Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


New Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About omesella

  • Rank
    HPC Newbie
  1. Online agents seem to cover a wider geographic area and therefore list more properties for sale and because of that economy of scale, seem to be able to offer fees that are far lower than the High St. With Tesco jumping on board with the concept it is just a matter of time before the online type estate agents dominate the industry through forcing down selling fees. They will grow. High Street agents will shrink.
  2. There are various online estate agents beginning to take on the traditional High Street firms. The largests has been around for four years or so and lists about 200 properties a month which is far greater than the conventional agents. I bet you've heard of Tesco? They launched iSold this weekend and it will raise the profile of internet based estate agents considerably. Whether you have heard of them all or not....
  3. The point is that you don't need to do the leg work yourself. The new breed of online estate agents like eMoov.co.uk will do all that a traditional, expensive estate agent does but for a tenth of the fee. Isn't that the best of all worlds?
  4. Or indeed unless the charge made renders it worthwhile for you not to do it yourself. This is the point. In this day and age of the Internet and digital technology where teh EA job is substantially easier, shouldn't their fees have reduced accordingly? Even if the old fashioned High Street agents are twice as likely to sell a home than the new internet based agencies, why then is there a ten fold difference in fees. It just doesnt add up for the 'High Street = High Fees' mob anymore.
  5. Unless the fee as a flat rate was so nominal as not to make a significant difference in terms of advantage to one or other demographic?
  6. It would seem that using an estate agent but that was much cheaper than the conventional ones and that actually 'did the job' well, would be the ideal scenario?
  7. So why don't agents charge more if they secure a sale quicker? But less if they drag their feet?
  8. It certainly seems that some agents do more than others. Its apparent that they have high overheads and wastage. But the justification I was eluding to is from the point of view of teh consumer, not the industry.
  9. I suspect that estate agents are selling more than one property a month on average, even in a bad market. 2009 is set to see around 580,000 transactions (according to the Land Registry) and there are about 8000 agency offices apparently. That's 6 transactions pe ragent per month? Regardless, I am not sure that the public are particularly interested in how much an estate agent's office might or might not cost, what the fall of frate is etc. Many probably just feel that £3000 to stick their house on Rightmove and make a few calls, is rather pricey.
  10. I suppose that is the essence of the estate agency fees debate. Can the same service be provided for less than the £3,000 average that they charge. It seems to me that if you worked out what they do as an hourly rate equivalent it would result in a fee of over £200 per hour. Most lawyers are cheaper than that and they are rather better qualified !
  11. I suppose that sellers are even more hesitant to pay those 'spivs' a hefty fee in th event that their home has not increased in value so much, in order to soften the blow?
  12. Lots of discussion on here about prices, but not much about the justification for the fees charged by those that have benefited so much from double digit house value increases in the past few years. The average estate agency selling fee in the UK is about £3000.00. Value for money?
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.