x

Jon Tarrey

Retired

10929 Profile Views

About Me

Bit of a grumpy old man these days, with a special interest in property.

my expertise in the industry

Spent my formative years in the industry and dabbled with property investment when I was younger (unsuccessfully, I should add). Disillusioned with much of what estate agency stands for these days - so trying (in my own small way) to change that. Again, unsuccessfully.

Jon 's Recent Activity

And so the merry-go-round continues. How long was Raab in the job? Five or six months. I suppose the position of Housing Minister is pretty redundant now that there is effectively a Housing Secretary with a place at the Cabinet table in James Brokenshire, but still. The role is a joke; a mere stepping stone to something else. Raab has spent his whole time as Housing Minister rabbiting on about Brexit; now he gets the chance to do that full-time. I'd say he couldn't do any worse than his predecessor, but having seen a fair bit of Raab in the past I'm not sure that's the case. Brexit continues to be a total shambles orchestrated by a total shambles.

From: Jon Tarrey 09 July 2018 11:03 AM

That advert on after the football yesterday was beyond awful! I didn't think anything could beat the commisery adverts for naffness, but this latest effort knocked it out of the park. Cringe-worthy doesn't even cover it. I don't have as many issues with PB as other people, but their adverts are something else.

From: Jon Tarrey 02 July 2018 15:05 PM

Have to disagree. I thought England played very well, especially in the first half, and kept going against an obdurate, time-wasting, crafty and clever Tunisia team, who knew how to slow the game down and push the referee's buttons. The referee, by the way, was awful - and barely gave England anything. The second half was much tougher, but in the first half England could have been out of sight after 30 minutes. A questionable penalty aside, England dominated the game and were never really in danger of conceding. Trippier had an impressive game at right wing back, Henderson was excellent in the middle, Stones and Maguire were a constant threat from corners, Alli, Lingard and Sterling were bright and lively, Rashford and RLC offered something different when they entered the fray, and Kane did what Kane does best. A very promising performance all told, and a great start for England to what has been an excellent World Cup so far. Even an old pessimist like me is starting to develop a little bit of hope. Football's coming home! (Maybe, possibly, probably not).

From: Jon Tarrey 19 June 2018 09:20 AM

"The agency scores highly on TrustPilot and allAgents review sites." As we all know, the definitive markers of quality! "its website describes the agency as the UK’s 14th largest" What on earth is this based on? Has he just snatched that figure out of the sky? That can't even be close to right, can it?

From: Jon Tarrey 17 May 2018 14:42 PM

"is now reported to be worth some £16m." The article isn't saying he's definitely worth £16m, it's saying he's reported to be worth £16m. It's leaving it up to the reader to decide whether he is or not. As other people who know more about this stuff have pointed out, it all looks like a load of smoke and mirrors - or at the very least plumped up and exaggerated figures based on very little.

From: Jon Tarrey 17 May 2018 14:38 PM

This won't go down well, but there is a lot of truth in what he says. I don't for one minute think estate agents will be disappearing anytime soon - just look at how many there are of them on the high street! - but the demand for online services is on the rise massively, particularly among younger generations. Millennials (how I hate that word!) will be much more willing to embrace the likes of Purplebricks and the newly merged offerings of Tepilo and eMoov. They shop, bank, date and live much of their lives online, so it makes sense that they'll want to buy, sell and rent that way too. The agencies that meet this need will thrive, the ones that don't will struggle.

From: Jon Tarrey 14 May 2018 08:52 AM

They've certainly got traditional agents scared. There can be no other reason for the constant put-downs and defensive attitude whenever their name is mentioned. If they were no threat, why all the vitriol? PB are following in the footsteps of Foxtons and then Countrywide as the agency everyone loves to hate. Now CW are back in the good books with Platt's departure and the rehiring of proper property people, the ire has to be aimed elsewhere. Don't get me wrong, I think there are considerable flaws in PB's model. I really dislike their naff TV adverts, some of the claims they make are outrageous (are they still claiming to be open 24/7?) and they have more money than sense. They've invested big and got many big guns behind them, but it's unclear how successful they've actually been. They seem to rely heavily on being bankrolled by large investors a lot of the time. I'm also not sure about expanding operations overseas - to the US and Australia - when you haven't fully cracked your initial market. Running before you can crawl and all that. For all that, though, they can't be dismissed outright or treated with utter disdain. Clearly they're doing something right, even if it is just from a PR perspective. There's been a gap in the market for a big online agent (and yes, they are online) and they have filled it in the last three years. The others before just couldn't achieve the nationwide recognition that PB has. People know who they are, people have seen the adverts, people are willing to give them a go. Ask friends, family, work colleagues - they will likely know of PB above any other online operator and they may well have used them, or be willing to use them. The sales pitch is strong, even if it is a bit blurred. The chance to sell your home for a lot less than you would with a traditional agency has considerable appeal. Their boards are everywhere, their adverts are everywhere, they are big, bold, brash and brassy. And they're not going anywhere, whether people like it or not You can dismiss them as chancers and charlatans, but you can't ignore the threat they pose to the traditional model.

From: Jon Tarrey 27 March 2018 16:08 PM

Goddard a goner - never seemed a natural fit for him to go from being the main man behind PSG to trying to juggle all of Zoopla's diversification projects. Similar thing happened with Rob Ellice at easyProperty - he got shunned sideways after easyProperty was swallowed up by the Guild and soon departed the business he helped to found.

From: Jon Tarrey 23 February 2018 14:23 PM

Their silence speaks volumes. Why be so coy if you've got nothing to hide?

From: Jon Tarrey 12 December 2017 10:17 AM

I'm amazed that OTM have lasted this long, to be honest. They've been teetering on the brink for a long time, and this is surely just one last throw of the dice. I just can't see who would invest in OTM with any confidence, particularly when you look at what that Evening Standard columnist said about the prospects of the portal floating. Zoopla and Rightmove will both be laughing their way to the bank either way.

From: Jon Tarrey 12 December 2017 10:15 AM

"is opening a Mayfair office in a bid to secure some of the lucrative prime central London residential market." I thought the prime central London market wasn't as lucrative these days. Maybe they know something we don't.

From: Jon Tarrey 24 April 2017 10:04 AM

Something needs to be done about this. A quite ridiculous number.

From: Jon Tarrey 24 April 2017 10:02 AM

When will the endless increases stop? When the average prices reach £300,000, or £400,000? Of course, it's in the government's interests to keep prices high, so expect little to change in the coming years. The North East has the cheapest average asking price, but little demand because of a lack of job opportunities and a high number of people in relative property. It's all very well properties being cheap, but the demand simply isn't there. More jobs need to be created in deindustrialised towns and cities to make them more appealing places for people to live, drawing some of the jobs and investment away from the likes of London, Manchester, Birmingham and Liverpool. Otherwise the situation will get no better.

From: Jon Tarrey 23 March 2017 10:38 AM

All is well for the baby boomers. Not so good for everyone else, mind. Goes to show how much wealth is now tied up in property - the ultimate asset. No wonder so many are so desperate to get on the housing ladder.

From: Jon Tarrey 23 March 2017 10:21 AM

PR stunt? Not to mention weird and creepy. An own goal from PB here, methinks.

From: Jon Tarrey 21 March 2017 16:19 PM

Online threat? Is it really that much of a threat? It holds a very small share of the market, and even then PB has most of that chunk. Purely online agencies are few and far between, and most go out of business fairly quickly. The hybrid model - mixing the best of online and traditional - is the future, and that's how PB like to describe themselves despite having no physical branches. There are things I can't stand about PB - none more than so their exceedingly naff "Commisery" adverts and some of their more outlandish claims like being open 24/7 - but I don't quite get the attack-dog approach that they are often bitten by. They don't deserve the huge amount of opprobrium poured on them, that's for sure. "They are so consistenetly given 5 stars, and the way they are written speaks of artifice" Of course some of their reviews are artificial, but that's the case for many others. Reviews are a nonsense in the agency world, because they can be so easily manipulated and placed there. If anyone is choosing their estate agent on the basis of reviews, rather than hard, thorough and detailed research, then they are a fool. There is a great deal of difference between a meal out or a mini-break away and selling a house, so if anyone is taking the TripAdvisor approach to selling a home then they need to have a serious rethink.

From: Jon Tarrey 21 March 2017 16:09 PM

Well said, Chris.

From: Jon Tarrey 21 March 2017 16:01 PM

Many people think that's the way forward. Luckily, many more don't, including all the sensible ones. Regulation should not be seen as a dirty word, if implemented properly and sparingly. If we didn't have regulations in place, it's a free for all. Self-regulation very rarely, if ever, works, but that won't stop people with vested interests calling for it.

From: Jon Tarrey 16 March 2017 11:57 AM

Steady on. I don't think anyone is saying that these agents are equivalent to drug barons or mafiosos, but what they've been involved in has still deliberately cheated consumers by not allowing them to get the best possible deal. I thought agents were all about the customers? I thought agents were only interested in providing the best service to their clients, not the profits? An isolated case, yes, but an important one. Traditional agents shouldn't get a free pass because they're traditional. They should be held to the same standards - higher standards, even - as everyone else. If the likes of PB are going to get regular criticism for their practices, when trad agents do something wrong they should be called out on it and punished in a fair and appropriate way. I think that's what happened here. All these double-standards are staggering, and it does no favours for the old boys club to leap to the defence of any traditional agent who has done something iffy. When the supermarkets were accused of price-fixing, they were hammered. This is clearly not the worst crime ever committed, but its seriousness shouldn't be diminished because it paints a less than flattering light on the workings of some agents.

From: Jon Tarrey 02 March 2017 15:57 PM

Very naughty from the agents involved, reflected in the severity of the fine. To those jumping to the defence of the agents, saying they've not done anything wrong and the penalty is way too harsh, would you be quite as forgiving if this was Purplebricks, eMoov or Countrywide involved? Can't be different standards for different agents, depending on which side you agree with. As Chris Wood says, a cartel is a cartel and this story is like catnip to the online/hybrid agents who will now be firmly pointing out that agents aren't on the side of consumers at all. Not very bright.

From: Jon Tarrey 02 March 2017 15:50 PM

Tut tut. Hopefully they now change their ways. No excuse for it in this day and age. No surprise to see hospitality and retail as the two main offenders - they've been getting away with it for years and will continue to try and get away with it, so this name and shame list is a good way of forcing their hands. Debenhams, KFC and Subway care about their brands - and their brand perception - so they'll be keen to minimise the fallout from this. Just look how Michel Roux Jr has been tainted by revelations about not paying the minimum wage and not giving waiting staff proper tips. His whole "friendly face of the high-end cuisine market" has been tainted as a result.

From: Jon Tarrey 16 February 2017 13:30 PM

I wonder how much Mr Panos is being paid for all this. I'm guessing, as the world's top estate agency mentor, he doesn't come cheap. "Panos is a Sky TV Australia property market pundit." Ah, so he won't be prone to hyperbole, sensationalism and bending the truth, then. Good to know. Taking my bitter, sceptical hat off for a minute, he could offer some really good advice to young estate agents and help them on their way. That should be championed. But just seems like too much of a PR stunt in its current guise, with all the talk of elite performers, webinars and motivational speeches. All sounds very manufactured.

From: Jon Tarrey 14 February 2017 10:08 AM

Interesting. Purplebricks have become the agent everyone loves to hate recently, but I don't quite understand why they get so much stick. I can see why elements of their model are unpopular, but I don't buy into this idea that they are the devil incarnate.

From: Jon Tarrey 30 January 2017 15:34 PM

Oh dear oh dear. Is this the year that the death knells finally ring out for OTM? Not looking good, is it? As T Dap says, little has been made of their 2nd anniversary. In fact, we hear very little from OTM full stop. What's going on, Springett?

From: Jon Tarrey 26 January 2017 11:53 AM

Where did I dismiss anyone? I just put across my opinion. You know, like you have. I'm not vehemently defending them, I'm just pointing out that they're not the devil incarnate. Anyway, let's agree to disagree.

From: Jon Tarrey 17 January 2017 11:42 AM

Sorry, but this is nonsense. Ryanair might not offer the most luxury service in the world, but they do what they do very well. They're a no-frills airline; they never pretend to be anything other than that. They get you to where you need to be in a cheap, hassle-free way. Cheap, cheerful and reliable. You could argue that firms like EasyJet and Ryanair have led a race to the bottom, with other airlines having to slash their prices to compete, or you could say that the low-cost airlines have made travel far more accessible for people who previously couldn't afford it. The safety standards and reliability of EasyJet and Ryanair is generally top notch. There are things you can criticise and dig these firms out for, but they do the job properly. The idea that PB are offering some bargain basement product because they are charging less doesn't seem to hold up to scrutiny. Just because something's cheaper, doesn't mean it's of lesser quality. Just look at the revolution being caused by Aldi and Lidl, with very little impact on quality. There should be a place in estate agency for all kind of models - low-cost, high-end, middle of the road. Some agents do charge far too much, others don't. Many offer a very good service, but not all. This idea that traditional agents are the only ones who offer a fantastic service is nonsense. There are plenty of agents out there who offer substandard fare.

From: Jon Tarrey 17 January 2017 10:32 AM

Interesting idea. Sounds like a planning nightmare, but if it could be achieved it's quite an inventive and innovative plan to ease London's housing crisis. If these garages are empty and without purpose, surely they would be better off be putting to use? Sounds a little gimmicky, but if the will is there to seriously consider it, this might just have potential. Then again, given the prices garages go for in London these days, the councils might decide to cash in instead!

From: Jon Tarrey 17 January 2017 09:53 AM

But they're probably able to get away with the 24/7 claim because it's impossible to prove otherwise.

From: Jon Tarrey 17 January 2017 09:50 AM

I think you overestimate the ASA's powers. I'm sure, if the ads were misleading, they would have been asked to take them down by now. They probably have a large legal team who have found some clever loophole that allows them to say what they say. They've been around for a while, saying this sort of thing, so surely they would have been challenged already if they were doing anything untoward? Not saying what they say is right, but they probably have some small print somewhere that covers them very nicely in the event of a challenge. It's like their claim to be a 24/7 agent, which is utter nonsense. Doesn't exist. And who would want it to?

From: Jon Tarrey 17 January 2017 09:50 AM

Typical anti-PB comments here. In most cases, fair and justified - and I have plenty of issues with their model and their aggressive levels of PR - but it does sometimes seem to be the case that they are criticised no matter what they do. They can't win. They will be bashed either way. If they are no threat to traditional agents, why do trad agents take against them so much? Why so defensive? Some will say PB are charlatans, but it would be churlish to deny that they are doing something right, with their share of the online market, their visible presence and their ability to get under the skins of older heads in the industry. I've said this before, but I have seen quite a number of PB boards out and about on the street. Their PR drive - aggressive and in-yer-face as it is - is very effective. People know who they are, much more than any other online/hybrid offering. Granted, they have significant financial backing and plenty of dosh to be playing with, but I think it's dangerous to write them off completely, even if much of what they preach is baloney.

From: Jon Tarrey 17 January 2017 09:45 AM

Well, when you put it like that!

From: Jon Tarrey 12 January 2017 09:48 AM

What a surprise. Government with no clue about housing can't decide which day to release its housing White Paper. Maybe they've been too busy moving the goalposts on affordable housing and subtly massaging the figures to make it seem like they're anywhere close to achieving the ridiculously ambitious target of 1 million new homes by 2020.

From: Jon Tarrey 12 January 2017 09:47 AM

Oh dear. Not looking so good for the estate agent that everyone loves to hate. As Andrew Jones says, though, there is so much expanding and growing you can do before you reach a peak and start to come tumbling back the other way at a rate of knots.

From: Jon Tarrey 11 January 2017 13:11 PM

Almost certainly not. The more pertinent question is - do the government build any new homes at all? If they do, they're very well hidden!

From: Jon Tarrey 03 January 2017 14:49 PM

Hmm, not sure about this. At least these kinds of boards serve a purpose for the community.

From: Jon Tarrey 03 January 2017 09:39 AM

Can the last person at Countrywide please turn the light out?

From: Jon Tarrey 03 January 2017 09:30 AM

Does the image of estate agents no favours whatsoever.

From: Jon Tarrey 20 December 2016 13:45 PM

Not sure you'll find much sympathy for the prime central London market somehow. Some say we need the trickle down effect - if the top end of the market doesn't perform well, this filters down and has a negative effect on everything - some say that's rubbish. I think I'm in the latter camp.

From: Jon Tarrey 20 December 2016 13:44 PM

No vested interests from Begbies Traynor. No, no, no.

From: Jon Tarrey 19 December 2016 10:52 AM

From: Jon Tarrey 19 December 2016 10:14 AM

Hmm, you make the mistake of using your own anecdotal evidence as fact. Just because you do it, and the other agencies you've worked in do it, doesn't mean everyone does. "The disparity will be due to commision earned. I'll say the same now as I do to everyone, if you are not earning enough, work harder." This sounds a bit too much like "stop complaining, stop moaning, get on with it". If earnings and hard work were related - which they very definitely aren't - lots of middle managers and corporate bigwigs would be living on the breadline. The idea that those who work the hardest get the furthest is the biggest load of baloney I've ever heard in my life.

From: Jon Tarrey 15 December 2016 15:28 PM

The success of Brexit shouldn't be judged on house prices falling - God knows that needs to happen at some point - but on whether anyone actually has a clue what the hell we're doing or what our actual plan is. Man of the people Farage has now got far better things to be doing with his time than mixing with the hoi poiloi, while Boris is too busy going from one diplomatic disaster to another. May seems more interested in trousers and talking a good game than any actual action, and the only thing you can rely on Davis, Grayling and Fox for is to mess things up spectacularly. Still, all these months later, we're not clearer on what is actually going to happen. You would have thought someone on the Leave side might have had a clue. Apparently, now they've "won", everyone else should shut up moaning and not hold them to account. Anyway, where was I? Yes, property might take a knock, but it's proved resilient to this sort of thing in the past and will do so again.

From: Jon Tarrey 12 December 2016 17:05 PM

"Go on, get outta it! Get out of my paaabbb!" Classic, immortal line. Phil's having a bit of a bad time of it at the moment, but Steve McFadden himself seems in much better health. I did wonder what he was doing up in Birmingham, but it soon made sense. "He's behind you!" I'll get my coat.

From: Jon Tarrey 12 December 2016 10:39 AM

Nice. Keep up the good work!

From: Jon Tarrey 06 December 2016 09:57 AM

From: Jon Tarrey 06 December 2016 09:56 AM

Agreed. That one really stands out. The Aladdin one is just as impressive, mind.

From: Jon Tarrey 05 December 2016 14:25 PM

He's just reporting what PB have come out with. That's his job, as a journalist, isn't it? You know, to report the news. What would you rather, he made it up? He's not trying to big up anyone, PB are trying to do that all on their own. It is the figures they - the biggest UK online agent, whether you like it or not - released to the city, out in the public domain. Of course that is going to be reported on. I can't see how it couldn't be. You can argue all you want about PB, their figures and how sustainable they are, but they are newsworthy. You can't just ignore them because you don't like them, surely?

From: Jon Tarrey 05 December 2016 14:23 PM

Oh dear, oh dear. Run out of residential properties to sell and let, I presume? Pretty embarrassing stuff leading up to the big 2nd anniversary. Will Springett and co be holding a party, I wonder? Have to say, I see plenty of offices in and around London with the OTM logo on their office windows. Now someone like me, a bit of a property anorak with experience of working in the industry, knows exactly what the logo stands for, but your average passer-by on the street doesn't have a clue. They do, however, know exactly who and what RM and Zoopla are. That's the key difference. And it's one that OTM are never going to overcome, commercial properties or no commercial properties.

From: Jon Tarrey 02 December 2016 11:08 AM

Great work on these window displays. Enough to make even an old Grinch like me feel a little bit festive!

From: Jon Tarrey 02 December 2016 11:05 AM

That is impressive. If you're going to do it, you might as well go the whole hog like Living in London (rubbish name, mind!) Is it actually the case that they have offices in the tube station? Is that a first?

From: Jon Tarrey 01 December 2016 09:31 AM

"Separately, Zoopla has also announced investment in and a partnership with Neos, a home insurance provider which boasts Match Of The Day presenter Gary Lineker amongst its other backers." Really? Gary Lineker? Home insurance would be the last thing I would think he would advertise. Anyway, what do I know? Interesting acquisitions from Zoopla, who really seem to be going to town on this sort of thing in recent times. Some could argue, though, that they are putting too many fingers in too many pies. Then again, with the battle with OTM seemingly over, they need something else to do with their time.

From: Jon Tarrey 01 December 2016 09:28 AM

They just keep replacing them with experts from other industries. First DFS, next an advertising guru from Vodafone. Strategy in place? Nah, we'll worry about that later.

From: Jon Tarrey 28 November 2016 12:04 PM

Shush. Apparently endless price rises, to the point where the average asking price in London is £1m, is a brilliant, wonderful thing. Price rises, price rises, price rises, until only the super-rich can afford to live in the capital. That's the goal.

From: Jon Tarrey 28 November 2016 12:02 PM

Indeed, Algarve. The fuss over stamp duty is another storm in a teacup, just like all the hoohaa over the ban on letting agent fees. It works perfectly well in Scotland. And, believe it or not, rents haven't soared north of the border. Lots of threats from landlords about passing on the cost to their tenants, but they sound like empty threats to me.

From: Jon Tarrey 24 November 2016 09:40 AM

I appreciate that CW has become every agent's favourite punching bag lately - a position that was until recently reserved for Foxtons or online "pretenders" - but the results above aren't actually that bad. Unless I'm reading it wrong. The lettings side of the business would appear to be thriving, with an 11% rise in the number of properties they are managing. Plus revenue is up for the first nine months of this year when compared to the same period in 2015. That's not to say they don't have serious issues, but I wouldn't be writing CW's will and testament just yet. Whatever you think of Alison Platt, her new team and their approach to property, it's still wise to look at things with a rational, unbiased eye. It's the same with PB - people can't see past their irrational anger and dislike of the company, and any sound judgement is impaired as a result.

From: Jon Tarrey 24 November 2016 09:38 AM

I doubt you'd get much sympathy from the public at large - in particular tenants and aspiring buyers - to any of the above. I sometimes think people who comment on here live in their own little bubble. Buy-to-let investors are about as popular as a referee who's just called a penalty wrong. Charging tenants upwards of £800 in fees doesn't seem legitimate to me. At the lowest end, they're paying about £200. That's fine if rents are cheap and tenancies secure, but in many cases they're not. We need a complete overhaul of our private rented sector and our whole housing policy. We've been promised 40,000 more affordable homes, but I've heard that before from this government. It's very rarely backed up in reality. And what exactly counts as affordable these days? The government and ordinary people seem to have a very different opinion on that.

From: Jon Tarrey 23 November 2016 14:03 PM

"Countrywide’s chief marketing officer, who joined the group a year ago from furniture company DFS" DFS to estate agency. Hmmm. I suppose you can see their thinking. DFS always, always has sales on. Estate agency involves lots of sales. Kind of the same thing. We'll worry about the details later on!

From: Jon Tarrey 23 November 2016 13:58 PM

Indeed! I wonder if she has quotes from Des'ree songs to inspire her as well. "Money makes the world go round...I'm reaching out to a higher ground..."

From: Jon Tarrey 23 November 2016 13:56 PM

Predictably hostile response to PB. I'm going to put my neck on the line and say he's not far wrong. People might not like it, but agents are just above politicians and just below traffic wardens in the list of the most disliked professions. The stereotype exists for a reason, even if in the vast majority of cases it's hugely unfair. Local property experts, though, just sounds naff. So I'm not sure they've called it right on that one. PB clearly get people's goat up, but they are having an impact. Whether you love or loathe their bright purple branding and naff adverts, people have heard of PB in a way they haven't heard of eMoov or Tepilo or the other main online agents. Ask the public to name one online agent and the first name that will come to their lips is PB. That can't just be written off. Also, I don't know if it's just where I live, but I've seen quite a few PB sold, For Sale and To Let signs in recent months - much more than any other high-profile online agent. I know there are massive question marks over their profitability and their long-time prospects, but I think it's dangerous to write them off completely.

From: Jon Tarrey 22 November 2016 10:51 AM

Maybe he should try again on The Apprentice. With the quality of candidate this year, he'd probably walk it!

From: Jon Tarrey 17 November 2016 12:05 PM

"Put another way, if you took a team of the best agents and put them in a rubbish shop with a crap image and put them up against an average team in a great office with a fabulous image the best team would win easily." Not sure I agree with that, Simon. A rubbish shop and a crap image are going to be very offputting, just like a restaurant that looks dire from the outside. You wouldn't want to live in a dive of house just because the people inside are the best, would you? You need to attract people inside to begin with - to do that, the brand needs to look the part. It's all about perception and image. Of course, this needs to be backed up with good agents who know what they're doing, but I'm not sure I agree with your sentiment that it's all about the agent and stuff the rest. Lots of different things play a part in the success, or otherwise, of an agency.

From: Jon Tarrey 17 November 2016 12:03 PM

Factless? Pointless, maybe - that's a matter of opinion. But I wouldn't say it was factless. Halifax are a fairly respected body when it comes to this sort of thing.

From: Jon Tarrey 15 November 2016 10:37 AM

"The newspaper dedicates its argument largely to the market for homes above £1m." I can see that generating a whole heap of sympathy from the wider public at large. Not.

From: Jon Tarrey 15 November 2016 10:34 AM

The whole enemy thing has always been blown out of proportion by the media and certain indiscreet industry figures. In reality, purely online agents make up a very small percentage of the market, but nearly all estate agents now have considerable online presences - with websites, social media and listings on the portals. In some cases, they even offer things like virtual reality tours, online valuation tools and digital floor plans. Truth is, to survive in this day and age, you need to be internet-savvy and up to date from a digital point of view. Estate agents understand that better than anyone. Those who don't are doomed to failure. Which means that most agents are effectively a hybrid anyway. The problem is, certain high street agents get very defensive when it's suggested that their fees are too high and their service is no better than the online offerings. It's why we see regular disdainful comments about online agents below article. But, in reality, the best agencies mix the best bits from the two models. Hybrid - or whatever you want to call it - is already the dominant force at the moment, and will continue to be.

From: Jon Tarrey 09 November 2016 15:02 PM

From: Jon Tarrey 09 November 2016 14:56 PM

Sounds like a terrible rebranding of Right to Buy, which has been - and continues to be - a disaster. There are a lack of housing association homes, council homes and affordable housing to begin with, selling off more of the stock ain't going to help.

From: Jon Tarrey 07 November 2016 14:35 PM

Yours, maybe not. Others, probably. You can't just ignore the issue because you don't like it. Some people do think that estate agent fees are too high. In fact, I'd say the public at large do. You clearly disagree with that, but there is a conversation to be had about estate agent fees and how much is too much. Closing down the debate with "what a load of rubbish, my agency hasn't seen such rises, this is total tosh!" doesn't really add much to the discussion. If fees are rising across the country, that's an issue that can't just be ignored.

From: Jon Tarrey 07 November 2016 14:33 PM

Maybe you should read the article. It's one comparison site saying it's the case. You're a defensive bunch, you estate agents. Somehow your anecdotal evidence trumps the actual research carried out by this website. You can dispute their findings - and how representative they are - but I would be inclined to believe that estate agency fees have gone up in that time. Agents will say they do plenty of work for their money and fully deserve it, others would disagree. That's the way debate works.

From: Jon Tarrey 07 November 2016 14:31 PM

Agreed, Glenn. It don't look very rosy.

From: Jon Tarrey 04 November 2016 15:38 PM

Oh joy. Will anything be done to reverse this? I wait with (very) bated breath. How has this been allowed to happen? I blame Thatcher.

From: Jon Tarrey 03 November 2016 13:56 PM

Not surprised. People only dislike them because they're so successful. Agents dislike them because they thought of the portal idea first. The efforts to replicate RM's success, as we've seen, have not worked out well. They are a British success story and they've managed that without too many own goals or the PR scandals that have afflicted Amazon, Tesco, Sports Direct, BHS et al.

From: Jon Tarrey 03 November 2016 13:44 PM

Thought you were all about the free market, Rookie. Or is that only when it suits you?

From: Jon Tarrey 03 November 2016 13:42 PM

Any good news for CW? It's hard to remember the last time we heard anything upbeat about the company. They're slowly turning into Foxtons - one PR disaster after another, bad results after bad results, etc. They even seem to be taking on Foxtons mantle of being the estate agents that everyone loves to hate.

From: Jon Tarrey 25 October 2016 17:11 PM

Agreed with your first point. There needs to be some kind of financial deterrent - as you say, a penalty system maybe - to stop housebuilders and developers sitting on land.

From: Jon Tarrey 25 October 2016 17:09 PM

All sounds perfectly reasonable from Sadiq. It's quite refreshing, after years of the Boris show and his dismal record on housing (luxury apartments excepted), to have a Mayor who at least seems willing to accept there is a problem and go about tackling it.

From: Jon Tarrey 25 October 2016 17:07 PM

This kind of data makes my brain hurt, especially on a Monday. They all seem to say something different and contradict themselves at the same time. After reading it, I'm still no clearer what the outlook is.

From: Jon Tarrey 24 October 2016 09:42 AM

If the people of Surrey are starting to complain about high house prices and rents, you know something is seriously wrong with housing in this country. Will anything be done? Will it heck!

From: Jon Tarrey 24 October 2016 09:25 AM

Another CW exec jumping ship. What is going on?

From: Jon Tarrey 21 October 2016 16:49 PM

Tell us more, Paul.

From: Jon Tarrey 21 October 2016 16:47 PM

"An article written by someone who need to go back to school" Might want to get your spelling in order if you're going to post a sentence like this. Other than that, I mostly agree with your other points.

From: Jon Tarrey 21 October 2016 16:44 PM

"The government has published details of the Criminal Finances Bill with prime central London property used for purposes of money laundering in the spotlight." Never! Don't believe it. I'm shocked, I tell ya. Completely and utterly shocked!

From: Jon Tarrey 20 October 2016 09:43 AM

Yes, lovely gesture. Already raised fair bit of money.

From: Jon Tarrey 20 October 2016 09:42 AM

Hmm. Doesn't look great, does it? Not sure such an initiative ever really had legs. Lots of big money behind it, but not something that seemed to have a long-term strategy in place before launching.

From: Jon Tarrey 20 October 2016 09:41 AM

Makes sense, I suppose. The immediacy and reach of something like Facebook or Twitter is far greater than what can be achieved with newspaper or even online advertising. Do For Sale boards, for example, still have any function? That said, Purplebricks - which is very much an online venture (even if it considers itself a hybrid) - uses For Sale and To Let signs, something I find a tad incongruous. Gets their name out there, though, with that distinctive purple branding. The less said about their latest naff advert, the better.

From: Jon Tarrey 13 October 2016 10:21 AM

At least Barwell shows his face a bit more than Brandon Lewis, but still this government is taking housing about as seriously as an episode of Miranda! With extreme pressure already on a bloated private rented sector, what do the government decide to do? Place even more pressure on it. Nice one. Brilliant idea. Top tomato. It's a good call to scrap the controversial and useless Help to Buy scheme - which has managed to help about ten people to buy a property in six years - but what will be put in its place? I read today that £5 billion is going to be pumped in to kickstart the construction of thousands of new homes. I shall believe that when I see it! "Conservative MP James Cartlidge - chair of the Commons all-party housing and planning group and considered an influential figure on Tory policy making - wrote in The Guardian at the weekend that renting should be a larger part of the housing debate." Can it be any larger than it already it is? How big will the PRS go? Maybe if some actual social housing was built there wouldn't be such a backlash against the buy-to-let brigade, who people see as greedy and in-it-for-themselves (fairly or unfairly). A number of politicians might be able to expand their portfolio, but young people and aspiring homeowners will continue to lose out. More tinkering around the edges from the government, who are too scared to take any actual decisive action. Move on, please. Nothing to see here.

From: Jon Tarrey 03 October 2016 12:04 PM

Good answers, Glenn. I'd completely forgotten about Carol Smillie. Changing Rooms was a cult classic in the 90s and early 2000s, but I can't picture Carol without also picturing the impression of her by Ronnie Ancona! Interesting thoughts on hybrid. Entirely agree on that front.

From: Jon Tarrey 03 October 2016 11:36 AM

"It says it also achieved a record number of 10m visits in the month of September" Sounds impressive, until you read this. "In the summer Rightmove announced that during the first half of 2016 alone it received a record 765 million visits" Which means Rightmove had an average of 127.5 million hits per month. Just slightly dwarfs OTM's figures. I also find it strange that they won't reveal how many actual leads it has provided. If it's a record number, shout about it. Why so coy? Not revealing the figure just makes cynical folk like me even more cynical. Instead of adding mystery, it just adds scepticism. "We're performing really well, you know. Really, really well." "How well?" "We can't tell you that." "But." "We're doing really, really well. That's all you need to know. Actual figures aren't needed, trust us."

From: Jon Tarrey 03 October 2016 11:31 AM

I thought the same thing when I first saw the piece. I'm ashamed to say I didn't know who the other Harry Hill was, despite taking a fair old interest in the world of property. Given he helped launch Rightmove and is a key industry figure, perhaps I should do. The other Harry Hill, the comedian and TV personality who is actually a doctor called Matthew Hall, hasn't been doing much work recently, so maybe he could be brought on board for a "Countrywide goes Retail" advert. I'm sure Platt would tell you she knows what she's doing, but she might like to take a bit of advice from all these ex-Countrywide bigwigs who are telling her she is going down the wrong path. Maybe she's a visionary, maybe she's just too stubborn. We shall see. Things ain't looking too rosy at the moment, however.

From: Jon Tarrey 28 September 2016 15:59 PM

Indeed. Never understand that. I know they extrapolate and what not, but the definitive nature of their findings don't really hold up when they've only spoken to just over 1,000 people. How can they in any way be representative?

From: Jon Tarrey 28 September 2016 09:35 AM

Not surprised. The Tories' record on housing has been truly abysmal. They try and fudge the figures with talk of affordable homes that aren't actually affordable and gimmicky schemes, but they just paper over the cracks (very badly!) Labour has plenty of ammunition when it comes to housing; they should attack the Tories again and again over this.

From: Jon Tarrey 28 September 2016 09:33 AM

"The former chief executive of Countrywide, Harry Hill, has tweeted that on a four mile walk encountering hundreds of estate agents’ boards he saw only one from a Countrywide brand - a fact he has described as a “market share disaster.” Ouch. Countrywide aren't having a great time at the moment, are they? Too many changes, too much upheaval, too much fuss.

From: Jon Tarrey 28 September 2016 09:24 AM

"Aston Mead says that building on green belt land has become necessary if a solution for the UK's housing crisis is to be found." Why's that? Have all other options been explored properly? No, didn't think so. As Rob and the other posters outline above, there are other ways in which to go about solving the housing crisis before you have to think about building on the green belt. All manner of abandoned and derelict buildings that have no purpose whatsoever can be found all over the country. I understand that some of these may be listed, beyond repair or involved in legal wranglings, but surely the majority of them can be easily and quickly converted if the desire is there? I appreciate you are only taking about small patches of land that shouldn't even be classified as green belt. But what one person thinks of as green belt, another might not. That's when difficulties arise. You start building on the green belt, you set a dangerous precedent.

From: Jon Tarrey 27 September 2016 10:04 AM

Zoopla has been spreading itself very thinly recently. Not so sure that's the brightest idea. This latest venture has "quietly shelved after six months" written all over it.

From: Jon Tarrey 27 September 2016 09:48 AM

From: Jon Tarrey 27 September 2016 09:45 AM

Good to see. I take my hat off to them.

From: Jon Tarrey 23 September 2016 09:51 AM

Ah, easyProperty, where have you been? Up you pop every few months with your latest PR stunt. Have you actually sold or let any houses recently? You know, the bread and butter stuff. I see their naff adverts, I see stories like this, I see them regularly expanding and talking about overseas operations and announcing the death of traditional agency, but I don't seem them producing any actual results. Maybe I can be contradicted on that? A lot of investment, a lot of backing, but very little to show for it. A bit like a reality show celeb still trying to convince the world they are relevant. They keep getting their name in the headlines, they keep shouting out about how great they are, they keep being loud, distinctive and controversial, but really their career is heading absolutely nowhere.

From: Jon Tarrey 23 September 2016 09:50 AM

It's been sinking for a while now. Court case after court case, agent after agent jumping ship, failing to make any impact on Zoopla, not even close to Rightmove, no traction from TV ads or massive PR drive, etc, etc. I'm afraid it's a dud and agents are starting to realise they've been sold a dud. If you're not making progress after nearly 2 years of being in operation, something is clearly up. If Springett and co hadn't been so bullish when launching, lashing out at rivals, outlining ridiculously ambitious targets and coming up with the stupid one other portal rule, they might have done better. A slow and steady approach might have reaped more dividends. Instead, they angered Zoopla - who, after an initial dent, have bounced back massively - and they also angered the agents who had put faith in them. An unedifying spectacle all round, really. Springett, of course, has gone very quiet. I think he knows OTM is finished - or at least going nowhere good - but doesn't want to admit that just yet.

From: Jon Tarrey 23 September 2016 09:45 AM

Does anyone think OTM has worked?

From: Jon Tarrey 23 September 2016 09:39 AM

"When pigs fly" has never been a more apt phrase. It's like people saying Leicester City can win the Premier League. Oh wait... Maybe it's not so far-fetched after all!

From: Jon Tarrey 22 September 2016 11:31 AM

*Hat. I don't hate them. I'm not that horrible and bitter (honest)

From: Jon Tarrey 22 September 2016 11:26 AM

If you believe that the government's figures are flawed - which I don't really buy into, given the figures look bad on them - the 30,000 omitted new build homes still aren't enough to keep up with government house-building targets, surely? "The HBF says that the housebuilding industry is 'rapidly increasing output'" Yeah, right. Any actual evidence for this? The housebuilding industry has been criticised for good reason, no amount of whining and shouting "the figures are inaccurate, things are fine really" is going to change that. If the government and the housebuilders reach their target of 1 million new homes by 2020, I will take my hate off to them. Until then, massive pinch of salt being taken with anything they say.

From: Jon Tarrey 22 September 2016 11:23 AM

Interesting thoughts on Countrywide, PropTech and how the industry has changed in recent years. Also intrigued about these ballroom dancing lessons. Is that for the property version of Strictly Come Dancing?

From: Jon Tarrey 19 September 2016 09:58 AM

They've got big back from Savills, who I'm sure see YOPA as a long-term venture. All of these new firms have big backing and are clearly intent on making a name for themselves first, and a brand, and then worrying about making a profit later. Many will balk at such methods, others will think it's genius. Quite a few major firms didn't turn a profit for the first few years of operation, but they had a good idea and played the long game. I don't actually think PB's model is the right one, and I hate their claims to be 24/7 (they're not) and a hybrid because of their property experts down on the ground (often covering massive chunks of land), but if YOPA can get similar levels of brand awareness as PB I'm sure they'll be laughing. The onliners market share is still pretty low - although it has doubled to about 5% in the last two years. Of this market share, PB make up the majority of it. They are the main players in the online estate agency world (I know they count themselves as a hybrid, but they're not).

From: Jon Tarrey 16 September 2016 11:19 AM

Indeed it it. I'm the first to criticise property ads for being naff, twee and cheesy. They all take themselves far too seriously or try way too hard to be funny. This is silly, tongue-in-cheek, funny and serves a purpose. We saw how successful ComparetheMarket became when they started to play on words and just ran and ran with it. A brilliant bit of advertising and marketing, no matter what you think of the product or their ads. YOPA have done something similar. What does YOPA sound a little bit like if you spell out each individual letter? The YMCA song, that annoyingly catchy song that is a perennial favourite at weddings and parties up and down the country, something that people generally associate with happy, joyful times. Clever stuff from YOPA here - and they win the distinction of being the first property company to come up with an advert that made me smile. Zoopla's latest effort was so groan-worthy it was almost funny.

From: Jon Tarrey 16 September 2016 11:08 AM

Not really sure what the point of this is. What is it actually offering? I think Zoopla are spreading themselves too thinly. Stick to what you do best. I know they feel a responsibility towards PropTech startups, because that's what they started out as, but I think they're going overboard with this. Can't see it working out.

From: Jon Tarrey 16 September 2016 11:01 AM

Different. Good luck to them.

From: Jon Tarrey 15 September 2016 11:42 AM

Moving Swiftly On will be moving swiftly on in about, oh, six months. I'm all for giving new innovations a start, but I just can't see how they are going to make any money or impact. May be proved wrong, but I'm willing to bet my house I won't.

From: Jon Tarrey 15 September 2016 11:41 AM

Quirk is a cad, isn't he? Say something, doesn't matter if it's true, then wait for the rebuttal. If the rebuttal doesn't come, Quirk's version of the story wins out. On this occasion, no such luck. His version of the story has been completely contradicted. Who do I believe? Well, not the one with RQ as his initials. As Algarve Investor points out above, Quirk is like the boy who cried wolf. The one time that he's actually telling the truth, people won't believe him because of japes like the above. I do genuinely wonder with Russell whether he actually believes what he says or it's just for PR purposes. I think it's probably the latter.

From: Jon Tarrey 15 September 2016 11:38 AM

And David Cameron. Who called the referendum in the first place to placate his party, then campaigned awfully for Remain, then quit when he lost, then quit as a backbencher after that for an easier, simpler, better-paid life. He should be forever reminded of his legacy. Of course, we have no way of knowing how Brexit - when it actually happens - will pan out in the long-term, but the signs aren't exactly promising. Out the single market, paying a fee to visit the EU, domestic business that is too fat and lazy (according to prominent Brexiter Liam Fox), a more divided and hostile country - sounds fun! Still not clear what effect all this will have on the property market, though.

From: Jon Tarrey 13 September 2016 09:29 AM

Grant Shapps is too busy being Michael Green or Sebastian Fox or whatever he calls himself now.

From: Jon Tarrey 13 September 2016 08:25 AM

The silence is deafening. No-one seems to have a clue right now, but that's OK - it's a work in progress. The plan is to have a plan at some point in the future. Maybe. We're not sure yet. It's a work in progress. Hesse is spot-on with what he says here. A shambles. Total shambles.

From: Jon Tarrey 13 September 2016 08:23 AM

I doubt Osborne really gives much of a damn. He doesn't strike me as a caring, compassionate type. He doesn't strike me as someone with much of a conscience or an idea about anything, really. Is he back on the backbenches or has he already sloped off to some cushy job in the city? Maybe he's too busy licking his wounds over his political career tumbling into oblivion quicker than an F1 car hurtling around the track!

From: Jon Tarrey 12 September 2016 10:40 AM

Are they? They've kept that quiet. I know the prime market, particularly in London, has taken a battering in recent months - worsened by the build-up and aftermath of Brexit - but I didn't realise they were in quite such dire straits. I suppose, though, property selling is only one branch of their operations these days, so how much impact all this has on their overall profits is less clear.

From: Jon Tarrey 12 September 2016 10:36 AM

Will this never-ending tax saga ever be over?

From: Jon Tarrey 12 September 2016 09:47 AM

Everything that is wrong with the UK property industry, right there.

From: Jon Tarrey 12 September 2016 09:46 AM

"but will again be on More 4, Home, 4oD and two additional channels. Drama and Yesterday" The channels that everyone watches, then? Think I might have fell upon one of these adverts at some point. They were unbearably naff and cheesy, which means they were probably doing their job very well. Why do all property adverts have to be so cheesy? Is it an unwritten rule?

From: Jon Tarrey 01 September 2016 16:29 PM

Could I point out that we haven't actually left yet. Come back to me when Article 50 has been triggered, if it ever actually is. We still have no clue when we'll be leaving, what the new relationship will look like or what deals we will be able to make. It's all still very up-in-the-air. All seems like a load of faff over nothing, given very little will actually change after Brexit. What a waste of time, money, effort and column inches. If I never have to hear the words Brexit and Farage again, I'll die a happy man.

From: Jon Tarrey 01 September 2016 16:27 PM

Does anyone think Help to Buy has been a success? Anyone?

From: Jon Tarrey 01 September 2016 16:23 PM

Oh dear! The government will soon be back-tracking desperately on this, probably finding some way of blaming Labour or Corbyn for their incompetence. I think most of us knew, like all their other gimmicky schemes, that the Help to Buy ISA was a con. How many people has it actually helped to buy? Very, very few. Next, please. A scheme that actually encourages genuinely affordable housing for first-time buyers would be nice. I won't hold my breath.

From: Jon Tarrey 24 August 2016 11:55 AM

Never. I don't believe it. A flagship government policy, from a government whose record on housebuilding has been routinely awful, turning out to be a dud. Must be some kind of mistake, m'lud.

From: Jon Tarrey 22 August 2016 12:15 PM

But...but...I thought Brexit would have no effect on anything? That's what I kept being promised. We haven't even properly left yet and people are already cancelling house moves, what will it be like when Article 50 is finally triggered (if it ever is)?

From: Jon Tarrey 09 August 2016 13:57 PM

It wasn't really, though, was it? It was a shameless vote-winner with no long-term goal. By selling off the council houses, and not replacing them adequately, Right to Buy helped to set in motion the total car crash of a housing industry that we have today. Low levels of council/social housing, a lack of affordable homes, a PRS that is bursting at the seams, high rents, high house prices and buy-to-let landlords hoovering up the stock. How many of those council homes bought under Right to Buy have ended up in the hands of greedy buy-to-let owners who then charge a fortune in rent? It's absurd. No, it's beyond absurd. Right to Buy was a disaster, an absolute disaster. A few people might have benefited from it, but a lot were left worse off because of it. That doesn't sound like a success to me. It should have been scrapped years ago, rather than being expanded or extended. It's not going to help ease the housing crisis, is it? It's only going to make things worse. Scotland and Wales have seen sense, can England now do the same? May, as expected, hasn't lived up to her promise to be the government "for the many not the few", but actually taking some decisive action on housing would be a start. If the shocking figures about home ownership coming out in recent days aren't enough to spur the government into action, nothing will be. I can't even remember the new Housing Minister's name - oh, that's right, Gavin Barwell - but the fact he has so little sway, power or influence means housing will be kept on the backburner again as billions is wasted on things like HS2, Hinckley Point, Trident renewal and poxy Garden Bridges. Post-industrial towns and communities will continue to be left behind, the North will continue to be neglected in favour of London and the South East, house prices and rents will continue to rise beyond all reason, and the reframing of affordable homes to mean £400,000 or more will continue apace. There's plenty of talk about the housing crisis and what must be done, but very little action. That cross-party HoL report the other day made some decent recommendations - could these now be enacted?

From: Jon Tarrey 09 August 2016 13:55 PM

"London house prices rose by 251 and 209 per cent respectively during Thatcher’s and Blair’s time at Number 10" That's not a good thing or something to be proud of, that's absurd. Thatcher, Blair and Cameron all failed to bring house prices under control and all failed to deal with the housing crisis. May won't be any different. Prices might dip a bit because of Brexit, but it still won't make it any easier for first-time buyers to buy if there aren't enough new homes. The government has talked plenty about new homes and affordable housing, but they have failed to back it up. May has talked plenty in speeches about the need for more affordable homes, but I don't have much faith in this government improving on their appalling record thus far when it comes to housebuilding. If some actual homes were built, if empty homes were brought back into use, if brownfield sites were used for affordable - actually affordable! - housing schemes, then we might start to actually solve the problem that goes right back to Thatcher and her disastrous Right to Buy initiative (something the Tories are still trying to flog). Maybe if the Housing Minister had a position in Cabinet some action could actually be taken, but I'm guessing Mrs May has more pressing concerns at this minute.

From: Jon Tarrey 26 July 2016 09:59 AM

What to make of all this, though? Is Joby Russell - I don't think I've ever heard that name before! - getting out early because he knows something we don't or is there some other reason for this sudden pull out?

From: Jon Tarrey 26 July 2016 09:53 AM

Maybe Sir Philip Green or Mike Ashley could swoop in to save the day, ploughing in investment and making PB as successful as BHS and Sports Direct. What could possibly go wrong!?

From: Jon Tarrey 26 July 2016 09:50 AM

Shouldn't even be up for discussion. It's a ridiculous and short-sighted idea, purely there to make more money for already rich people. The Land Registry is doing just fine as it is, leave it well alone.

From: Jon Tarrey 20 July 2016 09:04 AM

Never! I was being promised that a Brexit would absolutely, completely and certainly make it easier for first-time buyers to get onto the property ladder. I've been duped! Apologies for my heavy sarcasm this early in the morning. Must be the heat.

From: Jon Tarrey 20 July 2016 08:58 AM

Another housing minister, another who will do diddly squat to reverse the housing crisis. Until housing is given a Cabinet position and the issues facing the property industry are taken seriously and addressed, nothing will change. It says it all that May took so long to appoint a housing minister and has given it the same level of importance as the Notting Hill set that went before her. I think I saw Brandon Lewis on the news more in these last few weeks, as a prominent and vocal backer of May, than I ever did in the two or so years he's been housing minister. What are the new government's plans for housing? The PRS? Build to Rent? Help to Buy? Right to Buy? Does anyone know? Is the target still one million new homes by 2020? What is May's definition of affordable?

From: Jon Tarrey 18 July 2016 08:53 AM

It's bound to happen. Just a matter of when, not if. Although I was saying that yesterday, so what do I know? (Pipe down at the back!) Perhaps, given how long it's been set at historic lows of 0.5%, they've forgotten what it feels like to actually raise or lower the interest rates and are just happy to keep it the same as it is. Not really sure what the point of the meetings of the Monetary Policy Committee has been in the last 8 years, because we always get the same result.

From: Jon Tarrey 15 July 2016 11:26 AM

Hand meet face! As Home Simpson would say: "D'oh!"

From: Jon Tarrey 15 July 2016 11:24 AM

Seems like everyone wants to be Irish these days - Irish passports, Irish houses, the favourite second team of most football fans. Given the mess that is currently being made of the country, I can't say I blame people. But don't worry, Boris Johnson is foreign secretary. Everything's gonna be absolutely fine. Honest.

From: Jon Tarrey 14 July 2016 11:49 AM

It's inevitable, surely?

From: Jon Tarrey 14 July 2016 11:48 AM

Fair enough. At least you put across your reasons why the above is tosh, rather than the usual anti-online dross.

From: Jon Tarrey 04 July 2016 16:43 PM

Anyone care to dispute what's been said? Lots of rants about it being a load of rubbish and regurgitated PR trash, but would it not be better to actually engage with what's been said before venting?

From: Jon Tarrey 04 July 2016 16:43 PM

Do estate agents provide accurate and meaningful property valuations? Not always.

From: Jon Tarrey 07 June 2016 16:15 PM

I didn't think this would get a favourable response - and I was right. Am I allowed to say that Simon Barker might just have a point? Estate agents need Rightmove and Zoopla far more than Rightmove and Zoopla need estate agents. That might be a controversial viewpoint to take, but it's true. Sellers want their properties to be listed on the major portals. Buyers search for properties on the portals. Landlords advertise their properties on the portals. Tenants turn to the portals to browse for rental properties. No amount of shouting from agents about how useless and expensive RM and Zoopla are will change that simple fact.

From: Jon Tarrey 07 June 2016 16:15 PM

Online, in some shape or form, will be the way forward. That's just the way the world is going. Look at Savills, look at Countrywide, look at Foxtons - all diversifying their business to include an online arm, or at the very least moving further and further into hybrid territory. There seems to be lots of debate about the success or otherwise of Purplebricks, Tepilo, eMoov and HouseSimple, but online agents aren't going away anytime soon. We can argue until the cows come home about the online model, but there is a place for it. People do use them. They wouldn't still be around if that wasn't the case. Look at some of the most successful companies in recent years - Rightmove, Uber, Airbnb, Match.com, Just Eat, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Amazon. What do they all have in common?

From: Jon Tarrey 06 June 2016 16:24 PM

Ah, we haven't seen much of Foxtons in the news recently. Glad to see they're still annoying local residents and fighting opposition to the continued expansion of their branches. Peckham, you don't know how lucky you are! Does show how far Peckham has now come, though, doesn't it? No longer the grimy, dangerous, no-go area made famous by Only Fools & Horses - it's now uber-trendy, a hipsters' paradise. So, we've now had Shoreditch, Brixton, Peckham, Dalston and Hackney - where next for the juggernaut that is gentrification?

From: Jon Tarrey 06 June 2016 16:19 PM

Interesting. A different challenge for estate agents, I suppose.

From: Jon Tarrey 02 June 2016 10:04 AM

I'll believe that when I see it. This government's record on housebuilding has been appalling, no reason to think that will change over the next four years. Especially with an incredibly divided party no matter what the result of the EU referendum. That report the other day showed that the government are once again failing to hit their targets when it comes to housebuilding. That won't change while this bunch of incompetents is in charge.

From: Jon Tarrey 02 June 2016 10:03 AM

Hmm, I think most sellers would expect their properties to be advertised on Rightmove and Zoopla these days. Don't you? Given how many property searches now start online, portals can't be ignored. They should be embraced, not blamed for everything. Yes, they have flaws - and RM's fees are too high - but this idea that they are the big bad wolf, eating up all the angelic little agents, is pretty hard to stomach.

From: Jon Tarrey 10 May 2016 16:45 PM

What you say is purely anecdotal and entirely based on your own experiences. Why do you presume that everyone else is as happy with OTM's performance? Clearly, given the recent stories we've been seeing, many aren't. Do they not deserve a voice too? You've obviously done well from ditching Zoopla and joining OTM. Many others haven't. In the balance of fairness, that needs to be reported.

From: Jon Tarrey 10 May 2016 16:43 PM

Hold a referendum, don't like the result, use the courts to change the result. Sounds fair. The residents of St Ives are absolutely right on this and the result should stand. There is an argument that Cornwall relies heavily on tourism to keep the local economy afloat - and there is plenty of truth to that - but that doesn't mean properties should be hoovered up by second-home owners in London who only use the property for 4 weeks a year. The people who live there need homes, too. We're seeing a similar issue in London. The people who live and work in the city can't afford to live there, with the gilded elite buying up all the new "affordable" luxury properties. That's the free market for you, folks.

From: Jon Tarrey 10 May 2016 16:41 PM

Good on them! Would do the tarnished Foxtons brand the power of good as well.

From: Jon Tarrey 10 May 2016 16:38 PM

Who's Corbin? If you think Corbyn isn't progressive, then I'm afraid you've bought the far left lie hook, line and sinker. Corbyn is much more likely to stand up for small businesses and the squeezed middle than this current Tory government (who are, as you say, in the pockets of big business, major corporations and the Murdoch-owned media). On Osborne, you're absolutely right. A political chancer, who has no warmth, charisma or empathy, who has overplayed his hand one time too many in recent months. But his unwise words shouldn't be a reason to leave in the same way that Bojo's flustered appearance at the select committee shouldn't be the sole reason to remain. This debate isn't being made too much about personalities, with the real issues at hand once again being ignored. Quelle surprise.

From: Jon Tarrey 09 May 2016 13:01 PM

The In side are indulging in a bit too much Project Fear. There are plenty of good reasons to staying in the EU - which can be put forward in a coherent and lucid way - but they seem keener on scaremongering over everything. On the other hand, the Out side only really have Project Fantasy to fall back on. Coming out of the EU single market and then expecting extremely favourable trade deals? Really, Gove, what are you thinking? The likes of Cameron and Osborne are toxic for the In side, but Gove, Johnson and Farage are the same for the Out side. The referendum debate has turned into everything we all knew it would - a bitter, petty squabble between the two factions of the Tory party, lots of lies, half-truths and fearmongering from both sides, and very little analysis of the pros and cons of staying or exiting. It has become all about emotion and gut reaction, which isn't what we want.

From: Jon Tarrey 09 May 2016 12:57 PM

They were probably thinking they could get away with it - most people involved in collusion of this kind do. Obviously we have no way of knowing the veracity of the leaked emails, but if they are genuine those above are pretty much banged to rights. Whether any action is taken against them is another matter altogether.

From: Jon Tarrey 29 April 2016 10:54 AM

And, like with the Panama Papers scandal, I'm sure the above people will get reprimanded in the appropriate way. Oh, wait...

From: Jon Tarrey 29 April 2016 10:53 AM

That's the crux of the issue. There is no money in stocks & shares or other investments anymore, the money is all to be made in property.

From: Jon Tarrey 25 April 2016 15:08 PM

That would be far too forward-thinking, Roger. The developers just want to make as much money as possible, they have no interest in the domestic market or producing affordable home. They're just chasing the Yankee dollar, as David Brent might say.

From: Jon Tarrey 25 April 2016 15:05 PM

I'm assuming the flats in Battersea Power station will be affordable, right? That's what the government keep banging on about, affordable housing for all. Very little evidence of that so far. Battersea Power station would have been a real chance to produce genuinely affordable flats and apartments for people who live and work in the city. Instead, they'll be sold off to super-rich investors and playboys with more money than sense. They're holding back the apartments until they rise in value again. Milk as much as they possibly can from them. That's all there is to it.

From: Jon Tarrey 25 April 2016 15:03 PM

Interesting question. Maybe someone from Zoopla or PSG could tell us more? Until then we can wildly speculate to our heart's content!

From: Jon Tarrey 19 April 2016 13:11 PM

*there. My errant grammar can be corrected, not so sure about the current housing crisis!

From: Jon Tarrey 19 April 2016 13:10 PM

Absurd. Ridiculous. Unnecessary. And many other words beside. Will anything be done about it? You can bet your bottom dollar that their won't be!

From: Jon Tarrey 19 April 2016 13:09 PM

I'm not sure they care too much about adverse publicity at this stage. They seem to be on their last legs as it is and want to make as much of a song and dance about everything as they can before they die out completely. Could be wrong, but these disputes could be the beginning of the end for OTM.

From: Jon Tarrey 19 April 2016 13:07 PM

This is going to run and run, isn't it? And I can confidently predict that the end result won't be pretty!

From: Jon Tarrey 18 April 2016 11:57 AM

Care to elaborate?

From: Jon Tarrey 18 April 2016 11:56 AM

Breathtaking ignorance, Rich. If you think young people have it easy, I suggest you come and have a talk with my nephew and niece. Or the children of friends of mine. They certainly aren't going on 2 holidays a year. Many of them have to scrape by every month because their wages are so rubbish and the rents they pay so high. With most of the jobs concentrated around London, young people who live elsewhere have to move to the capital, pay extortionate rents and then have no hope in hell of saving enough money for a massive deposit because most of their income is going straight back out again. Have you not seen the news about how much deposits are these days, Rich? Have you not seen how high house prices currently are? If you think buying a home in this day and age is simple and straightforward, you need to take a long, hard look at yourself. It's far from easy. Competition is fierce, stumbling blocks many and varied and the associated costs of buying a home - conveyancing, surveys, solicitor fees - incredibly high. You need a small fortune - or very rich parents - to get on the property ladder these days. Failing that, you'll need a big helping hand from the Bank of Mum and Dad or a hefty inheritance. It shouldn't be this way. You and I both remember when it was possible to get a home on a fairly modest wage. Then Thatcher came along - a hero to you, I imagine - sold off all the social/council housing and never replaced it. Subsequent governments have had a similarly appalling record on housing, including this current mob (who have been the worst of the lot), and we now have a situation where the average price of a home in the UK is over £250,000. Where the average price of a home in London is over £500,000. What's that if it's not absurd? Young people are probably buying iPhones, new cars and bigger tellies because they've given up hope of ever owning their own home. It takes a long old time to save up £20,000 for a deposit (at least), especially if you're not part of a couple. Not every young person is rolling around in money on £60k a year. Very, very few are. I thought a man of the world like yourself might know that. The solution, of course, is simple. Regulate rents, end Buy to Leave, bring all empty properties back into use, build thousands of new homes - genuinely affordable ones at that - and stop gimmicky nonsense like Help to Buy, Lifetime ISAs and shared ownership, which do nothing to solve the issue. The current situation, where house prices are rising ten times faster than wages - with rents not far behind - is not sustainable in the long run. You can blame young people all you want, Rich, but you need to be targeting your ire towards the government instead. Young people didn't cause this housing crisis, but they are the ones who are having to stay at home until their early forties because of it!

From: Jon Tarrey 18 April 2016 11:56 AM

I don't think this is going to be very popular news in the landlord community!

From: Jon Tarrey 29 March 2016 12:00 PM

Never. I don't believe it. The government told me otherwise. They insist RTB is a brilliant idea because all stock sold off is replaced. Now you're telling me that isn't true. What is the world coming to? Sarcasm aside, I think we all saw this coming from a mile off, didn't we? Right to Buy is a flawed scheme. It was in Thatcher's day, it still is now. It's one of the main reasons why we have such a shortage of council homes now - they all got sold off, ended up in the hands of rich private investors, and have never been replaced since. Quelle surprise.

From: Jon Tarrey 29 March 2016 08:55 AM

Typically sneaky move from a very sneaky government. They'd try and privatise their own parents if they thought they could get away with it! The Land Registry is doing just fine as it is, let it be! I'm sure, like with the "consultation" on the additional stamp duty surcharge, that all opinions put forward will be routinely dismissed.

From: Jon Tarrey 29 March 2016 08:51 AM

Hmm, Starter Homes and Help to Buy - two gimmicks that do nothing to address the problem. There is a reason why home ownership is dwindling while the PRS is put under increasing pressure. It's a deliberate ploy by the government to not build enough houses - that way they can keep house prices artificially high, the only thing that is propping up our incredibly fragile economy. The housing market goes pop and everything tumbles like a deck of cards, just as it did in the US in 2008. The endless price rises and increasing bloating of the PRS is not sustainable in the long-run. The PRS already can't cope with record demand, the stamp duty changes are only going to make that worse. Social housing under this government is a joke and you need a small fortune (or very rich parents) to help you to buy a place. All in all, a pretty depressing state of affairs.

From: Jon Tarrey 14 March 2016 14:29 PM

Get rid of them all, I say! Total eyesore.

From: Jon Tarrey 14 March 2016 14:14 PM

How do you know there won't be an economic downside? We saw yesterday the effect the uncertainty is having on sterling. Truth is, you don't know how it will work out. It might be better, it might be much worse. Do you really think, during those two years of negotiating us out of the EU, that the economy won't suffer or that investors won't be put off. Our economy isn't exactly rock-solid as it is - propped up by high house prices, shedloads of debt and the services industry. A Brexit will only make that worst. It's obvious that trading will be easier from within the EU. Look at Norway and Switzerland - they still have to adhere to EU regulations and pay to do deals with the rest of Europe. I haven't seen any concrete reasons from the out side of how Britain is going to be better off outside the EU. Scotland will go, Wales probably won't be far behind, and then what? Oh yeah, self determination, the chance to govern ourselves, the chance to control our borders - all things we already have. Whenever the government tries to push a new law through, I don't see the EU stepping in to say "hang on a minute, old chaps, you can't do that." So where are all these powers that the EU has over us?

From: Jon Tarrey 23 February 2016 15:38 PM

Eight wins in a row? Hmm. Probably can't deny they are somewhat of a superbrand, given their size, their distinctive branding and the amount of staff they employ. But whether they are a superbrand for the right reasons - or just there to help the very well-off - is another argument altogether. I know the services Savills offer are diverse, but they are first and foremost a high-end agency for the super-rich.

From: Jon Tarrey 23 February 2016 09:17 AM

And he'd be right.

From: Jon Tarrey 23 February 2016 09:15 AM

Excellent points. The Brits living and working in the EU seem to have been largely ignored in this whole debate. Do they not matter too? As you say, it's a major issue that needs some more consideration. But I fear that any reasoned or intelligent debate surrounding the EU will be drowned out by fear, hysteria, hyperbole and half-truths.

From: Jon Tarrey 22 February 2016 14:21 PM

Could, should, might, may, may not - truth is, no-one really knows for sure. It's a leap in the dark. One thing is for sure, an out vote would cause a lot of uncertainty and issues in the housing market, that's just inevitable. Look at what happens before a general election - that, but ten times worse! The Brexiters don't seem to have a plan, they just seem certain that the UK will be so much better off outside of Europe, where we can set our own rules and makes our own laws and not be ruled by corporate suits from Brussels (we can be ruled by the Westminster suits instead!) This makes no sense to me, though. This government has implemented, or attempted to implement, plenty since last May. I didn't see the EU getting in the way there. The EU is an easy, simple and lazy scapegoat. Want someone to blame? Blame the EU. See also benefit cheats. The out campaign might have picked up a few big-hitters in recent days, but are they the sort of big-hitters you can really trust? Duncan-Smith, Gove, Grayling and BoJo, with Farage and Galloway also in tow. There's 6 reasons to remain in already!

From: Jon Tarrey 22 February 2016 14:19 PM

I think it would be more of a news story if Countrywide went a week without hiring someone! It's hard to keep up with who's who and who's no longer in a position and which ex Tesco or BBC or CompareTheMarket executive has joined the Countrywide bandwagon. Too much for my poor old brain to process.

From: Jon Tarrey 18 February 2016 09:20 AM

From: Jon Tarrey 18 February 2016 09:18 AM

From: Jon Tarrey 16 February 2016 16:35 PM

Nincompoops, brilliant. Perfectly sums up Cameron, Osborne, Hunt et al. Yes, this does seem like a case of guilty before being proven innocent. I think the agency jumped the gun far too soon on this. Their reaction was understandable - they wanted to protect their reputation and the inevitable bad PR that would come their way if they kept him on and it turned out he was guilty - but they don't out of this looking too great. Sad and sorry state of affairs all round. Hope the agent gets his life back on track after this.

From: Jon Tarrey 16 February 2016 16:34 PM

Oh dear, Richard. Don't give up the day job, will you?

From: Jon Tarrey 16 February 2016 16:29 PM

OTM has outspent RM? If that is the case, and I have no reason to disbelieve you, then that really is shocking. In what sense have they outspent them? On PR? On advertising? I don't think anyone actually believed that OTM could be a genuine competitor to RM, other than maybe Springett. I think they had more realistic ambitions to challenge Zoopla, but that's rather gone down the pan as well.

From: Jon Tarrey 04 February 2016 15:15 PM

Judging by the comments here, I don't think this policy would play very well. Which means, of course, that it will definitely be introduced.

From: Jon Tarrey 04 February 2016 13:02 PM

Ridiculous situation. Something needs to change. But I doubt it will. Not when we continue to roll out the red carpet to super-rich investors and the Buy-to-Leave brigade. Makes a mockery of the government's "affordable" homes drive, but then we all knew that was a load of old tosh, didn't we?

From: Jon Tarrey 04 February 2016 13:00 PM

I look forward to this with great anticipation!

From: Jon Tarrey 04 February 2016 08:58 AM

Yep. A pretty depressing state of affairs all round, which means the rather more upbeat song you've chosen doesn't really seem that appropriate!

From: Jon Tarrey 02 February 2016 10:35 AM

Obscenely rich people buying obscenely expensive properties via an obscenely high-end and exclusive estate agent - what's not to love? "while the Caribbean, specifically Barbados and the Cayman Islands" I'm sure the fact that both these places are massive offshore tax havens has nothing to do with it. Oh no, no, no. All this must be a joke, isn't it? We've reached a new nadir!

From: Jon Tarrey 02 February 2016 10:33 AM

Good on you, Rob. Seems like people are going to need all the help they can get, with no-one quite sure what the new measures will actually mean. I'm not sure Osborne really knows what he's doing - just making it up on the hoof, as usual. Whatever happens, I'm sure he'll declare it another "major success". I still think he's taking a major risk by annoying so many of his potential voters with this buy-to-let tax. His desperate play for the first-time buyer vote - which, if they had any sense, should be dismissed out of hand - has risked alienating another core of voters.

From: Jon Tarrey 01 February 2016 11:32 AM

Cinematic? Yes. Stylish? You could make a case for it. Cheesy as hell? Yes, sir! It might look very slick, but it still falls for the same trap that nearly all property adverts do - that of being completely, irredeemably naff!

From: Jon Tarrey 01 February 2016 11:23 AM

Bit harsh. EAT is a news website. OTM, whatever you think of them, are big news. It also happens to be their first anniversary, which means they are bound to be taking up more column inches than usual. You're right that there could be something much deeper here, but there also might not be. It might simply be it's too expensive. Not many people can afford £1m houses, can they? From what I've read the prime property market in the South West isn't exactly very popular, with people critical of second home buyers and too much outside investment. Holiday homes are all well and good, but local people need homes too. If those homes are becoming overpriced because of second-home owners, then this is something the government need to have a look at. There we go, maybe there is a story in that. I thought it was quite a light-hearted story for a Friday, but what do I know?

From: Jon Tarrey 29 January 2016 11:23 AM

I think Mr Quirk, like many of our politicians, has selective memory. He's probably completely blanked out everything he said 12 months ago and wouldn't remember even if pushed on it!

From: Jon Tarrey 26 January 2016 09:30 AM

*The fact they're shelling members like I'm shelling hair would suggest that it is a flawed concept, wouldn't it?

From: Jon Tarrey 26 January 2016 09:27 AM

"all they need to do is to win the hearts and minds of members." They've had a year to do this, haven't they? The fact they're shelling members like I'm shelling hair would suggest that it is a flawed concept, isn't it? You talk about online agents struggling to convince the public that they are the future. Well, maybe if OTM had embraced the online model as a viable alternative they'd have put up more of a fight than they have. They've not disappeared, they're still here, but I don't think you can call this first year a success. They've made RM stronger and, after putting Zoopla on the ropes for a bit, they've made the main challenger portal stronger too. They set out to break up the duopoly but they've only succeeded in making it stronger, as far as I can see.

From: Jon Tarrey 26 January 2016 09:25 AM

"A year ago the future of Zoopla was uncertain with the launch of OnTheMarket, but last week ZPG announced the return of several agencies from the challenger portal." There was definitely a post-launch bounce in support for OTM, but I don't think Zoopla were ever really in mortal danger. Talk of their demise was grossly over-exaggerated. The fact that they have bounced back to knock OTM's challenge out of the water shows they had plenty of credit in the bank. They were one of the Big Two and still are. It was always going to take a lot to change that. OTM tried and failed. If they'd been a bit more open and inclusive, they'd be in a much stronger position than they are now.

From: Jon Tarrey 26 January 2016 09:22 AM

So the crux of it is that smaller landlords are being screwed over while the large corporate landlords are raking it in? Makes sense. The government likes getting into bed with money and big business, they're not so concerned about smaller businesses or investors who won't be hoarding their money in offshore accounts in the Cayman Islands. I think the issue is one of perception. Buy-to-let landlords are perceived by the public as greedy so and sos hoovering up all the spare stock and then charging extortionate rent to the tenants they get to live in these properties. Whether this is unfair or not is irrelevant, that is the perception. People also think buy-to-letters have an easy ride of it - the perception being that it's much easier for buy-to-letters to expand their portfolios than it is for first-time buyers to get on the ladder. I don't necessarily think that the public at large would have much sympathy with this campaign against Osborne and the extra stamp duty because of how landlords are now perceived. They are seen as the enemy; they are all seen as greedy, land-grabbing, unscrupulous crooks happy to provide sub-standard accommodation for sky-high rents. This perception needs to be challenged and altered if public sympathy is to turn. I don't think first-time buyers should fall for Osborne's spin, either. He's had five years to make housing more affordable and it hasn't happened yet. They're good at bringing out gimmicky schemes, to give the impression that they are actively solving the housing crisis, but when it comes to the building of new, genuinely affordable homes they continue to be left wanting. See also Buy to Leave and the nonsense that is Right to Buy for other areas in which the government are failing on housing.

From: Jon Tarrey 25 January 2016 09:31 AM

Did anybody really expect any different? If you asked him what year he was born he'd find some way of skirting around the question! Cameron and Osborne don't seem to care much for the hand that supposedly feeds them. I'm sure many buy-to-letter voted Conservative at the last election, believing their property interests would be much safer under a Tory government. How wrong they were. I can see why they're so angry - buy-to-letters have definitely been deliberately targeted by the government, because the government know public opinion is turning against landlords and investors. People see them as greedy and selfish. But Cameron and Osborne are taking a calculated risk. By making a play for first-time buyers - a demographic they've previously shown no interest in whatsoever - they risk alienating a core part of their support. It's a brave move, and one that could turn out to be very foolish.

From: Jon Tarrey 25 January 2016 09:20 AM

Dropping like flies. Who will be next?

From: Jon Tarrey 18 January 2016 14:57 PM

Yep, nice bit of smoke and mirrors from Springett there. He must be taking lessons from our government. Dropping from £300 a month to just £50 a month suggests desperation rather than the sign of a thriving business, doesn't it?

From: Jon Tarrey 18 January 2016 14:56 PM

Self-promotion and hype can take you a long way. More's the pity.

From: Jon Tarrey 18 January 2016 14:54 PM

Never a truer phrase spoken. Just look at Manchester United over the past few years. (I know, I know, they won yesterday, but they were still absolutely dire). It's when you start looking back on past performances and congratulating yourself that complacency and the rot sets in.

From: Jon Tarrey 18 January 2016 14:53 PM

Yes, but are they any less naff? Can't say I've ever seen a Hunters ad - or a Your Move one for that matter - but I don't have much faith in them being any less cheesy than the ads pumped out by Purplebricks and easyProp.

From: Jon Tarrey 12 January 2016 10:58 AM

All thanks to OTM? :)

From: Jon Tarrey 08 January 2016 10:14 AM

Can't say I'm surprised.

From: Jon Tarrey 08 January 2016 10:14 AM

Does seem like a very strange, very risky move.

From: Jon Tarrey 05 January 2016 10:51 AM

Hmmm, earn a living from renting property? Some people might say that a home is somewhere to be lived in, not something to be used for investment. Works pretty well in the rest of Europe. I don't trust this government as far as I can throw them, but on this I don't entirely disagree with the Chancellor (never thought I'd utter those words! I think I need a lie down). Of course, the housing crisis isn't the fault of the buy-to-letters, but it isn't going to be solved by making this form of investment even more popular. People find it difficult enough to buy as it is. I have zero faith in the government's housebuilding promises or all these supposed affordable housing schemes - upwards of £300,000 is affordable nowadays, is it? - but I also think the buy-to-let brigade get a little bit too defensive when it comes to any interference in a market that barely existed even a decade ago!

From: Jon Tarrey 05 January 2016 10:48 AM

Sold or let any houses yet, easyProperty? That's what we really want to know, not these endless expansions or branch outs into areas where they seem to have no expertise.

From: Jon Tarrey 04 January 2016 10:14 AM

If what you say is true, smells very strongly of desperation. Quite sad, really, because AM/OTM's good intentions seem to have got lost along the way thanks to vested interests and big egos.

From: Jon Tarrey 04 January 2016 10:12 AM

Wishful thinking from Mr Flint methinks!

From: Jon Tarrey 04 January 2016 10:10 AM

And I wonder why that is Kelly? It's almost like the government have a vested interest in keeping prices high by restricting supply. You know, because the economy would be in serious trouble if our house prices returned to something approaching normality!

From: Jon Tarrey 22 December 2015 10:11 AM

Say what you mean, Ray. Crikey!

From: Jon Tarrey 22 December 2015 10:10 AM

Gordon, how's life outside politics serving you? Wouldn't have thought a career in estate agency would have been for you, but each to their own. Anyway, jesting aside, I agree with your point. I don't think pushing things back to 6pm will actually help, it will just mean things will be done slower because they have more time. As you say, it's human nature. If there are deadlines, people work harder to get things done. If they have more time, they tend to procrastinate a little bit more and leave it to the last minute.

From: Jon Tarrey 22 December 2015 10:09 AM

Indeed. It is most impressive. Does smack a bit of "ooh, look at me", but if you've got stuff to shout about, shout out about it. Sadly, Zoopla and OTM do that regardless of whether they've got something to shout out about!

From: Jon Tarrey 21 December 2015 11:15 AM

Does she prefer browsing on Rightmove to talking to you? :)

From: Jon Tarrey 21 December 2015 11:14 AM

Joy of joys. As if house prices weren't expensive enough already, now they're going to get even more expensive. Pop open the champagne, let's have a party!

From: Jon Tarrey 17 December 2015 09:38 AM

He speaks a lot of sense. Can't disagree with too much of what he's said there.

From: Jon Tarrey 17 December 2015 09:34 AM

"The campaign is called Knowing More" If they don't manage to crowbar the music of Abba or a reference to Alan Partridge in, I think they've missed a trick.

From: Jon Tarrey 15 December 2015 12:03 PM

Property adverts are uniformly awful, so I doubt Zoopla's latest batch will be any different. As long as they stick to the tried and tested formula of cheesiness, bad acting and naff music they'll be alright!

From: Jon Tarrey 15 December 2015 11:59 AM

This government isn't Conservative enough? Really? Incompetent, yes. Out of their depth, yes. Out of touch, yes. Poor-bashing, yes. But it's one of the most Conservative, right-wing governments we've had in years. They're determined to shrink the state and sell off absolutely everything, while making the rich richer. Anyway, political rant over. I agree with you about Alan Sugar, Cowell and Clooney, by the way :)

From: Jon Tarrey 14 December 2015 17:04 PM

Don't have much time for Savills (it's what they stand for more than anything - i.e. gross wealth and high-end clients only, the rest of the market can do one) but I can't disagree too much with this analysis. If a crash does come, Savills are in a much better position to deal with it than, say, Knight Frank or Foxtons because of their other interests.

From: Jon Tarrey 14 December 2015 09:20 AM

Haha! Excellent stuff. That's given me a nice big laugh first thing on a Monday morning. Oh wait, they're not joking. Please tell me this is satire on Ellice's part. Please.

From: Jon Tarrey 14 December 2015 09:15 AM

If you believe they will build 400,000 new homes by 2020 you'll believe anything. Clue: it ain't gonna happen.

From: Jon Tarrey 09 December 2015 14:40 PM

Never let a thing like facts get in the way of an agenda, Christian. That seems to be the mantra from many these days, at any rate.

From: Jon Tarrey 09 December 2015 09:57 AM

Spot on, Trevor. Happens every year. Still, I agree with Alex's point that the supply shortage is not being addressed by the government's various gimmicky schemes. As he rightly says, it's just window dressing on their part. And very bad window dressing at that.

From: Jon Tarrey 09 December 2015 09:55 AM

These examples are flawed in some way :)

From: Jon Tarrey 09 December 2015 09:50 AM

"Meanwhile Sky News is reporting that easyProperty is to raise nearly £15m from a major City investor in a deal that will take the company's value through the £100m milestone." Another big money investor, more funds being ploughed in, still no tangible success or results. The company might be valued at £100m, but that ain't much good if they don't sell or let any homes (which, it would appear, seems to be easyProperty's strategy). Investors with deep pockets will only keep you going for so long, but I think easyProperty should just come out and say they've failed to properly understand the market, the "easy" brand is not a good fit for property and that they underestimated just how hard it would be to establish themselves. I'd respect easyProp, and Rob Ellice, far more if they came out and said that. As it is, they just seem to move from one PR campaign to another. A fake funeral mocking traditional estate agents, talk of expansion overseas, talk of entering the auction market, sourcing more investment from a major City investor with more money than sense, what will be next for the online estate agent that doesn't ever actually seem to live up to that name? As you'd expect, they are very good at getting their name out there - eMoov, too, excel at self-promotion - but no so good at producing actual results.

From: Jon Tarrey 08 December 2015 10:35 AM

You don't say. Shared ownership is another shameless gimmick, just like Help to Buy and Right to Buy and these 400,000 affordable starter homes that are going to appear out of thin air at some point in the near future. Shared ownership is just another way of keeping house prices high while giving young people the illusion that they are somehow forcing themselves onto the ladder. It's a nonsense, like much of what this government says on housing. There was an article on the BBC the other day about the number of empty homes in the UK. It's an absolute disgrace. Bring as many of these back into use as possible and you go some way to improving the supply situation. Eradicate buy to leave, sort out brownfield sites and get a handle on buy-to-let and dodgy landlords and the situation will start to look a lot better.

From: Jon Tarrey 08 December 2015 10:27 AM

So you're calling for even higher fees? That will make estate agents even more unpopular than they currently are. As Trevor points out, it's the collaboration (not the competition) that is key across the pond. I do find that estate agents are a delicate, defensive bunch. Any criticism against them - whether it be fees that are too high or the old "not a real profession line" - is batted away furiously.

From: Jon Tarrey 08 December 2015 10:23 AM

Interesting perspective. Thanks.

From: Jon Tarrey 07 December 2015 11:47 AM

Yes, the market does seem rather crowded with so many of these apps. But if it's of use to someone, especially young people, then like you say it could find its own little niche.

From: Jon Tarrey 07 December 2015 10:49 AM

Agree about the name being absolutely awful, but I don't think it's a bad idea at all. Rough around the edges, but certainly brave and innovative. I also agree with Trevor's point that consumer safety must come first, and that this sort of thing might be quite hard to police, but I don't think it should be completely dismissed on those grounds. It's an interesting idea, it just needs to be refined a tad.

From: Jon Tarrey 07 December 2015 10:47 AM

"Many of the current ministerial line-up are proud followers of Thatcherite traditions and central to Margaret Thatcher’s thinking was that home ownership should be within the grasp of all." Oh please. Your fawning over Mrs T (urgh!) means your judgement has been clouded. Thatcher introduced Right to Buy, which is one of the main reasons why home ownership is now such a distant pipe dream for so many. She sold off thousands of council homes and never replaced them. Her disastrous Right to Buy policy is one of the reasons why we have a housing crisis at the moment. Thatcherite polices didn't promote home ownership for all, they destroyed it.

From: Jon Tarrey 07 December 2015 10:44 AM

What is wrong with the world? Seriously, what is wrong with the world? Two hundred and fifty thousand bleeding quid for a boiler room in a basement, are you 'avin a larf? Please tell me it's April Fools today. Please. Anyone?

From: Jon Tarrey 01 December 2015 10:14 AM

Prices in London have gone out of control. Anything that can be done to control that is welcome. Stamp duty is far from the only solution, but it's a start. Unfortunately, Boris and his chums are always courting foreign investors to come and invest in the BEST CITY IN THE WORLD. For these investors, though, investment means one thing - buying up houses that they never actually have plans to live in. Prices in the capital won't be anywhere near affordable until the issue of empty homes, buy-to-let, Right to Buy and Buy to Leave is addressed. Believe it or not, you could afford to buy in London a few years ago without being a millionaire. I know. Crazy, right? Now you either need to be earning at least a six-figure salary or have a very rich mummy and daddy to buy a place for you. We need to get back to making London genuinely affordable - for both tenants and buyers - otherwise we risk the capital turning into the biggest tax-dodging haven in the world. What is the average price in London now? Over £500,000. Even in the suburbs, like Hillingdon and Harrow, prices are crazy. Based on what? The fact that they're near a Tube station. It's madness. Prices in London currently bear no relation to reality and it's going to take a long struggle to change that.

From: Jon Tarrey 01 December 2015 10:11 AM

Good old Foxtons!

From: Jon Tarrey 30 November 2015 16:47 PM

If we actually had a serious, extensive and well-managed housebuilding programme, where truly affordable housing was built and gimmicky policies like Help to Buy and Right to Buy were scrapped, then maybe we wouldn't need so many investors/buy-to-letters to provide the housing that is so badly needed. I don't understand the endless whining from investors and the buy-to-let brigade that they are being treated harshly by Osborne. Spare a thought for those people who are struggling to get on the property ladder, spare a thought for those people who have given up on that dream altogether, spare a thought for Generation Rent - priced out of buying and forced to pay obscene rents for substandard accommodation. Might be naive and idealistic of me, but can't we return to a situation where housing is a basic right rather than an investment? As agents on here have repeatedly said, a lack of supply combined with soaring house prices is a toxic mix that isn't going to do much good in the long-term.

From: Jon Tarrey 30 November 2015 16:32 PM

Good old Tories. They'd privatise their own mothers if they could away with it! Really hope this second attempt to veto succeeds. We can't just endlessly sell off everything otherwise we'll be left with absolutely nothing of our own. Do these people not understand that? The Land Registry is performing a vital public service and costing the taxpayer very little, why can't we just leave it alone?

From: Jon Tarrey 27 November 2015 09:17 AM

What's the typical deposit fallen to then? From £40,000 to £30,000. Oh joy. You either need a nice little inheritance or a stupidly well-paid job to get even close to cobbling together the deposit that I hear some people talk about. £80,000 in some cases. The world's gone mad, I tell you. Mad.

From: Jon Tarrey 27 November 2015 09:14 AM

"Legal avoidance"? Doesn't sound dodgy at all. Has the extra 3% stamp duty charge been extended to overseas buyers? You know, the super-rich oligarchs who are buying up stock in London and leaving it empty, just so it can rise in value. That might be a thought, to try and solve the supply issue we have. But don't worry, George promises us he's building 400,000 more 'affordable homes'. So all's well that ends well. As I said yesterday, it's quite funny to see Osborne going after buy-to-letters. I'm sure there's plenty in his own Cabinet who aren't best pleased about that, not to mention the wider Tory party as a whole. Where's Brandon Lewis to give his take on this? He seems conspicuous by his absence just at the moment.

From: Jon Tarrey 27 November 2015 09:10 AM

I can't believe I'm writing this, but I actually agree with Osborne on something. The buy-to-let bonanza needs to be brought under control. It's gone crazy in the last few years, in part because of Osborne giving buy-to-letters a load of tax breaks in the first place (but that's by the by). We hear all the usual complaints. It will put off landlords/investors from investing! Rents will go up! Supply will go down! This is not what we need! Well, maybe if buy-to-letters stopped hoovering up all the stock to make a fast buck we wouldn't have so much of a supply issue. Maybe housing could once again be seen as a basic human right, rather than an investment opportunity. Maybe we'd then become a nation of homeowners rather than renters again. On the other hand, it's quite funny to see Osborne bite the hand that feeds him. All these buy-to-letters no doubt voted for the Tories in the election, thinking their investment and business interests would be protected. Now they're realising, like everyone else, that the Tories are quite happy to screw everyone over.

From: Jon Tarrey 26 November 2015 10:46 AM

@James Ferguson - Ah, very interesting. This has certainly been glossed over by the mainstream media. Glad to see there is a petition to save it. It worked last time, should work again. As we've seen in the last 24 hours, this government is becoming very good at climbing down over unpopular policies that get scorned by nearly everyone. As for the rest, it's nothing we've not heard before. They've been banging on about starter homes and affordable homes since well before the election, but no action has actually been taken. And, of course, the revival of Right to Buy is an absolute disaster, as anyone with half a brain cell could tell you. "We've not got enough social housing as it stands, George." "OK, right, well you know what the solution is, don't you? Get the housing association to sell more of its stock off. Eventually, it will make its way into the hands of some rich investor, the very people we stand for." Despite all the words and promises, the reality when it comes to the government's record on housebuilding is that it doesn't hold up to scrutiny. So forgive me if I'm a tad cynical about all these new "proposals".

From: Jon Tarrey 26 November 2015 10:38 AM

Indeed. No fan of easyProperty, but this is a good move.

From: Jon Tarrey 26 November 2015 10:29 AM

Shameless PR stunt. And in Knightsbridge, too. It's not exactly going to make too much of a difference to those buying or letting in that part of the world, is it? A mere drop in the ocean for them.

From: Jon Tarrey 17 November 2015 15:43 PM

Care to elaborate further? Which part of the move are you praising, the acquisition of Hatched or the promise that they are still on the prowl for traditional agencies to swallow up?

From: Jon Tarrey 17 November 2015 15:41 PM

Hardly a tabloid headline, is it? It's not exactly sensationalist clickbait, like some of our so called broadsheets come up with these days. At the very worst, you could argue it's a bit misleading. But you'd have to really be nitpicking for that to be the case.

From: Jon Tarrey 17 November 2015 15:37 PM

It's ridiculous. How can you have any work/life balance if you're commuting that distance every day? Don't worry, though, the government reassures us that there is no housing bubble and that "affordable" housing is being built. So that's that sorted then.

From: Jon Tarrey 10 November 2015 09:42 AM

I knew Twitter had its uses. Good on them. These agents shouldn't be allowed to get away with stuff like this. I thought agents would have realised by now that boards are outdated and inefficient. Not to mention a stain on the landscape. Get rid, I say.

From: Jon Tarrey 09 November 2015 09:38 AM

To add to the points above, I've seen a fair few agencies (especially in London) with the OTM branding on the front of their offices. But this, and the expensive ads, still don't seem to be doing the trick when it comes to brand awareness. When I see the OTM logo, I recognise it immediately, but that's because I have knowledge of the property industry and the main debates currently raging through it. Joe Public, not so much. If I ask my friends and family about OTM, they look at me with questioning faces. "Who?" is the general response. I'd never get that if I was talking about RM and Zoopla. That's the big difference. That's not necessarily OTM's main goal, to be as instantly recognisable as the big two, but I'm a little bit confused as to what their aims actually are. It seems to change week by week, depending on how Springett is feeling.

From: Jon Tarrey 02 November 2015 09:58 AM

Fair points. But I find it hard to believe that the average buyer on the street is as aware of OTM as they are off Rightmove and Zoopla. I think people outside the property industry would be hard pushed to name another portal after the big two and maybe PrimeLocation. Which is Richard's main point, that consumer awareness is not where it should be and probably never will. RM and Zoopla have become so synonymous with searching for a home, whether it's to buy or rent. That is going to take years to change, if it ever does happen. Established brands take some shifting.

From: Jon Tarrey 02 November 2015 09:54 AM

Good point, well made. This playground pettiness is becoming really quite pathetic. I don't think either side comes out of it well. I'm with you. If I were Zoopla, I'd shut up and let them die slowly. Then crow about it afterwards. It's what RM have done. Taken a backseat throughout all this. And look at how well they're doing.

From: Jon Tarrey 29 October 2015 12:07 PM

In fairness, if the only news coming out about OTM is negative, then what can they do? If Zoopla or Rightmove was struggling, there would be stories about it here. We've seen many articles where Springett has been claiming that they will have overtaken Zoopla by the end of the year, despite all evidence pointing to the contrary. There has been plenty of articles where Springett has claimed his stats prove that OTM is outperforming Zoopla and will be the number 2 portal within a matter on months. I appreciate that the stories recently have seem quite one-sided, but the amount of agents coming out saying they are dissatisfied with OTM's service in recent weeks suggests there is no bias or scaremongering, just reporting of the facts.

From: Jon Tarrey 29 October 2015 12:04 PM

They are really not having a good time of it lately, are they? I'm sure Mr Springett will find some way of spinning this favourably and blaming Zoopla. He had plenty to say when they first launched, but he's been remarkably tight-lipped since agents from all over the country have been coming out to criticise his brainchild. What's his response?

From: Jon Tarrey 29 October 2015 11:59 AM

Was the debate titled "Stating the Bleeding Obvious"?

From: Jon Tarrey 28 October 2015 15:48 PM

Good old Russell. He'll have a go at anyone as long as it means free publicity. You have to admire his gumption.

From: Jon Tarrey 28 October 2015 15:46 PM

Many of these online agencies say they offer a 24 hour service. Can this really be the case? If, say, I rang up at 2am with a burning question, would someone be on hand to answer me? And, more to the point, do we really need an estate agent that is 24/7? Surely it can wait until the morning.

From: Jon Tarrey 06 October 2015 11:24 AM

Exactly right, Steven. Why is an international arm a priority at this stage? Build your reputation up a bit before you start getting ahead of yourselves. It's a bit like easyProperty heralding the death of high-street agents despite having hardly any properties on its books. Unless you can back up your claims, don't make them. Simple.

From: Jon Tarrey 05 October 2015 16:29 PM

I don't know. It looks like people on the streets were enjoying it. And, as the article states, agents from Carter Jonas and Knight Frank took it in the spirit it was intended. I can't get on board with people who say this was tasteless or pushed things too far - it was quite clearly tongue-in-cheek, it was quite clearly taking the mickey. Some people need to get a sense of humour, for cry sake! The worst thing you could say about it was it was a shameless PR stunt by a company that might not have a huge deal to shout about, but to call if offensive just entirely misses the point. Looking at the video, I'm quite impressed with how much effort they put into it. Hiring all those actors and the horse-drawn hearse must have cost a fair bit, but it looks like they got a fair bit of publicity from it. Whether they can now turn that into actual results - which doesn't seem to have happened yet with the easyProperty brand - is a question that remains in some doubt.

From: Jon Tarrey 30 September 2015 09:24 AM

Yep. Whilst I don't condone the violence or unrest caused, there are a lot of people who are very upset about the continuing gentrification (at a very rapid rate) of much of London and the social cleansing this is causing. People on low and even middle incomes can no longer afford to live in the capital, dominated as it is by rich investors from Russia, the Middle East, Africa and the US. The hipster duo with the terrible sounding cereal cafe - seriously, who goes to a cafe for cereal? - do seem to have been scapegoated in all this and there is no excuse for attacking their property, despite the understandable anger. Still, as you say, this anger needs to be dealt with. Because it is not just going to magically disappear.

From: Jon Tarrey 28 September 2015 12:29 PM

Nice to get a response. Thanks, Alex. When I see the new advert, I'll be sure to let you know my opinion! It can't be any worse than the Purplebricks abomination that is currently on our screens seemingly every day!

From: Jon Tarrey 21 September 2015 11:53 AM

Wouldn't surprise me the way things are currently going. It's absurd, obscene, wrong and unsustainable, but it's what Boris and Osborne are determined to make happen. Unfortunately, the bubble will have to burst and a lot of people will have to lose out before the public at large wake up to our housing crisis!

From: Jon Tarrey 21 September 2015 09:06 AM

Interesting viewpoint, although we have to remember that this is anecdotal rather than empirical. I agree with your general point, Chris Arnold, but I think you have to accept that there will be a place in the market for a low-cost alternative. We're seeing it all over the country. And, in many cases, cheaper prices don't necessarily mean lower quality.

From: Jon Tarrey 10 September 2015 10:09 AM

Lies, damned lies and statistics. You can make any stats fit your agenda if you try hard enough. That seems to be the case. Once again, the war of words between Springett and Zoopla is turning into a snooze-fest. It really is playground level stuff, isn't it?

From: Jon Tarrey 07 September 2015 12:00 PM

Why are most property TV adverts so naff and instantly forgettable?

From: Jon Tarrey 07 September 2015 09:32 AM

It wouldn't solve the housing crisis on its own, far from it. But it would be a step in the right direction. We need to stop the nonsense that is Buy to Leave - how is it right that super rich foreign investors can buy up property in London that they have no intention of ever living in, purely to make themselves even richer? It's a disgrace. There are many others who need the housing much more desperately. Part of the reason why we have a housing shortage is the amount of empty homes and the amount of homes that need to be brought back into use. This government, as per, is failing to realise that. They're just determined to turn London and the South East into one of the biggest tax havens in the world. Corbyn is right on this as he is on many things. Whether you agree with him or not, he's a man of substance and integrity. Finally, a politician who understands issues, is in touch with people and talks like a real person. It will never catch on!

From: Jon Tarrey 04 September 2015 09:46 AM

Don't buyers have to have a survey done anyway, before they complete the transaction? Or are you saying they should have a survey before they decide to buy rather than when the wheels have been put in motion? If so, I agree with you. Will help nip things in the bud. It also seems shocking that agents don't, as a matter of course, point out potential defects to buyers - especially if these defects were potentially troublesome or harmful. Surveyors do seem to get a bit of a bad press from agents, but I think they do an underrated and valuable job. What is the main barrier to more agents using good-quality surveys, Alan? Cost? The possibility of delays?

From: Jon Tarrey 03 September 2015 10:17 AM

Seems like a good idea to me. She gets a lot of flak from those in the industry, but at least she's willing to come up with a few ideas to solve the housing crisis. Rather than the government, who are more content with burying their heads in the sand.

From: Jon Tarrey 03 September 2015 10:13 AM

Can't be any worse than Purplebricks' feeble offerings. Anyone else switch the channel as soon as their cringeworthy ad comes on?

From: Jon Tarrey 03 September 2015 10:10 AM

I usually agree with you on most things, Glenn. On this, though, we're at odds. Shelter can be criticised for lots of things, but in this case they have a very valid point. Will all those starter homes be built by 2020? Doubtful. Will they be affordable? Very doubtful. May I also ask why you think rent controls and long leases are a bad thing? They work perfectly well in other countries. And, you know, there is such a thing as long-term security, which most tenants seem to appreciate.

From: Jon Tarrey 27 August 2015 09:40 AM

@Chris Arnold - I think you're being a little harsh on online agents. In what way is it flawed compared to, say, agency websites that look like they've been lifted from the early days of the internet (plenty of traditional agents have this issue) or a resistance to anything resembling change or better value for money for the customers? Not saying online agents are perfect, far from it. But I think there is plenty to criticise traditional agents for as well. I don't understand why online and traditional can't just co-exist together. If online agents are no threat, why do the trads get so defensive about them?

From: Jon Tarrey 26 August 2015 10:50 AM

Agreed. Congratulations, Naylors. Always nice to see a bit of altruism/philanthropy in an industry that is often rife with greed and self-interest. As we see from the Agents do Charity weekly round-up on here, plenty of agents do good things on a regular basis. I would argue, though, that this is more the case with local or provincial agencies rather than the big national ones. For example, could you imagine Foxtons ever coming up with a charity initiative?

From: Jon Tarrey 26 August 2015 10:46 AM

Indeed, John. Does seem a bit like the estate agency equivalent of hot desking.

From: Jon Tarrey 20 August 2015 11:41 AM

Interesting idea. Not sure about the long-term potential, though.

From: Jon Tarrey 20 August 2015 11:41 AM

Agreed, Chris Wood. But I also concur with you, Hafsid, I'm not really sure how setting up a research team is a marker of modernisation either. Surely an increasing use of technology and innovation would be more obvious signs of modernising? I think you have a point with Point 3, too. They are certainly quite a divisive agency, and this does sound a bit like a blowing your own trumpet exercise. I'm not sure, as you say, that a research team will have any positive impact on what CW is there first and foremost to do - sell houses!

From: Jon Tarrey 19 August 2015 11:30 AM

@Chris Arnold - from a distance it looks like you've nicked my avatar:)

From: Jon Tarrey 19 August 2015 11:27 AM

And what, may I ask, should be the most important thing to a vendor when choosing an agency?

From: Jon Tarrey 19 August 2015 11:26 AM

Really good deal, courtesy of them doing absolutely nothing to warrant it! A return on their investment of 800%. That's just barmy. Purely through luck, market conditions and taking advantage of Maggie's flawed RTB policy, they've made an absolute mint off the property. People will say you can't begrudge them the money, but I can. What have they done to earn that money? To be fair, it's not their fault, it's our ridiculously overblown housing market that is to blame, but still. "With central London property prices at a premium, and with demand for properties far outstripping supply, we weren’t surprised that this former council flat reached this impressive price." Barnard Marcus, to their credit, understand why the market is as mad as it is. But, of course, nothing will be done about it by our current government. How many of those new homes they promised have they built? How many are affordable? How's all that construction on brownfield sites going? We need actions, not wishy-washy words. This, too, is exactly what will happen if RTB is persisted with - council-owned property will end up in the hands of rich, greedy BTL landlords. Wonderful.

From: Jon Tarrey 17 August 2015 11:52 AM

Wait till that bubble bursts.

From: Jon Tarrey 14 August 2015 11:37 AM

Desperate stuff from OTM. It's quite sad, really, when you think about it.

From: Jon Tarrey 13 August 2015 09:24 AM

Everyone should say no to George, on everything. The man is the worst type of self-serving careerist, the likes of which infest much of Westminster today. Wants power for power's sake, egotistical, dead behind the eyes - I trust him about as far as I could throw him. The man pretends to be competent, but he's very far from that. However, lo and behold, I agree with him on this. It's quite clearly a populist policy, but why should buy-to-let landlords continue to get such large tax breaks?

From: Jon Tarrey 13 August 2015 09:23 AM

Good points, Stephanos. Zoopla should get you on their marketing team.

From: Jon Tarrey 11 August 2015 15:02 PM

@ Matt Brereton - nonsense! Why can't you interfere with market forces if it's for the good of the country as a whole? No, let's all just sit back and watch house prices skyrocket until nearly everyone is priced out of the market other than rich overseas investors and oligarchs. That sounds like a sensible plan. Look how well allowing market forces to dictate things has done for trains, utility companies, supermarkets, etc. It's the same with RM's monopoly in the property industry, the very thing a significant number of agents seem to be railing against. You can't have it both ways. We need to end all this free market nonsense. Free market shouldn't mean unregulated and unrestricted - it shouldn't mean the few getting rich off the many. It might sound idealistic, but why can't we return to a time where houses are actually affordable and don't cost buyers a small fortune to purchase? A small fortune that leaves them saddled with debt in some cases. What's the point? Why can't we return to a time where young people are given hope of actually owning a home? Because, for the majority of 18-30 year olds, that ain't ever gonna happen. Which might be OK if the PRS was up to standard, but it very definitely isn't. Why can't we return to a time where house prices going higher and higher, beyond the reach of most ordinary folk, is greeted with dismay rather than cheers? The whole idea that you buy a house and make a load of money - a load of unearned money - from market forces alone is bonkers. I'm fed up of people saying we must never interfere with market forces. We've had agents in these very comments saying they would like to see a return to a more stable, rational housing market - one where people don't have to save for 25 years to own a home, one where buyers are encouraged rather than stalled. But no, some people would rather wealthy people buying up hundreds of buy-to-let properties and second homes - that they use for about one month a year - in Cornwall, Devon and Dorset. Because, you know, that's just the way it goes. We've become so afraid of state intervention and public investment in this country that, even when it's the right thing to do, it's outrightly dismissed.

From: Jon Tarrey 11 August 2015 12:24 PM

I think they've every right to be sceptical. Sounds like another short-lived fad. Bit like crowdfunding itself.

From: Jon Tarrey 06 August 2015 14:01 PM

Ending RTB? He's got my vote. Finally, we have a potential Labour leader who talks and acts like a real person, one with principles and beliefs that he's stuck to for the last 30 odd years. He'll scare Osborne and Cameron something rotten.

From: Jon Tarrey 06 August 2015 14:00 PM

"The reality is that we are on a growth path towards overtaking Zoopla and then building to provide a genuine, low-cost, alternative to Rightmove.” Dream on, Ian.

From: Jon Tarrey 05 August 2015 08:40 AM

@Ashley Gray - interesting. Shows how crazy the last 13 years have been if a property can go up by that amount of money. So, the way we're going, the house will be worth about £4m in 2028. And that will still be deemed at the cheap end of the prime, high-end market. When did property become like football transfers - operating on a level that is so far beyond reason and irrationality. We need to get away from seeing property as an investment and get back to a more stable, appropriately priced housing market. You know, where people might actually be able to afford to buy without cobbling together a £40,000 deposit or putting themselves into mountains of debt. I hold out very little hope of this being the case.

From: Jon Tarrey 03 August 2015 16:57 PM

"Harry Hill, the former Countrywide chief executive" You don't think he's slightly bitter in any way, do you?

From: Jon Tarrey 31 July 2015 11:21 AM

30 seconds? Five minutes sounds more likely. To be fair, you do get an instant impression of a place sometimes, within the first few seconds, but I'd doubt you'd base a decision to buy on the initial gut instinct. You'd want to see the rest of the house first - the garden, the kitchen, the bedrooms, the bathrooms, etc. Does, though, show the importance of viewings and getting them right. Too often in the past these have been done badly, and I don't think many agents know how to carry them out property. That's certainly the experience I've had whenever I've been on one before.

From: Jon Tarrey 31 July 2015 11:20 AM

Yes, where is easyChris? He was always good for offering some insight into how the company was doing, despite his massive (and understandable bias) towards the company he works for. Maybe he's given up the ghost? Perhaps the plan is to make a success of it in the sales market, so the lettings experiment can be swiftly swept under the carpet. Sadly, it seems more like a vanity project from the "easy" brand that is only going to fall flat on its face.

From: Jon Tarrey 30 July 2015 11:25 AM

It has all gone very quiet on the easyProperty front. Might be nice to know how well the lettings side of their business is doing - not brilliantly, by all accounts - before they embark on this sales market venture. They clearly have no issue in securing investment. That's not hugely surprising given the brand name. easyProperty's issue seems to be turning that funding into a successful, functional business. I think they've found it a lot harder than they would have originally imagined. As many posters have said before, there is a world of difference between property and aviation. Whatever you think of easyJet, their business plan and success can not really be argued with, but you definitely couldn't say the same for easyProperty.

From: Jon Tarrey 30 July 2015 11:23 AM

They're too blinded to see what is right in front of their eyes. It's quite sad, really, they just won't accept any criticism or OTM, despite its obvious failings. It's all about taking back control or something. "Portals don't sell houses, people do" is a popular slogan for the OTMers. Self-interest, pure and simple. The trad agents are just jealous that they didn't think of the RM and Z idea all those years ago. RM and Z have become bigger than any agent would ever be able to be, and the high-street agents don't like it. These are the people who sneer at online agents or DIYers. Surely the property industry should be collaborative in nature? People working together, not trying to knock everyone down. Horribly idealistic, I know, but not impossible. One of the reasons I left the profession (many years ago now) was this petty, "I know better than you", "we don't need change for change's sake" attitude. Both sides are guilty of it - by which I mean online and traditional - and it just means any serious discussion is always bogged down in playground politics.

From: Jon Tarrey 28 July 2015 14:39 PM

@Robert May - how?

From: Jon Tarrey 28 July 2015 10:10 AM

@John Bamonte - which goes to show the stupidity of the rule in the first place. People were never going to stick it. It was regressive, petty and narrow-minded. Banning online agents was exactly the same. OTM was there to look after the vested interests of the very big high-street agents in some extremely misguided and arrogant attempt to show the property world that RM and Zoopla weren't needed. That went well, didn't it? The saddest aspect of all this is the smaller agencies who have put total faith in OTM and are going to lose out as a result. Not that the bigwigs who run AM/OTM really care too much about that.

From: Jon Tarrey 28 July 2015 09:59 AM

I give them another six months. The fact they've stopped shouting so loud and the fact that OTM and Zoopla have stopped slinging mud at each other leads me to think that they're fast becoming an irrelevance. Before long, Springett will resign blaming someone else and evil market forces, and it will all go back to how it was before, only with RM even stronger than before. Great work, guys!

From: Jon Tarrey 27 July 2015 11:56 AM

Oh dear. You fear some people would lose their head if it wasn't screwed on. Surely, when dealing with sensitive and delicate information, you make sure you're extra careful and carry out even more due diligence. In this case, obviously not.

From: Jon Tarrey 27 July 2015 11:54 AM

Affordability improving? That's the biggest joke I've heard all day! Pull the other one, Mortgage Advice Bureau, you're kidding no-one.

From: Jon Tarrey 24 July 2015 14:49 PM

But...but...but...what about the property-owning democracy we keep hearing about?

From: Jon Tarrey 23 July 2015 09:31 AM

Sharing the wealth, as it were. Also makes them more accountable, does it not, if all these shareholders have a say in the direction of the company. OTM would have you believe Zoopla finished and will be out of business by this time next year, but I think we all know that is nonsense. It suffered after OTM first launched, although nowhere near as much as some made out, but it seems to have bounced back with a vengeance. Whereas the one other portal portal has gone the other way.

From: Jon Tarrey 22 July 2015 14:42 PM

Rubbish! You really think charities want to keep the poor poor? That's the job of the government and they're wonderful at it. RTB is a nonsense scheme that didn't work last time - why do you think we have such an issue with social housing these days? Why are so many ex-council properties now in the hands of private landlords? - and won't work this time. They're trying to follow Thatcher's ideological wet dream even though no-one, no-one, outside the Tory party thinks this is the right move. I'm very glad to see the House of Lords quashing this. That's the government's main problem, they have to pass motions through the HoL, which is full to the brim with Labour and Lib Dem peers. Good luck with that! As far as I know, the Tories don't want to abolish the HoL, whereas Labour in the their election manifesto said they would, so the Tories have basically shot themselves in the foot. RTB should be confined to the annals of history, not brought back to life in some desperate attempt to bag the votes of housing association tenants.

From: Jon Tarrey 22 July 2015 09:02 AM

Brilliant! Let's just keep housing stock chronically low so those house prices can keep rising and people can get richer simply by sitting on there biggest asset until they can sell for double or triple the price five years down the line - and they think they've somehow achieved something, even though it's pure luck and market conditions. You watch, the average house price in London will be pushing towards the £1m mark if we carry on like this. It must already be pretty high. The government, however, won't act. They know they've built the economy, in part, on the back of high house prices so they will do all they can to keep it that way. They'll spout off about new housebuilding programmes and the regeneration of brownfield sites, but they won't take any actual action. What have we had, one comment so far from Brandon Lewis since May? Shows how seriously this government are taking housing!

From: Jon Tarrey 22 July 2015 08:56 AM

Veyo, easyProperty, Houser - where have they all disappeared to? Anyone?

From: Jon Tarrey 21 July 2015 10:56 AM

The high street is dead, long live online agents!

From: Jon Tarrey 21 July 2015 10:55 AM

Sneaky. I don't often agree with Mr Quirk, but on this matter I think he is completely correct. Traditional agents always bang on about being totally unthreatened by online agents - they like to say they barely even give them a thought - but this would suggest otherwise. Why go touting, why send such a desperate letter, if you're not a little bit afraid of the competition? Hmm, sounds like weasel words from Mr Love. As is always the case with these spats, a move is made and then desperate backtracking is carried out. Ridiculous.

From: Jon Tarrey 20 July 2015 09:37 AM

God, this sounds utterly dreadful. I know nearly all daytime TV must, by law, be absolutely, toe-curlingly awful, but this really takes the biscuit. And, to put the icing on a particularly bad-tasting cake, Saira Khan (one of the most annoying contestants on The Apprentice ever, and that's quite an achievement) is the host. Count me out!

From: Jon Tarrey 20 July 2015 09:31 AM

Main difference is this: people outside of the property industry will, for the most part, be aware of RM and Zoopla and what they do. People outside the property industry have no clue who OTM are, despite the best efforts of that ill-fated TV ad. If you went and asked 30 random people on the street to name two property portals/websites, I could guarantee you that nearly all would say Rightmove and Zoopla. None would say OTM. Whether we like it or not, brand awareness is all-important. AM, for all the talk, bluster and money they've ploughed into OTM, must have known they were on a hiding to nothing from the start. They were never going to become as big or as well-known as the big two. They'll tell you that's not what their intention was, but I think we all know that's not true. Because they will be unable to break into the national psyche in the same way, they will fade away and die - whether that's six months from now or six years is immaterial, I just can't see how it won't happen.

From: Jon Tarrey 17 July 2015 08:48 AM

Indeed, John. Both sides are as bad as each other. If we could put this playground level squabbling to bed once and for all, we wouldn't have so many of these 'my model is better than yours, ner ner ner' type articles.

From: Jon Tarrey 16 July 2015 09:20 AM

Well said, Richard Rawlings. Completely on the button.

From: Jon Tarrey 15 July 2015 16:50 PM

And I didn't. So it's breaking news to me. Happy now?

From: Jon Tarrey 15 July 2015 16:48 PM

Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle. They're not fooling anyone, are they? “In particular, we do not accept that a desire for confidentiality or the use of offshore trusts is evidence of money laundering." This, in particular, is a gem. They don't like it up 'em!

From: Jon Tarrey 15 July 2015 16:46 PM

Crazy! What kind of a world do we live in where people can afford to pay £25,000 for a parking space at an airport? The mind boggles. Why can't they just use public transport to get there or get a taxi? Much, much cheaper. You'd have to use Gatwick airport a hell of a lot to make this worthwhile. Or have more money than sense.

From: Jon Tarrey 14 July 2015 09:49 AM

He was drowning by that point, John. So the wave analogy was probably quite appropriate. Painful viewing.

From: Jon Tarrey 14 July 2015 09:47 AM

What a car crash! Sadly, I think Mr Fearnhead has delusions of grandeur. He seems to have plucked that £20m valuation out of thin air - completely laughable. The fact that he even needs to head to the Dragons for that amount of investment suggests the business is struggling somewhat. Sounds like another entrepreneur with pound signs in his eyes and not much business sense.

From: Jon Tarrey 14 July 2015 09:46 AM

@Sceptical as Always - why does it have to be a race to the bottom? Cheaper doesn't always mean naffer. Look at what Aldi and Lidl have done in the supermarket sector - they've given Sainsbury's, Tesco, Waitrose and Morrisons a right kick up the backside and got rid of some of the complacency those retailers were starting to show. To a lesser extent, Ryanair and easyJet have done something similar in the aviation industry. Fair enough, an argument could be made that they've brought all other airlines down to their level by making price a bigger consideration than comfort or customer service, but they do what they say on the tin and they're very effective at it. They get you from A to B and it doesn't cost you a small fortune along the way. If online agents can offer a service that is as good as a traditional agent for a fraction of the price, that has to have an appeal. As long as quality isn't sacrificed, cheaper estate agent fees are surely no bad thing? If quality is sacrificed, then that's a different issue. But we'd need to know more about the experiences people have had with online agents before we can judge their quality or otherwise.

From: Jon Tarrey 02 July 2015 11:05 AM

"When the firm completes a successful sale it also donates £500 to a local charity based in the same borough as the property." Yes, this really is refreshing and something that restores my faith slightly in the property industry. As well as this, bringing empty homes back into use - as long as these homes are turned into affordable housing - is one way of dealing with the massive supply issue. We keep hearing of the need to build many more houses. While that also needs to happen, on a massive scale too, why aren't we making more of the existing stock we have? It's madness, isn't it? Two big ticks for Youspotproperty.com from me. Well done.

From: Jon Tarrey 30 June 2015 10:19 AM

Pigs will fly before that happens, Mr Investor.

From: Jon Tarrey 30 June 2015 10:16 AM

Yep. OTM have managed to achieve precisely what they set out to avoid. As Springett keeps telling us, they'll be the second biggest portal in a few months time - despite no evidence to back this up - and then they can work out a plan to overtake the behemoth that is Rightmove. Or so OTM would have you believe.

From: Jon Tarrey 29 June 2015 09:51 AM

"One of the country’s most prominent online estate agencies" Hmm, does prominent mean the one that shouts the loudest?

From: Jon Tarrey 29 June 2015 09:48 AM

Brandon Lewis, where have you been hiding? Finally, a comment from the housing minister - this deserves a celebration! If you believe the Tories we don't have a housing shortage and everything is just fine and dandy with house-building in this country. RTB is a brilliant scheme, don't you know? People buy their own properties. Then, a few years down the line when they can't afford the mortgage repayments anymore, they sell it off to some rich buy-to-letter, a chum of one of the Cabinet most probably, who then rents it out as an extortionate rate in the PRS. Rinse and repeat. Social housing stock is reduced, those who most need it have to scrape by in sub-standard private accommodation. The whole thing's rotten, it really is. No-one, absolutely no-one, thinks RTB is a good idea or the solution to the supply/demand imbalance. Lewis is towing the party line very well - I thought he was better than that - but even he knows it's unworkable, especially in London. He says the sales receipts have been reinvested in building projects - any figures on this? How much of this new stock is affordable/social housing? Or is it just going to wealthy investors keen to expand their portfolio? £2.8 billion, all sounds well and good, but what is actually being done with it? The phrase you can't polish a turd fits perfectly here, but the Tories will power on with their ideological madness until supply is diminished completely.

From: Jon Tarrey 26 June 2015 10:31 AM

The North ignored and left to their own devices, while London and the South East continues to prosper. You only need to look at Network Rail's cancelling of electrification projects past the Watford Gap to see how seriously this government are about creating a Northern Powerhouse. You could tell Osborne was lying through his teeth - he always does, he's become quite an expert at it - but once again it will be people in the Northern cities who suffer, ignored once again by the Westminster bubble and their misguided view that London is the centre of the universe!

From: Jon Tarrey 26 June 2015 10:21 AM

It wasn't obvious that you were being ironic - now, with the benefit of hindsight, yes, but at first I just thought you were laying into surveyors. You're too subtle for your own good, Richard! Irony, as Mr Fake points out, doesn't come across too well on internet comment sections. Something like 'I agree with everything you say, Richard' is obviously me being ironic, but people will take it literally if they don't know the context of our regular, good-natured disagreements. Anyway, where were we? Oh yes, surveyors, bunch of useless wasters, the lot of 'em!

From: Jon Tarrey 24 June 2015 16:48 PM

@Noel Flint - didn't OTM launch in Jan 2015? Why weren't they included if the research went up to spring 2015? This is all getting very confusing.

From: Jon Tarrey 23 June 2015 15:13 PM

"The review, undertaken by a firm called Inside Online, examined search activity over recent years up to spring 2015" The above would suggest otherwise, David Rogers. But I'm not completely sure. Can anyone clarify? It does seem a bit like a stating the obvious exercise. RM and Z have by far and away the most searches? Well blow me down!

From: Jon Tarrey 23 June 2015 15:11 PM

Thanks for responding! That sounds like a very thorough and well-thought out system, putting as many barriers in front of fake reviews as possible while also making sure genuine reviews aren't flagged as fake. As you say, it's nigh on impossible to guarantee that every fake review will remain unpublished, but it seems like the steps being taken to prevent this happening are very comprehensive. For the people who are sceptical about how this will be policed, I think your answer is pretty hard to argue with. Thanks again.

From: Jon Tarrey 22 June 2015 12:09 PM

@Jordan Mann - out of interest, how can you tell genuine reviews from fakes? Some might look fake but are actually genuine, or vice versa. What's the protocol?

From: Jon Tarrey 22 June 2015 11:41 AM

The way it's policed is something that needs to be looked at, but in theory it's a fantastic idea. It just needs to be monitored in a fair and scrupulous manner, which (admittedly) won't be all that easy.

From: Jon Tarrey 22 June 2015 10:25 AM

"are bigger than a Texan’s waistband and we don’t think that’s fair" Not that I in any way vindicate the use of stereotypes or barely disguised Fattism, but this is quite an eye-catching tagline. They're gonna get under the skins of the traditional agents, aren't they?

From: Jon Tarrey 19 June 2015 11:32 AM

"and that the true skills of good estate agents are often under-estimated." Not by people in the industry. They're positively over-estimated, which is why so many agents get so defensive against any criticism.

From: Jon Tarrey 19 June 2015 10:54 AM

Simon...are you there?

From: Jon Tarrey 18 June 2015 13:00 PM

It certainly captures your attention. It hurts my eyes slightly and is a bit too fluorescent and bold for my liking, but it's definitely a brave move. Not sure it shouts out estate agents, either. What do other people think?

From: Jon Tarrey 18 June 2015 09:28 AM

Very true, Glenn. Maybe Hunters are guilty of getting a little bit carried away? Expansion is all well and good, but only if it can be adequately financed. As we've seen with Tesco recently, if your plans go too ambitious and your profits don't match up then you have to start closing stores (or in Hunters case branches) on the sly.

From: Jon Tarrey 18 June 2015 09:25 AM

Fascinating insight into the estate agents everyone loves to hate - often for good reason! "First, there is a pep talk – or you’re all told off .... and then you get to shout out your figures. It shows on the screen where you are in the rankings. If you’ve done well, you’re buzzing. It’s one of the funnest parts of the week.” This sounds absolutely awful. The total opposite of "fun" to me

From: Jon Tarrey 18 June 2015 09:22 AM

Can I be the first to ask, what on earth is a Puy Lentil and is it as disgusting as it sounds? @Richard White - you're turning this comments page into Twitter, old boy. But, since you asked, I just had a bacon sarnie with plenty of brown sauce. Oh, the joys of being retired!

From: Jon Tarrey 17 June 2015 14:49 PM

@ Paul House - you're towing the party line very well. Say nothing, just let people assume we know what we're talking about. Why can't you offer Rob an explanation if you know more than he does?

From: Jon Tarrey 17 June 2015 10:02 AM

Lyn, you keep doing this to us. Is the comment bar not functioning correctly for you or something? Anyway, typical non-announcement from AM. We might do this, we may do that, we probably won't do anything. Bit like their business model :)

From: Jon Tarrey 17 June 2015 10:01 AM

Ray, I'd argue they very much are. Maybe it's just the ones I've seen, but if it's an OTM office you soon know about it. They're not backwards in going forwards about it. There is just not enough agencies willing to back them, content as they are with RM and Zoopla or the many other portals that are out there. Which agency wants to be restricted to just two portals, one of which must be OTM? It was a ridiculous idea. We always hear that it's agents, not portals, who really sell houses. But that task is made a hell of a lot harder if you don't have a very visible online presence.

From: Jon Tarrey 16 June 2015 18:01 PM

@Ashley Gray - explain how this is a mountain out of a molehill or something being made out of nothing. If a board member left Zoopla or RM, do you not think that would cause a bit of a stir? This sort of thing might be commonplace, but given Rook's association as a founding member of OTM - who by all accounts are struggling a wee bit at the moment, to put it lightly - this is newsworthy. If they came out and said exactly why he had resigned, we wouldn't be having this issue. But, as usual, it's all clouded in secrecy, which doesn't help OTM's cause. I think the people trying to make this into a non-issue are trying to deflect attention away from the real story here - that OTM is falling apart bit by bit.

From: Jon Tarrey 16 June 2015 17:40 PM

Oh no, those poor owners of £2m-plus properties having to pay a little bit more stamp duty. My heart bleeds for them, it really does. Seriously, has the world gone mad? How can there be 30 people battling it out for these types of properties? I'm sure Mr Johnson will be happy, his plan to turn London into a larger version of Monaco or Liechtenstein is well in motion.

From: Jon Tarrey 16 June 2015 10:42 AM

Yes, industry Expert, things not looking too good for OTM. The cracks are starting to appear, I'm sure the in-fighting will begin soon. Where's Mr Springett to tell us all how brilliantly OTM is really doing, and how much market share they are taking away from Zoopla? He's gone suspiciously quiet recently.

From: Jon Tarrey 16 June 2015 10:39 AM

@Lyn Burgoyne, you're leaving us on tenterhooks here.

From: Jon Tarrey 16 June 2015 10:37 AM

Yes, HarryNoName, will be interesting to see the fallout from this. A lot of big agencies have placed a lot on the success of OTM. If it goes down the pan - as seems likely - what will happen then?

From: Jon Tarrey 15 June 2015 12:03 PM

Oh dear. Seems all is not well in the AM/OTM universe. What a surprise!

From: Jon Tarrey 15 June 2015 12:01 PM

Agreed on the video. Always a good watch.

From: Jon Tarrey 12 June 2015 17:21 PM

From a famous British sitcom actor to a Republican politician overnight, you just keep us guessing, Michael. Brilliant profile pic, too!

From: Jon Tarrey 12 June 2015 17:20 PM

Are the wheels coming off Beeny's venture?

From: Jon Tarrey 11 June 2015 15:19 PM

Everything that is wrong with our property industry (and society) in a nutshell. Young people and first-time buyers giving up on the prospect of ever owning their own home while greedy buy-to-letters hoover up all the stock and then charge these people who can't afford to buy extortionate rents, which means they can't save up a deposit, etc, etc. No person should be allowed to have 100 or 200 properties - it's just patently unfair if others are denied the chance to buy. Property owning democracy - that's a laugh! If you're a BTL owner you get generous tax breaks and a lot more help to buy more properties, and yet there are some landlords/letting agents who have the temerity to say they are poorly treated. Pull the other one!

From: Jon Tarrey 11 June 2015 11:19 AM

One-upmanship, John. Everyone looking to get ahead, no matter how many people they screw over along the way. Just look at Foxtons! Most of the recent complaints to the ASA have been petty in the extreme. There was that one the other week where the grounds for a complaint were very tenuous, and it's the same in this instance.

From: Jon Tarrey 11 June 2015 11:12 AM

@M Barbour - I can see how it would be vulnerable to corruption, but if it was carefully managed and regulated I don't see how it would be too much of an issue. On Tripadvisor, for example, if a hotel/restaurant has overwhelmingly positive reviews and one negative review, the negative review is usually taken with a pinch of salt. I don't agree with the notion that one bad review is worth 20 good reviews. People aren't stupid. If they see almost universally good reviews for an agency and one that is bad, they're more than likely to discard that bad review as an anomaly and use that agency anyway. I don't think a rating system is a bad idea at all. It encourages healthy competition and allows the public to see which agents offer the best customer service, which agents carry out the most transactions, which agents have the lowest levels of withdrawals. It could be done like the university league tables, taking into consideration a number of different variables to calculate an overall score. I understand the concerns of small agencies, that they'll merely get lost amongst the larger, richer agencies, but to solve that issue you could have a separate league table for large, multi-branch agencies, medium level agencies, smaller agencies, and one branch, independent agencies. For me, the more accountable estate agents can become, the better their reputation will be.

From: Jon Tarrey 10 June 2015 12:29 PM

"and this is different to all the other agent comparison sites...? yawn." And this is different to all the other comments moaning about another agent comparison site...how? Yawn. It's a good idea. Just because the others haven't been a success - and that could be argued against, I'm sure - doesn't mean this one won't work. Mr Thompson sounds like he's got his head screwed on. Give him a chance. Before people book a hotel or go to a restaurant, they have a look at the reviews and make their choice from there. Why not the same thing for estate agents? I can see the potential problems with it, but I don't think the idea should be written off completely.

From: Jon Tarrey 10 June 2015 12:09 PM

Well, no, obviously not. And I'm fairly sure that never happens, except in very extreme circumstances. But that's not really the point of virtual tours, is it? You don't buy off the back of it, but it's a good way for busy, time-poor buyers to get a first look at the property they might one day call home. It's the first step in the process, a taster. No-one is saying a virtual tour can replicate the thoughts and feelings a would-be buyer experiences when they go on an actual viewing, but it's arguably the next best thing. And it prevents time-wasters, doesn't it? If a person decides to view a property after seeing a virtual tour, it's more likely that they're serious about the house in question. Why would you view a house if you've been turned off by the virtual tour? It's just another marketing tool - better than photos, not as good as an actual viewing - but I think it is a great way of giving a first-look to prospective buyers. Professional, glossy photos don't really provide that - they're too unreal. A virtual tour can't hide things as much, it's much closer to what a person would see in real life.

From: Jon Tarrey 09 June 2015 16:44 PM

What you do in your spare time is of no interest to us, Richard :). What is of interest is the attitude of certain Luddites in the industry who can't see the value of using innovative, interactive tools like the above. Should we all just continue living in the Dark Ages?

From: Jon Tarrey 09 June 2015 14:24 PM

Well, of course they're not all bad. We all knew that already. But the stereotype wouldn't exist in the first place if there wasn't an ounce of truth to it. It's like bankers or politicians - they're not all money-grabbing weasels, but some of them definitely are. Not all agents are greedy and unscrupulous. In fact, the vast majority aren't. But during my time in the industry I met plenty that were.

From: Jon Tarrey 09 June 2015 09:38 AM

ITVBe is expert when it comes to making dross like this. Sounds truly awful - you'd have to pay me to watch!

From: Jon Tarrey 09 June 2015 09:35 AM

Don't say that, Jonathan. You'll tempt fate :) Then again, maybe that's not a bad thing. People will realise how fragile our housing market is, and propping it up on high house prices and foreign investment is not a good long-term plan. Maybe we will get back to a more fair and balanced property market, where young buyers actually have a chance of getting on the ladder and the stock isn't all hoarded by a load of rich buy-to-letters and dodgy landlords. Maybe we will even start to build enough houses to keep up with demand, or at the very least bring back into use the shocking number of empty homes we have in the UK. I won't hold my breath, though.

From: Jon Tarrey 08 June 2015 17:21 PM

Double-charging comes across as cheeky and dishonest, even when that's not the case. I think agents would be well-advised to steer clear.

From: Jon Tarrey 08 June 2015 10:34 AM

Yep, and it's only to get worse. Good luck to any young person trying to get on the housing ladder in the next five years, you're gonna find it mighty difficult even with gimmicky schemes like Help to Buy and Right to Buy in place.

From: Jon Tarrey 05 June 2015 08:25 AM

Good to hear. We can't just roll over and let these all-powerful super agencies try to take over the world with their ridiculous expansion plans.

From: Jon Tarrey 05 June 2015 08:23 AM

@ John D - interesting to a get a legal perspective from this. If what you say is right, and I bow to your superior knowledge of legal procedures, then things don't look very good for OTM. It's always interesting to get an outsider's thoughts on the property industry. As you say, you have no axe to grind - unlike some on here - and no bias, so you can merely put across the facts of the matter in a totally impartial way. I do find it a bit odd that the pro-OTM brigade haven't responded to your comment. Maybe they're uncomfortable at how close to the truth your words are.

From: Jon Tarrey 04 June 2015 17:31 PM

Richard, me old chum, it's nothing to be ashamed of. You're just starting to see sense :) David Brent nails it to a tee. Unfortunately, the ads aren't even funny in a really cringeworthy way, they're just naff. As the recent OTM ad also showed, it doesn't matter how many millions have been ploughed into something - if it's bad, it's bad!

From: Jon Tarrey 03 June 2015 16:58 PM

Their adverts make me switch channels immediately. Having said that, I don't doubt their financial might or their ambition. Like Glenn says, will be very interesting to see how much actual income they are making if/when they float.

From: Jon Tarrey 03 June 2015 11:45 AM

Yes, good on Chris Wood. Quirk doesn't like it so much when the boot is on the other foot.

From: Jon Tarrey 03 June 2015 11:43 AM

Wonderful. Foxtons spreading their wings even further afield. Just what we need. I don't think they'll be happy until they have a branch in every part of London. Do they not listen to the public? Actually, scrap that, of course they don't. Fingers in ears, heads in sand, just plough on regardless. Expansion, expansion, expansion, no matter how many local residents you annoy, that's the Foxtons way. They really don't care about their reputation, do they? I quite admire that, but surely this us v the world mentality can't last forever.

From: Jon Tarrey 03 June 2015 11:42 AM

Quite refreshing. An estate agent that is not there merely for profit and profit alone. Can't see it catching on, though. Also, the very fact we have to have these ethical agents is a bit of a damning indictment of estate agency, no?

From: Jon Tarrey 02 June 2015 09:56 AM

The mere fact a house can sell for £24m in London tells you all you need to know about where we're heading. It's a ludicrous, mind-boggling amount of money. What has it got, gold encrusted doors and handcrafted diamond kettles or something? And unmodernised - so not only do you have to pay £24m to buy it, you then have to spend a load more renovating it. Still, the buyer will probably be able to sell it for £50m to some super-rich investor in a few years. Tidy little profit.

From: Jon Tarrey 02 June 2015 09:54 AM

Yes, branches would suggest otherwise. As would 'opening their doors'.

From: Jon Tarrey 01 June 2015 11:09 AM

Good. Was ridiculous what they were trying to do!

From: Jon Tarrey 01 June 2015 10:59 AM

Why are they persisting with this? It's so stupid it's laughable. I haven't met one person who thinks this is a good idea - not one single person. I bet even Brandon Lewis thinks it's ridiculous. But no, the Tory bigwigs no best. And everyone else will have to fall in line and suffer. I mean, you wouldn't think we had a housing shortage, would you? No, the solution to this is to sell off our social housing stock! It beggars belief.

From: Jon Tarrey 28 May 2015 10:01 AM

"Demand is still outstripping supply" That's all you need to know. While this is still the case - and it will be for some time, have no fear about that - then housing in London will continue to be the preserve of the rich and famous. A much bigger version of Monaco here we come. And we had the Tories claiming yesterday that extending Right to Buy to housing associations won't have an effect on the housing shortage, because they'll have a one for one approach. As some bloke on the news pointed out, that is just not realistic. Where is this new stock coming from/going to go? If it wasn't so idiotic it would be laughable.

From: Jon Tarrey 27 May 2015 13:28 PM

Ah, Rookie, how did I know an old-timer Luddite like you would be here dismissing anything vaguely new and modern. You know, because if it ain't broke, don't fix it. And even if it is, we've been doing the same thing for 60 odd years, why change our ways now? If it's going to cost us a bit more but offer our customers a better all-round experience - well, the clear winner is...cutting costs. @Kelly, how do you know it's pointless and overpriced? Have you ever tried a virtual tour before? Tip - they're actually surprisingly good. I think you're just allowing your hatred of anything online to cloud your judgement. I'm assuming you're relatively young, you should be embracing new technology like this, not outrightly denigrating it.

From: Jon Tarrey 27 May 2015 13:23 PM

15 years of boom? Oh joy!

From: Jon Tarrey 26 May 2015 09:14 AM

I'm here! And I agree, it is a thought-provoking article and pretty much hits the nail on the head.

From: Jon Tarrey 22 May 2015 09:32 AM

Zoopla says one thing, OTM refutes it. OTM slags Zoopla off, Zoopla fights back. Rinse and repeat.

From: Jon Tarrey 21 May 2015 11:04 AM

So the number of agents went down but the number of visits went up? All very well agents defecting to OTM, but if people are still visiting Zoopla and PrimeLocation instead then it's all a bit redundant. OTM is still struggling to reach into the national consciousness in the way Zoopla and RM have over the last few years. Until they rectify that, they'll continue to be also-rans.

From: Jon Tarrey 20 May 2015 11:35 AM

More playground squabbling. Yawn.

From: Jon Tarrey 18 May 2015 13:01 PM

And in other news, the Pope's still Catholic. This was always going to happen - it happens before every election. Pre-election slowdown followed by post-election boom.

From: Jon Tarrey 18 May 2015 13:00 PM

@Andrew Grant - fair enough, thanks for clearing that up. Completely the right decision. I feel sorry for you that your reputation will take a battering as a result of your association with Eades. I'm sure most people will be able to make the distinction between employer and employee, but unfortunately some will only read the headlines and form the wrong impression.

From: Jon Tarrey 15 May 2015 15:11 PM

Was Eades sacked by Andrew Grant? I can't believe she'd have kept her job after such a horrific attack. Again, the name of agents being dragged through the mud.

From: Jon Tarrey 15 May 2015 09:13 AM

Yeah, I agree Robert. Agents should never have new technology or products forced upon them if they don't believe it's right for their business. On the other hand, there are some agencies who are too stuck in their ways to embrace anything new. They just dismiss it immediately. I'm sure, when the portals first arrived or when the internet first became really big, there was resistance to them. Now, agencies would struggle to get by without them. Same with social media. Bit by bit more agencies are seeing its value - not necessarily to help sell houses, but as a means of improving both the reputation and standing of an agency and, more generally, the reputation of estate agents themselves. Which, whatever way you want to spin it, is not good. Definitely not sensible to take the 'I'm right, you're wrong' approach, but by the same token certain agencies will be left behind if they're never willing to take a gamble. As Rob says, some agencies still have websites that look like they were created in the very early stages of the internet.

From: Jon Tarrey 13 May 2015 15:44 PM

What did Mr Lewis do wrong? For all their bluster, I'm not really sure they have a clue when it comes to housing. Tarred by the expenses scandal? No background in property? No idea of how the industry works? Congratulations, you've got the job! On the other hand, Greg Clark did a good job as universities minister and is an accomplished MP. He's a much smarter choice.

From: Jon Tarrey 12 May 2015 10:34 AM

Is that a pig flying in the sky?

From: Jon Tarrey 12 May 2015 09:31 AM

Not a chance. Good trolling by Sky News!

From: Jon Tarrey 12 May 2015 09:30 AM

Whoever it is, I doubt they'll do the one thing they need to do - build more houses!

From: Jon Tarrey 11 May 2015 10:36 AM

@Richard White - it's too easy and simplistic to blame the problems on immigration. If supply had been anywhere close to keeping up with demand in recent years, this wouldn't have been a problem. Even if you reduced immigration, you'd still have to build more house - because we haven't got enough of them. It's tired and lazy, and what has fuelled the rise of far-right extreme parties like UKIP, to blame everything on immigration. There's been a major flaw in housing policy for a long time now, and successive governments have failed to do anything about it. Having presided over the lowest level of housebuilding since the 30s, the Tories have been more guilty of failing at it than most.

From: Jon Tarrey 11 May 2015 10:34 AM

Shocking! And people wonder why estate agents get such a bad name. There's no smoke without fire.

From: Jon Tarrey 11 May 2015 10:30 AM

How many houses have the Tories built in the last five years? How have they got in with reducing immigration, as they promised? If you make London incredibly attractive for super-rich investors, it affects the whole market. Not saying Labour would have been the perfect solution - certainly not in their current form - but to say the Conservatives are the saviours of the housing industry is pushing things to the extreme.

From: Jon Tarrey 08 May 2015 13:54 PM

Hmm. Sounds very dubious. Any actual links to these results or is it all just PR hot air?

From: Jon Tarrey 08 May 2015 10:18 AM

Self-interest trumps sense. Of course the high-end agents are delighted, they can continue to turn London into a billionaires' plaything, pushing everyone else into the overpriced and overcrowded PRS. Buy-to-let will boom, the number of rogue landlords will increase, and still nothing will be done to solve the housing shortage. Plenty to look forward to then.

From: Jon Tarrey 08 May 2015 10:16 AM

@David Winsper - did you swallow a thesaurus or a hefty academic text or something? Blimey, call me stupid, but most of what you wrote went way over my head. And a holistic approach to property? I've heard some out-there things in my time, but that takes the biscuit.

From: Jon Tarrey 07 May 2015 09:49 AM

Never nice to see. Hope the situation is sorted as soon as possible.

From: Jon Tarrey 06 May 2015 09:05 AM

The Tories are the most attractive party to super-rich overseas buyers and investors? Never.

From: Jon Tarrey 06 May 2015 09:03 AM

Sorry, but this is a load of rubbish. You don't even try to hide your Tory bias. Why is regulation in the PRS such a bad thing? If it makes people more accountable, if it increases trust, if it makes people less insecure, then that's surely a good thing, isn't it? Of course it's not a one-way street - you get as many awful tenants as you do dodgy landlords - but that doesn't mean regulation can't be introduced in a fair, even-handed manner. They manage it in Germany and Switzerland just fine. Pure self-interest from those who don't want to see their rental yields affected by regulation. The PRS is allowed to operate in its own safe little bubble for too long - about time it was challenged.

From: Jon Tarrey 05 May 2015 11:09 AM

Breaking News