you 've got.

    • 04 July 2012 11:54 AM
  • icon

    I would have thought that the key to Martin & co's success is that their USP is that they only deal with lettings. We have toyed with the idea of becoming a letting only agent for a while now as in my opinion it gives you an edge over the comp as it shows that you are a specialist in that field and will probably get more take ons.
    This approach is going away from that and personally I think this will seriously affect their business model by. They should probably have a re think!

    • 04 July 2012 11:46 AM
  • icon

    Honestly - who really cares what Martin & Co do. They aren't that good at lettings - sales will be interesting.

    The basic charge of £299 is an upfront fee for property details, including EPC, floor plan and photos, plus listing on Rightmove

    Where is the money in that? £299 less even £50 for EPC etc doesnt give the staff much and the company less.

    I bet franchisees are miffed.

    • 04 July 2012 11:39 AM
  • icon

    Its bloody expensive if they don't sell it.

    We sold a property recently where the other agent was Foxtons. The vendor queried our 2% fee.

    I pointed out that I was certain Foxtons would be charging more, which she confirmed.

    "Foxtons always charge more" she explained. I asked why?

    Her reply "Because they spend more on marketing which is why they get higher prices"

    I replied "Well, in this case, they didn't get any price - we did"

    "Oh yeah" was her surprised reply.

    • 04 July 2012 11:28 AM
  • icon

    If a property were to sell quickly then you will get a happy customer who will swear by Martin & Co.

    If it lingers and the seller has forked out for 3 months with no result then where will they go? If they have paid £299 plus £29 per month plus VAT (don't forget that!), then they have kissed goodbye to over £450 for nowt.

    The answer is probably back to the traditional estate agent to pick up the pieces!

    Most sellers prefer the traditional agent as they don't pay a seller's fee until completion, and they factor in the cost of that into the price they are prepared to accept. Is that not so?

    • 04 July 2012 11:06 AM
  • icon

    Wow. How innovative. Wish we'd thought of this

    • 04 July 2012 11:04 AM
  • icon

    Frankly, its a lesson in how to devalue a brand.

    Clearly they cant afford to employ dedicated sales staff. To pay a neg £30k a year, the neg would need to agree 3 sales a week allowing for fall-throughs and employers NI contributions.

    Good luck - its a tough ask with little prospect of profit IMHO

    • 04 July 2012 10:47 AM
  • icon

    Doesn't worry me, they can't even get lettings right at the one near us.

    • 04 July 2012 10:41 AM
  • icon

    Wow. How innovative. Wish we'd thought of this

    • 04 July 2012 10:38 AM
  • icon

    "The only country in the world where we all try and beat each out of a living..."

    Really? Apple v Android and countless other vying for Market share is the same thing

    • 04 July 2012 10:24 AM
  • icon

    *each other

    • 04 July 2012 10:22 AM
  • icon

    UK estate agency.

    The only country in the world where we all try and beat each out of a living...

    • 04 July 2012 10:21 AM
  • icon

    We have seen this so many times in London, in fact there are now 100's of these websites where you pay a few hundred quid to have your property listed.
    It doesn't matter what company you use, if you pay peanuts you will get monkeys!

    • 04 July 2012 10:17 AM
  • icon

    @Headway - "...Where is the incentive to get the best price?"
    Surely it's about time to scotch this ridiculous myth that the customer can only expect to get good service from the traditional business model. If anything, the opposite is true - particularly in the current market. In practice, the toxic combination of NSNF and commission-based charges is far more likely to result in agents pushing for sales at virtually any price. After all, better to have some commission in the bank now, rather than the possibility of a bit more in a few months' time... Besides which, we all know (and regularly tell out clients) that the "best price" is nothing more nor less than the price that someone is genuinely willing and able to pay.

    The idea of upfront fees hasn't worked in the past, because it generally tended to be new entrants with no track record and no brand recognition that tried it. As far as I'm aware, this is the first time that a firm with an established presence in the property industry, and equally importantly a familiar face in the High Street, has decided to have a go. And good luck to them.

    • 04 July 2012 10:16 AM
  • icon

    Internet taking over? Why are Tesco and M&S opening MORE stores?

    Business models change - but some things need to be seen.

    You may buy a laptop on line - but a steak is a different issue - as is a house.

    • 04 July 2012 09:55 AM
  • icon

    Anonymous coward, you say the Internet is offering better value for money hence the high street etc is closing down. I am going to say that this is not true. People are fickle and lazy and when you can have shopping delivered or an album downloaded from your arm chair, it's convenience. So estate agency will continue because cheap agents can't.

    • 04 July 2012 09:48 AM
  • icon

    Also @Headway, please remember that linked sales maketh profit...

    Solicitors £200 referral fee
    Mortgage £200 referral fee
    Removals £200 referral fee
    Decorators...
    Alarm Fitting...

    And the list goes on.

    This is THE new business model and IT WORKS...

    • 04 July 2012 09:48 AM
  • icon

    Careful boys & girls.

    You get all hot under the collar about how it can't work or won't work, but vendors are already paying up to £150 for an EPC, floorplan and photos with some companies. Then you pay 1-2% on top...

    The current fee model is flawed. There are very few industries that work successfully on a "no sale, no fee" basis.

    Just look at classified ads - what happened there? eBay.

    Look at your high street - that's changing because of internet shopping too.

    Libraries are disappearing rapidly - because of the internet.

    Cars & holidays are doing the same.

    It will happen, because people want to pay as little as possible.

    The psychology of it is complicated but if you are definitely selling then why spend more than £500 when most vendors think that all estate agents are the same bunch of shysters really (I've heard that several times this year).

    All you need is a company that does it successfully and once it works well in one area and gains traction then it will spread.

    I would say that this is exactly the right time to launch this.

    Good luck guys, but as a favour, could I ask that you steer clear of north Surrey for a bit?

    • 04 July 2012 09:30 AM
  • icon

    "Wilson said that the Martin & Co model would also encourage realism about asking prices, with agents not motivated by a sales commission, and sellers keen to conclude a deal."

    The key here is not motivated. Where is the incentive to get the best price?

    100 sales generate less than £30K - is there really a point?

    • 04 July 2012 08:52 AM
  • icon

    Anyone remember Seekers? A couple of hundred quid - no commission.

    That went well.

    London's most successful agent charges the highest fees.

    Staff work for money.

    • 04 July 2012 08:43 AM
  • icon

    "A monthly fee of £29 is payable to maintain the listings."

    With virtually no commission, where is the incentive to find a buyer swiftly?

    Staff must be soooo excited.

    • 04 July 2012 08:42 AM
  • icon

    A Wilson U-turn or what? "We are a dedicated letting agent and we do not do sales" [source. Martin & Co website]

    I then heard Wilson at a conference going on about how they are specialists and sales would compromise this.

    so instead - they go for 'bucket shop' sales with an upfront fee, no experience and no track record.

    They will have customers queuing up!

    • 04 July 2012 08:40 AM
  • icon

    "the no sale no fee system is outdated..." if a property can't sell, why would the customer not want this???

    Basically what he is really saying is " well if we can't sell it or not really interested in trying to sell it then we want some money from them anyway "

    Ian Wilson needs to get into touch with his customers more

    • 04 July 2012 08:19 AM
MovePal MovePal MovePal