x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
STAY CONNECTED!
    
newsletter-button

Mike's  Personal Profile View my company profile

Mike Riley
Mike Riley
Researching, testing and developing new consumer technology platforms.
2524  Profile Views

About Me

72% of people don't trust estate agents to tell the truth. We're working to change that.

my expertise in the industry

Romans - 14 years
Savills - 2 years
Capital and Coastal - 10 years
See https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelrileyux/

Mike's Recent Activity

Mike Riley
ViewRabbit provides agents with a platform to provide Standard "Free" viewings. Reservation and refund viewings. Standard "Free" viewings with priority access for the first week (time set by agent and owner) Standard "Free" viewings with "no cancellation" guaranteed (for a set period agreed by the agent and owner) All with automated viewing feedback and an option to donate agent proceeds to charity using the ViewRabbit "smile" switch. 15 Minute discovery calls can be booked on the website.

From: Mike Riley 10 August 2021 07:53 AM

Mike Riley
Hi Simon It's a good question. Clearly, we are not going to do something that is illegal. By all means get in touch if you would like to discuss.

From: Mike Riley 02 August 2021 14:00 PM

Mike Riley
Do you mean last week's product offering??? The only thing that is fixed with us at this point, is the problem we are solving. :) Improving the experience for home viewers. We will adapt and adapt until that is meaningfully solved including it being easy to communicate to consumers and agents. The Estate Agent Podcast is worth a watch and we would love to have a zoom call to hear your concerns around possible solutions.

From: Mike Riley 02 August 2021 11:06 AM

Mike Riley
Massive thanks to the BBC for the discussion about ViewRabbit and we would love to hear what agents think after listening to the programme. Link supplied by EAT above.

From: Mike Riley 02 August 2021 07:06 AM

Mike Riley
We could not be happier with the response we have had from agents directly and the words of advice from very senior agency figures whom we highly respect. ViewRabbit and the agents working with us are developing a "seed of scale" rather than sowing our field right this second. Getting it right, rather than big over the next few weeks is our primary focus. Sometimes we will be public about what we are testing and other times it will ruin the experiment if we are. As frustrating as this may be for the press and non-testing agents. We form all hypothesis with the belief that both the agent and the consumer needs to benefit. Sadly, the industry has never been able to shake off a poor reputation. We've all seen the raised eyebrow or heard the wisecrack when we tell people what we do for a living. We believe the system, not the agents, is at fault and we are developing technology and consumer propositions to aid pioneering agents to fix it. That is going to mean staring some sacred cows in the eye and pulling the trigger. It will be uncomfortable, baffling and infuriating at times. But, that's what needs to happen. The first of these is the existing free viewing process. A one size fits all solution for millions of people. Many of whom are not getting the ease and comfort of being treated fairly that they would like. Our view is that additional paid options with a different service promise attached will be welcomed by many of them. If we don't do this, a less agent-centric platform will, because the consumer is not a happy bunny. Join us on Twitter or see the ViewRabbit website for unedited updates.

From: Mike Riley 29 July 2021 07:16 AM

Mike Riley
ViewRabbit's Priority View calendar shows FREE and PAY TO VIEW viewing slots. The charged appointments are only available in the first 10-14 days of marketing (a date which you, the agent, control). The viewer has complete freedom of choice. We believe many viewers will grab the chance for the paid earlier slots if given a chance. Especially as viewers with paid viewings have the comfort of knowing their appointment will not be cancelled by the agent agreeing on a deal before their arrival. We are confident that Priority View and other "premium viewing" options we develop hand in hand with agents will prove highly attractive to consumers as their needs become better understood and met. As tens of millions of viewings are booked each year, we think there is a large and untapped opportunity worth exploring, and that's why we invest in it.

From: Mike Riley 27 July 2021 06:11 AM

Mike Riley
Another poll could be. What as an industry can we offer buyers or tenants that would make them happy to pay a small fee for a viewing, improve the experience for sellers and ourselves? Then how can we communicate that to the market? ViewRabbit has started by focusing on guaranteed viewings that will not be cancelled by the agent when doing a deal. An issue that infuriates millions of people and is overlooked. We have no doubt ViewRabbit will be used by agents to sell a range of different viewing options, as they look to solve problems for consumers needs. Buyers and tenants come in all shapes and sizes, with different needs and motivations. As an industry, we tend to bundle them up and treat them as one. For full press releases and statements in the future, please visit the ViewRabbit website.

From: Mike Riley 26 July 2021 06:30 AM

Mike Riley
We wholeheartedly welcome Propertymarks "green light" and look forward to engaging with them and other leading consumer organisations to ensure the stewardship of the ViewRabbit platform is always transparent, secure and fair for all.

From: Mike Riley 26 July 2021 05:34 AM

Mike Riley
Hi Vilesh Regarding your comment below about sellers listing at a low price, getting income and then enjoying a nice holiday. That can't happen on the ViewRabbit system, the only time the seller gets the income is when it is offset against their commission account and this is handle by the agent. In the cases of sellers removing their property from the market, the agent either keeps the income or it stays with the charity it has been donated to.

From: Mike Riley 25 July 2021 06:41 AM

Mike Riley
Hi Paul Have a look at the ViewRabbit website, you can automatically donate all of your income to charity too, which I'm guessing from a branding perspective might be good. What does appear to damage the reputation of the industry is tenants having their viewings cancelled because someone else has rented before they even got a chance to view. Few agents survey this section of their customer base and focus instead on landlords and tenants who achieved a successful let. ViewRabbit facilitates prospective tenants to either book a free viewing or pay for an earlier slot and have their viewing guaranteed. It is primarily a booking system for managing viewings on high demand properties and gaining feedback on them. We would love to talk more with you if you have the time.

From: Mike Riley 25 July 2021 06:31 AM

Mike Riley
I'm in my third decade and felt it might be time to evolve the process of booking viewings, which has barely hasn't change since I started! I'd love to pick your brains about it, if you want to reach out on Linkedin.

From: Mike Riley 24 July 2021 09:57 AM

Mike Riley
Hi Adrian, There is no restriction, agents can offer as many priority paid or free slots as they like. Check out the website and contact us if you would like to discuss further.

From: Mike Riley 24 July 2021 09:54 AM

Mike Riley
The charge is for priority viewing times and a guarantee the viewing will take place.

From: Mike Riley 24 July 2021 09:52 AM

Mike Riley
Hi Michael, thanks for your comments. It's really helpful to hear them and it all gets fed into the ViewRabbit offering. Everything we do is based upon conversations with agents. First thoughts, but let's have a direct chat. If you offset your viewing income against your seller's fee they will be VERY happy. Or donate to charity, in which case the buyers will find it hard to be negative. In terms of general unhappiness....you are right buyers get annoyed when they miss out.... and as an industry, we probably don't empathise with that enough. By paying, they get their viewing guaranteed and a level playing field is set. A little like the sealed bids process. So, everyone knows the deal. With the existing system, buyers just get a phone call saying their viewing is cancelled someone else has bought it or that the agent isn't taking any more viewings at the moment. Or.... no response at all, which having just been through the buying process is very really, with many agents. Have a look at the viewrabbit website and please get in touch to discuss. PS... It feels to me that once viewings hit a certain number the prices need to be pushed up. If, as an agent, I had sold 30 viewings..... I would personally be on the phone to everyone of my valuations telling them how amazing my marketing was, that we had to sell tickets to the launch day and I've got 29 surplus highly motivated buyers to contact immediately.

From: Mike Riley 24 July 2021 09:50 AM

Mike Riley
Hey Andrew. Check out the website. Let me know what you think. We believe everyone benefits from changing how agents get paid.

From: Mike Riley 24 July 2021 07:28 AM

Mike Riley
It takes courage to do new things and risk making a fool of yourself. Innovation should be applauded, as you never know where it may lead and what new discoveries might be uncovered.

From: Mike Riley 02 July 2021 09:24 AM

Mike Riley
If only all buyers told the truth about their position.

From: Mike Riley 16 June 2021 08:54 AM

Mike Riley
If you were charging for viewings you could justify more staff and therefore, comit more capacity to the problem of dashing from one place to another.

From: Mike Riley 13 June 2021 10:30 AM

Mike Riley
That would work. Charging for early access upto a certain date, then free afterwards for those buyers that want to wait. Refund the person who buys the property, so no conflict of interest.

From: Mike Riley 10 June 2021 11:48 AM

Mike Riley
Your sentiment is spot on Genevieve! The question of how much a viewing costs an agency is tough to answer, but its definitely more than £5. Cost of viewings is irrelevant, if your average fee is five digits, but sub that, its a material number when added up.

From: Mike Riley 10 June 2021 11:37 AM

Mike Riley
Hi Mike, thanks for your response. There are large parts of the market where the buyer, not the seller should be the one paying. As we know, this can't work for a number of reasons on a transactional basis. But, given how short supply is, why on earth are we charging sellers a full fee to list? Why should the sellers who complete their sale, pay the agents cost for seller's that change their mind? Sounds a bit unfair. There are a host of issues with our model that we suppress, because its just the way we do things. It might not be very nice to accept, but our model is broken and that is the reason our services, as an industry, have the reputation they do. The fact is, the public blame the agents, but its the economics of our industry that are at fault. Perhaps, we can chat more or you might want to come on a podcast? You can be the first guest to book (no charge:) Best wishes Mike.

From: Mike Riley 10 June 2021 09:46 AM

Mike Riley
Thank you Andrew for your response. The "we all know its true" says a lot. A model where "priority viewings" or "early access" are paid, followed by a period of free viewings works. Agent's can even chose to discount the sellers fee with the proceeds, if they wish. The payment would be for the position in the queue, not the viewing itself. The successful buyer gets their booking fee refunded on completion, therefore no conflict of interest. Having just sold my own property, I'd rather have chosen the buyer who has paid to see my house (and therefore has proved some motivation) than the one that didn't. Moreover, I'd like an agent that is truly incentivised to carry out more viewings. As an agent, I would have liked an income related to my cost of sale, especially with sellers that withdraw their listing. As a buyer who has missed out on numerous properties, because the agent withdrew the house from the market for some of the reasons above, I would happily have paid for access. The public are getting used to scarcity and reserving timeslots online for all manner of things, not least going to the pub for a pint. As an industry we can chose to ignore this or use it as a catalyst to start changing our financial models in a different direction. It's time we took a good hard look at how our services are monetised, because if we really dig under it, the economic model of our industry is not serving the agent, seller or buyer. The seller paying upfront isn't the answer, as we know.... but tapping into the demand side and (not on a transactional basis), probably is.

From: Mike Riley 10 June 2021 09:25 AM

Mike Riley
Agents deserve to get paid for (surplus) viewings! When you include properties that fail to sell or are removed from the market, agents carry out a considerable number of viewings per completed sale. Yet the only viewing that actually generates income for us, is the one that results in the purchase. Regardless of how much interest agencies have for a property, they can only sell it once. Every additional viewing, offer and discussion with a potential purchaser, adds to our cost of sale. Many agents deploy a range of methods to minimise their exposure to this cost on popular properties. This includes Severely restricting times when viewings can take place. Restricting viewings to prospects in a certain buying position i.e. cash or with no property to sell. Stalling viewings from other buyers, when they are close to agreeing a sale. Placing the property under offer and taking it off the market as soon as possible, ceasing any further viewings. Not placing properties that are under offer back onto the market, even though a buyer is dragging their heels. Not relisting properties that are being undersold, in a market where prices have moved up rapidly. The malfunctioning and outdated economics of estate agency greatly influence the process for booking viewings and infuriate buyers. Given the shortage of property for sale and ultra competitive fees, charging for priority viewings is a means to offset that. Taking cash however..... is not the way forward and viewings are definitely worth more than a fiver!

From: Mike Riley 10 June 2021 07:22 AM

Mike Riley
One of the biggest failed assumptions of lockdown will be that Work From Home will be a permanent trend.

From: Mike Riley 09 June 2021 06:23 AM

Mike Riley
The agent with the most sold stock in an area usually has the highest number of properties listed but failed to sell too. What's important is the percentage of completions against listings, not number of units sold. Either way, most prospective sellers find this type of marketing VERY dull.

From: Mike Riley 26 May 2021 06:37 AM

Mike Riley
FOMO

From: Mike Riley 24 May 2021 07:06 AM

Mike Riley
More valuation leads from portals = fewer valuations coming to agents directly from their marketing and relationship building efforts. This simply gives the portals more power. *This is not a good thing for agencies.* If you think its bad that portals control the search part of the mover journey, wait until they control more of the valuations flow. The organisation who controls that has incredible power. Agencies should push back hard on this development, more valuations sounds good, but it is a highly deceptive trojan horse. It might not seem like much at the moment, but this is the thin end of a VERY important wedge.

From: Mike Riley 19 May 2021 12:17 PM

Mike Riley
How does reallocating advertising spend from one monopoly (Rightmove) to another (Facebook/Instagram/Linkedin) create any competitive long term advantage for the agency owner? Spending money to "hack" growth is a route to nowhere in the long run. It's a tax companies have to pay for a mediocre customer experience. Organisations that focus hard on how to amaze customers, tend to have all the growth they can handle.

From: Mike Riley 18 May 2021 07:28 AM

Mike Riley
Nice work chaps.

From: Mike Riley 14 May 2021 05:46 AM

Mike Riley
There can be no comparison made between the startup days of Rightmove and Boomin. One invented the industry and the other is coming very late to a mature market place. Its also wrong to say that "People aren’t just going to change what they’ve been doing for the past 20 years" They did when Rightmove appeared and with many other game changing, industry inventing concepts. That's Boomin's fundamental issue, its just not different enough and its entering the back end of the 'portal phase' of technology in our industry. Something new will appear (ive no idea what) that WILL be game changing and your barber, taxi driver and grandmother will be talking about it. That is the effect real game changers have. Sadly, this ain't that. In fact, they should take "the game changing property search" off the hero text on their website.... its like telling someone your funny/pretty/clever. If its true, they probably already know it.

From: Mike Riley 10 May 2021 07:07 AM

Mike Riley
Good article. Its interesting that I keep hearing how easy it is for Boomin to raise money. The patchwork of investors revealed yesterday and delayed start date, would suggest it might not be quite so forthcoming without Neil Woodford's fund and Axel Springer. £25m barely gets you a seat at the property portal table, unless you are doing something really different. Let's hope the agency subscriptions make up a good chunk of the remaining £25m of marketing budget promised over three years.

From: Mike Riley 15 April 2021 07:39 AM

Mike Riley
Boomin is not dead, but its dangerously close to being stranded on the rocks of mediocrity.

From: Mike Riley 08 April 2021 08:11 AM

Mike Riley
It's a mistake to use the same marketing channels as smaller traditional agencies. Local marketing worked for Just Eat because the local restaurants are even worse than most agents at differentiation. They should stick to TV and go back to what got them where they are. If they had been doing that for the last year they would have massively increased market share. Given the news of Uber and gig worker pay, I wonder if the interview includes that ticking time bomb for purplebricks.

From: Mike Riley 17 March 2021 06:59 AM

Mike Riley
Boomin's £50m marketing budget sounds like a big number, but £17M PA isn't enough on it's own, if you are only adding bells and whistles to the consumer experience. It is enough, to create an amount of noise for your IPO and keep the show on the road until the founders can exit though! Read more... linkedin michaelrileyux

From: Mike Riley 08 March 2021 11:06 AM

Mike Riley
Good for ZPG that an intelligent business strategy is paying off.

From: Mike Riley 08 March 2021 09:47 AM

Mike Riley
Extending the stamp duty deadline and then making it easier to borrow, is like calling the fire brigade and then throwing more petrol on the fire. Homeownership affordability can't be improved by fueling demand.

From: Mike Riley 01 March 2021 06:16 AM

Mike Riley
One thing that Rightmove do have in their favour is a live site.

From: Mike Riley 26 February 2021 07:41 AM

Mike Riley
C and C portal one step closer?

From: Mike Riley 19 February 2021 07:18 AM

Mike Riley
Perhaps before agreeing shareholders should be asking what the merged companies plans are re. portal choice and whether they intend to create another rightmove on their own or with Boomin? Thats were the value in the deal is.

From: Mike Riley 25 January 2021 07:04 AM

Mike Riley
If PB had done that after the first lockdown, they would have already achieved it. They have missed their biggest opportunity since launch to grab market share.

From: Mike Riley 25 January 2021 07:00 AM

Mike Riley
Its an unpopular view, but I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment. Property would be a lot more affordable, if we only had one each.

From: Mike Riley 12 January 2021 07:01 AM

Mike Riley
Anyone have any figures on % of MIP that dont go through to mortgage offer stage?

From: Mike Riley 06 January 2021 07:55 AM

Mike Riley
This is highly unlikely. Value gains will not be lost, the current lockdown will result in supply contracting further and prices will therefore stay the same or increase. The greatest restriction on the market is lender appetite to provide mortgages.

From: Mike Riley 06 January 2021 07:50 AM

Mike Riley
Probably not worth predicting tomorrow let alone 2021.

From: Mike Riley 17 December 2020 11:30 AM

Mike Riley
The agent may not be incentivised, but because of the up front cost, the seller is and that's what sells property.

From: Mike Riley 16 December 2020 17:50 PM

Mike Riley
IMHO PB have missed a massive trick during the post lockdown 1 market. They should have been pouring on the COMMISERY angle on TV. Their model relies on a strong buyers market and if they had done so, they would have pushed their market share to the levels predicted in the beginning.

From: Mike Riley 15 December 2020 13:09 PM

Mike Riley
If the Connels x Countrywide deal goes ahead the only thing that will be relevant in portals is when will they launch Rightmove 2.0.

From: Mike Riley 25 November 2020 08:07 AM

Mike Riley
Is there is a rapidly increase gap between what a lender approves and what the final mortgage offer looks like? Its like two parts of their business aren't talking. When the application gets to underwriting, the lenders are being ultra cautious. Housing bubble x COVID x Brexit = big hole in lending book in n years.

From: Mike Riley 30 October 2020 07:55 AM

Mike Riley
“I do think this demand will come back eventually but it’s not clear yet how long it will take.” About 2mins after a vaccine is found. This is the best buying opportunity In London since the credit crunch.

From: Mike Riley 22 October 2020 07:07 AM

Mike Riley
Not while interest rates are low.

From: Mike Riley 16 October 2020 20:17 PM

Mike Riley
Without a doubt the toughest job in the portal market, best of luck Jason.

From: Mike Riley 01 September 2020 12:31 PM

Mike Riley
Really dramatic change in markets rarely arrives with much warning.

From: Mike Riley 27 August 2020 19:53 PM

Mike Riley
The org. With the way forward would not be stupid enough to post it on here. Ps. The point is that comments on here aren't all negative, they are often useful and from people who have pursued ideas and witness change in the industry over long periods of time.

From: Mike Riley 26 July 2020 22:10 PM

Mike Riley
Until recently I paid for FT.com there is just as much waffle on there.

From: Mike Riley 25 July 2020 08:43 AM

Mike Riley
Part of the issue is that most of the headlines are based upon what a company intends to do rather than proof of concept. Much of which have been tested before and investors have lost money. I see no reason not to point this out, as it saves other people potentially losing money. If Axel Springer had read some of the comments they might still have hundreds of millions in the bank and not up in smoke.

From: Mike Riley 25 July 2020 08:30 AM

Mike Riley
Some facts would probably lead to fewer emotional reactions.

From: Mike Riley 25 July 2020 08:12 AM

Mike Riley
This is part of a sales funnel for something else. When something is offered for free, you are the product.

From: Mike Riley 24 June 2020 06:45 AM

Mike Riley
This is a bizarre statement and reads like an extended preparation for a job interview. One word that relates to success in business that appears to be missing is..... .... profit.

From: Mike Riley 17 June 2020 04:34 AM

Mike Riley
What Rightmove need to do is get a quick grip on the definition of what a virtual viewing is. Its highly misleading to customers and a joke that many agencies think a virtual viewing is a series of still photos moving across the screen, like some iphoto sequence from the early 00's.

From: Mike Riley 04 June 2020 08:47 AM

Mike Riley
IMHO Rightmove is one of the least innovative companies I can think of.

From: Mike Riley 02 June 2020 08:33 AM

Mike Riley
I'm surprised that Zoopla would release this. It lacks hard data to prove key points to actually make decisions on and feels like a PR piece to show heads of agencies that "Zoopla is on your side". I'm up for lowering frictional costs in moving, but the arguments will need to be far more robust than this. PS its not a network effect of spending, its a trickle down effect.

From: Mike Riley 28 May 2020 06:51 AM

Mike Riley
Blah blah blah.

From: Mike Riley 22 May 2020 18:47 PM

Mike Riley
MLS works in America because it is a demand led market. The UK is a supply led market. It doesn't work here for that reason. Scary that this company is wasting investors money considering it.

From: Mike Riley 18 May 2020 09:14 AM

Mike Riley
Er.... why do you think they have prioritised getting the housing market going? Could it be they desparately need Stamp Duty revenues? The squeezed middle is about to get choked to pay for furlough etc....expect higher stamp duty in niches where the upper middle classes spend their excess cash. holiday homes, buy to lets and probably a host of taxes around Airbnbs for landlords and possibly travellers. The latter happens in hotels around the world already.

From: Mike Riley 14 May 2020 07:42 AM

Mike Riley
Hardly sinster. That message comes up with every listing that is removed by an agency, whatever the reason.

From: Mike Riley 04 May 2020 13:44 PM

Mike Riley
This isnt going to be popular! I say put prices up and get rid of all the uncompetive agencies that only exist because they plug into RM. Fewer agencies will mean higher earnings for those that are left. All that happens if RM charges are reduced is a) more agencies will startup and survive b) the discount will be passed onto the consumer, as UK agencies have an inability to maintain fee levels, with constant discounting. The industry should be thinking about increasing transactions not cutting costs. Starting with how to unwind all those sales to buy to let landlords (who rarely sell as often as an owner occupier) that seemed a good idea at the time, would be a start. The time for arguments against RM was 20 years ago. I can remember the small competitors to the agency I worked for not believing their luck when (as by far the most dominant agent in all our towns) we joined RM. Since then my former agencies market share is at best half of what it was and in some cases down by two thirds. Death by a thousand cuts, as predicted at the time. If your good and want more of the pie in your town, get RM to push up prices. You will have fewer competitors and in the long run make more money.

From: Mike Riley 30 April 2020 06:07 AM

Mike Riley
Are your agents self employed? Are you supporting them financially too or are they salaried?

From: Mike Riley 26 March 2020 09:56 AM

Mike Riley
This price war will continue.... i'd keep your powered dry. This is what deflation looks like in reality.

From: Mike Riley 20 March 2020 09:11 AM

Mike Riley
Value is different to price. If they were anything more than mildly annoying then more agencies would be doing something about it. It would be far higher up their priority list. The "agencies would rather turn their lights off" logic was spot on. I was in a multi-agencies meeting with Miles Shipside a few years after RM launch and we asked him whether RM fees would exceed £1000 pm per agency. He said he didn't ever expect that to happen. I'm not sure RM ever expect the agencies to be so stupid as to put all their listings in one place. IMHO RM could double their fees and agencies wouldn't pull the plug on it. The reason for that is, its good value. Not only that, but too many agencies have allowed their tech, alternative marketing channels and differentiation to wither, as they suckle up to the fat Rightmove sow. So, they have some very difficult choices and pivots to make to wriggle away from that constant supply and most have got far more pressing issues to deal with. But, time will tell. Until then its Bitty Bitty all the way:)

From: Mike Riley 10 March 2020 10:51 AM

Mike Riley
HMMMM.... You could also say it was just a UK version of ZILLOW (and Trulia) Started a few years earlier in the US..... Zoopla .... Zillow.... amazingly similar name given how weirdly named they both are, in exactly the same field with the same USP.

From: Mike Riley 14 June 2019 10:43 AM

Mike Riley
Am I reading this right..... EXP REALTY that has been around for ages and is hardly big news, is being touted as this amazing discovery from the US. Its like the internet doesn't existing and someone has brought a new product to our shores in an old schooner and said "look what we have found in this in a far and distant land". EXP Realty's growth from 2009 WAS impressive, but the VR style cloud campus which would have been cutting edge then, now looks a bit naff last time I looked. But, what I don't get is, if you are going to attempt to make a short cut to success by importing a concept that was thought through by someone else (KW, EXP REALTY, CENTURY 21, REMAX), why not take one of the new companies that are doing exciting things in the US, rather than one that's based upon the world in 2009? Just a thought. Lastly, given there is clearly a governmental policy shift coming on gig workers and self-employment. If I were an agent looking at this I would ask, can you afford the liabilities to employ me (and will you) if the government forces you to do so? Any company thinking this agent "self employment angle" is going to work in the long run is going to be in for a shock. They are on the wrong side of a policy shift. Sorry to be a downer.... I like exp realty..... but come on. As an industry in the UK we can evolve better than this and we don't need companies from outside the UK to show us how.

From: Mike Riley 07 June 2019 08:56 AM

Mike Riley
HARDLY woken up..... I think the city are well aware something is up.... I have been attempting to short the stock for a while and turns out most of the platforms that normally allow it don't allow you to on PB .... when contacting them its because too many people are already shorting the stock. if anyone knows somewhere we can..... please post.

From: Mike Riley 06 April 2019 16:15 PM

Mike Riley
11.3.19 And given the 30 % surge in the share price since this post.... seems i'm not the only one.

From: Mike Riley 11 March 2019 12:57 PM

Mike Riley
I wonder how many agents are fighting for an instruction against Purplebricks today, who will be printing this and telling the owner its only a matter of time before they run out of money like Emoov and you will lose your 900 quid. Have you got 900 to throw away Mrs Homeowner? Shares are down 35% today you know?..... I can picture it now. The only thing that keeps the PB pantomime going is their revenue. As soon as sellers are panicked that they may lose their money, that will slow down rapidly and the city will turn on them quicker than you can say... "I told you so".

From: Mike Riley 21 February 2019 08:27 AM

Mike Riley
Mike DelPrete, Iain White, Richard Rawlings make this worth a reading. Thank you.

From: Mike Riley 14 December 2018 16:31 PM

Mike Riley
I reckon, Alex likes to play "Boyzone" to market leaders "Take That".... This is a play against webuyanycar.... he will do the same as he has with Zoopla.... Go into an industry with a very strong and proven business model, put a spin on what they are doing, so the investors that missed out can invest with his new idea.... build it up and float it. My money is he will make it work and find a revenue stream that isn't necessarily obvious. It could easily also be a play on the car insurance market..... its an inexpensive way of generating lots of leads for car insurance.

From: Mike Riley 03 December 2018 18:32 PM

Mike Riley
Do Snake Oil salesmen often have trouble justifying a price?

From: Mike Riley 29 November 2018 09:43 AM

Mike Riley
There is a simple calculation for this business model which I overlooked in the initial dotcom boom. Over the last two decades I have seen companies constantly fail because of miscalculating this too.... ...it's the rather dull, but important "cost of customer acquisition", how much does it cost to get a customer to the site and them to generate revenue. Most companies seriously underestimate this and when your main income derives from referral fees, it is a vital number. It also increases rapidly with competition and as soon as anyone thinks your onto something copy cats will appear quicker than a long lost relative after a lottery win. In the late 90's when Amazon was really making a grab for customers, it was spending £70 per new customer.... which at the time seemed insane... the good thing was they had the cash to do it.... but more importantly, their shoppers repeat purchase year after year. That is unlikely to happen here. There is also another issue, one stop shops rarely work well, especially in one large transactions. They work better for lots of little purchases which don't warrant spending the time shopping around. Being heavily reliant on third parties to deliver the service to the consumer creates a fundemental flaw too. As soon as you do that you move the relationship to the supplier.... next time that person needs that service again.... they go straight to the supplier... cutting you "the introducer" out in most cases. So you lose the Amazon style repeat purchases. In most industries specialist and niche players are the ones that make the profit. It does raise an interesting question though which is worth a ponder with all low cost players.... which helps to prove/disprove the low fee and PB myth.... If an agent or a website like PB or YOPA were to offer their services totally for free, would their market share increase dramatically, would they dominate? If the answer is no, then it disproves their model. If the answer is yes, then we are all doomed! I reckon the answer is a resounding NO. The reason as we all know is, sellers in their hundreds of thousands, don't see fee as being the main motivator for using an agent and indeed see the opposite. It's about VALUE. Here is another one to ponder when you're walking to your car in the rain today..... Why was it last week that the seller of "Portrait of an Artist" by the painter David Hockney chose to pay a multimillion pound commission to Christie's Auction House to acheive the record beating £70m price tag for a living artist, rather than whack it on Ebay or Gumtree for a very low fixed fee? The principle answers to that is also why good agents charging % fees will probably be around for another few decades yet.

From: Mike Riley 21 November 2018 09:37 AM

Mike Riley
Insightful Steve, this concurs with other insiders views that I have heard. Your views on the US model are spot on too. Thank you for taking the time to write it.

From: Mike Riley 13 November 2018 11:17 AM

Mike Riley
Richard well done, I'm keen to meet.

From: Mike Riley 07 November 2018 08:43 AM

Mike Riley
In principle, I agree with most of that. My view is we have a structural issue in the UK estate agency market which will continue to be exposed for all sorts of reasons. That the average "agency" can no longer keep most of the "agents" fee. There is going to be a serious talent crunch due to years of under investment by many agencies in training, poor and inflexible working conditions and low pay for many new recruits into the industry. The demand for talented agents is going to be very high and the company with the solution that provides those people with the best support and earning potential will win. We are now at a phase in the industry where companies providing an average solution to that problem with struggle to justify how they keep most of the agents earnings. The city and other investors are about to realise that they have seriously zigged when they should have zagged by backing an online advertising model. Then after the battle and all the waffle over the last 5 or 10 years about online and high street has calmed down, the dust is going to settle and when it does a load of hobbits will be standing there looking around ( a bit like The Good Estate Agency today and Ewemove and others) and say bloody hell we are still here, with even average agents earning more than they ever did working for an agency and enjoying more flexible working. Others will want to join them and realise what they have been missing. My bet is that the industry will finally realise that the majority of the ones left standing are going to be agents who keep most of the fees that they generate every day, not the agencies. I am now going to get my coffee and avoid any more Lord of the Rings metaphors this year. SImon we should have a chat, I concur with most comments you put on here.

From: Mike Riley 07 November 2018 08:42 AM

Mike Riley
Well done Rob, proving the "proper" hybrid model yet again. The industry and press need to stop referring to PB etc as hybrids or agents. They are advertising platforms with few bells and whistles added, no different to Autotrader really, hence huge media companies interest ( Axel Springers in PB or Northern and Shell in Emoov.) Being paid regardless of the result is not acting as an agent. They have proved that tech can be used much better and most importantly they have provided yet more evidence that the industry is changing from one of being employed to self employed. At some point the city will wake up and realise that the chips they have placed betting on a low cost model is the wrong trend to back. There is huge change afoot, but it isn't that one. Having earnt over £1m in commission working as a hybrid agent, I hope that more people in the industry will read this article and the one about my old Romans colleagues doing £140k in a month using an off the shelf online franchise. Then realise that they can either work less and earn the same, or work the same and earn at least double, by stepping away from being employed by an agency and becoming freelance. Doing it for themselves online or otherwise. Kinda like everywhere else in the world apart from the UK. PS Rob, the original hybrid claim is incorrect, you may want to edit that in future press. PPS £18k in a month as a top performer is amazingly low I thought. Agents working similar models have top performers breaking £30k per month on occasion and most I know of is £70k in one month by sole agent working from home on his own. I'd love to hear more success stories like that.... Any agent done over £100k in a month on their own working from home, someone must have?

From: Mike Riley 07 November 2018 06:16 AM

Breaking News
MovePal MovePal MovePal