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

The Hunters purchase of the Bairstow Eves franchised business from Countrywide has raised some pivotal questions.

The boss of major franchise lettings chain Martin & Co, Ian Wilson, said that Countrywide had not exactly taken Bairstow Eves to the market, and he could have been a very interested purchaser.

Wilson said: “We were not offered Bairstow Eves and may have been interested in adding a parallel estate agency brand to our operations. Countrywide certainly did not seem to throw the net very wide to test the market.”

The story was released by EAT in line with a noon embargo on Monday.

The news immediately drew criticisms that franchisees had only been told of the sale in a pre-recorded phone call that morning. One post suggested they had no idea of the rebranding to Hunters until reading of it in EAT.

Some  Bairstow Eves franchisees made it clear that they had bought into the business purely on the strength of its name – which they had helped build up, but will now change.

Countrywide has been asked to comment on the issues raised and has confirmed it will do so. Countrywide also confirmed that there are still 150 Bairstow Eves wholly owned branches which will continue to trade under the brand.

A further twist to the story is that Hunters’ former director of franchising is Jamie McMullan.

He had previously been franchise development director at Countrywide, where he helped build up the Bairstow Eves brand.

McMullan said at the time of joining Hunters: “I would be delighted to overtake Countrywide – we are more ambitious than they are. The point about Hunters is that we are not a corporate entity but independent, entrepreneurial and highly profitable.”

However, McMullan is no longer with Hunters and since May has been a director at www.estatesdirect.com


Pictured are the new Hunters and Bairstow Eves team: From left, front row – Carole Cameron, Glynis Frew, Carrie Alliston, Louise Cowen; from left, back row – Tony Murray, Paul Sheard, Martin Robinson, John Waterhouse, Andy Bushell, Chris Tinney, Kevin Hollinrake


 

Comments

  • icon

    I cant believe no-one is questioning properly the purchase of BE by Hunters. If you ask enough questions you will find out that H are ruthless bullies who have absolutely no consideration for anything except their own bank balance. I seriously don't know how they have pulled this off, but as with all bullies they should be careful who they step on on the way up, as they are sure to meet them on their way back down.

    • 18 October 2011 13:13 PM
  • icon

    For the moderator:

    http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/lifestyle/the-arts/an_estate_agent_s_home_is_his_castle_1_2509926

    • 08 September 2011 11:48 AM
  • icon

    New name for firm will be BUNTERS

    All owners/managers will be called 'Billy'

    • 08 September 2011 09:52 AM
  • icon

    @ rip off rightmove; 1) right move is not a rip off, you just must be crap at what you do. 2) £300K deficit is how you run a business of that size if you are growing, no corporation tax to pay, cash at the bank is money down the toilet, which backs up point 1 that you are a grade 1 idiot.

    • 07 September 2011 17:57 PM
  • icon

    Chris, because if "raising your profile" means a 25% increase in revenue, the 15% is a sound investment.

    This works exceptionally well for SOME people, hence why not everyone does it.

    Completely agree with the Estates Direct comment.

    • 07 September 2011 17:27 PM
  • icon

    I feel this is a great move for Hunters, The brand will now go from strength to strength. Great news for a group of high quality, entrepreneurial Hunters, Best of luck to them, they are a strong company and highly focused on their franchise projects.

    • 07 September 2011 17:18 PM
  • icon

    Sorry I know the last post wasnt completely relivant to the story.

    So closer to the subject....... We had a Bairstow Eves franchise in our City until a couple of years ago. They were the laughing stock of the City. The image was SO dated that in the end the franchisee shut up shop and opened up again under a different (although still a bit crap) name and can now at least afford to advertise the few bits of stock he has got.

    I dont get why anyone would want to buy into a franchise. If your good , your good. Why pay some other fool 15% on everything you do just to raise their profile.

    • 07 September 2011 14:06 PM
  • icon

    Check out Estates Directs rightmove page to see just how well they are doing!! There just is now insentive for these upfront money agents to actually sell. Stick the property on rightmove at 20% more than any onther agent says its worth and then bank the £495.

    Vendor: Why havent you got any viewings or interest in my house.

    Upfront fee faceless agent: Dont know and dont care, I got my money.

    • 07 September 2011 13:54 PM
  • icon

    Another point of view,
    I understand Hunters staff being delighted with this news, a nice instruction winner when the BS starts about a branch in every town etc etc. But what are the motives behind CW selling up?
    Either
    a, the franchises are not earning them money.
    b, BE as a brand is dying.
    c, CW fancy more self owned branches.
    d, CW can roll out its financial services across the self owned Hunters branches as well as the franchises, or all of the above. The truth is that if the BE franchises where performing this wouldn’t of happened.

    • 07 September 2011 12:07 PM
  • icon

    Tough one,

    On one hand you think this Martin & Co bloke is sulking a bit for not getting a chance and I assume he didn’t make it known he was in the market either, didn’t think to talk to Countrywide and has been a victim of the ‘you snooze you loose’ curse.

    Then on the other hand Countrywide sort of didn’t own what they sold and had a moral (at least) obligation to engage the franchisees and hawk it around the market a bit.

    Course the truth is the agreements they had with the franchisees meant they could do what they want, and did, in quite spectacular fashion too.

    For my part and just to try and keep the debate on track the BE franchises could do well out of this if they all work together to create a flood of Hunters offices cropping up across the land in a short space of time

    ………………..you all signed the contract with Countrywide so make the best of it and welcome your new brand with open arms

    Jonnie

    • 07 September 2011 11:37 AM
  • icon

    That'll be why they are all looking so smug in the photo!!

    • 07 September 2011 11:13 AM
  • icon

    Hunters brand carries little or no credibility/value outside it's core area ( where co-incidentally most of the branches are not franchised )
    So here's the rub - most B.E. franchisee's are now to summararily lose any brand loyalty/presence they have spent years and THERE OWN good money trying to build up without so much as a by your leave because it suits the franchisors ends.
    To add insult to inury I've no doubt that Hunters will not be paying, or even contributing, towards the considerable costs of new facias - boards -stationary - etc etc that are going to have to be purchased - in fact I bet thet they wont even allow for the costs against the franchise payments that are calculated on turnover that they'll be creaming off the top. It's just like most franchises - a complete "p" take of the impotent franchisee - beggars belief that people continue to be sucked into these one sided arrangements the only sure fire winner is always the franchisor. If you can run a successfull agency business then get out there and do it for yourself not the benefit of some parasite.

    • 07 September 2011 11:03 AM
  • icon

    Any franchisee has exactly the same risk.

    There will be, somewhere in the small print, an Eff-You clause which allows the franchisor to sell out if they want to.

    Sounds to me that although it is going to be a bit stressful, this will probably end up well in the end.

    I have a BE franchise in my town - can't wait to see the new logo...

    • 07 September 2011 09:30 AM
  • icon

    "The point about Hunters is that we are not a corporate entity but independent, entrepreneurial and highly profitable.” Yeah, right.

    He should look at Hunters Franchising Ltd Companies House R&A y/e 31/10/10:

    "The company has estimated losses of £300,000 available for carry forward against future trading profits.

    • 07 September 2011 09:20 AM
  • icon

    Reason they sold was hunters is not competition - if they opened to the whole market questions would be asked by shareholders why not sell for a better price to a competitor - reason was not to add strength to their brand. Why did CW sell? - on the whole franchises were not bringing money in. Now they are gone they can open their own company owned offices and take the market place.

    • 07 September 2011 09:11 AM
  • icon

    I too would sell my house and all its contents to help Hunters.

    • 07 September 2011 09:11 AM
  • icon

    We are a Hunters franchisee and have been for four years. We are delighted with the proposition that Hunters offer, this has helped many offices become market leaders in their areas. We have prospered at a time when other agents have been closing their doors, this is down to the commitment and training that hunters offer us to develop our business's. We would like to extend a warm welcome to our new franchisees and are positive that they will go from strenth to strength under the Hunters name.

    • 07 September 2011 09:09 AM
MovePal MovePal MovePal