Luv the Lettings

The people over at Luvthecity.com were kind enough to interview me last week to get my views on what's so special about Letting Agents and in particular, Award Winning Letting agents.

The interview was to promote entry to the forthcoming Letting Agency of the Year Awards in association with The Sunday Times. Entries close this Friday and so agents wanting to benefit in the same way that Young London have, must get moving asap.

The entry process is really simple – register your entry online , fill in and submit a simple questionnaire before Friday 23rd April and then you will be called for a telephone interview.  

Any agents working with our sponsors as listed to the right will be able to benefit from a reduced entry by asking them for their voucher code.

You can read the interview here.

You can enter the awards here.

Why Google Property Search isn't a problem for portals

It was finally reported in the national press today that Google is likely to launch it's Real Estate search in the UK next year. Hardly breaking news for those of us in the industry, but it seems to have had an adverse effect on Rightmove's share price nonetheless.

I don't believe this will be a problem for the big portals though. Here's why:

1. It hasn't caused armageddon in Australia and the US

Realtor.com in the US and Realestate.com.au in Oz, the dominant property portals in their respective countries have both continued relatively unscathed by Google's entry to their marketplaces. Why? Because they offer agents more than just another place to list their properties and they have established brands with loyal users.

Even if Google did pull traffic away from the established portals, would this actually harm them? Most of them don't run advertising, so their traffic numbers aren't important from that respect. We tend to think of these things in absolute terms; "will people continue to use Rightmove or switch to Google". The reality is they may use both, they may use many others. It's a big enough game for there to be plenty of players. The success of one doesn't necessarily mean the doom of another. Look4aProperty is still hanging in there after all.

2. Google is a search engine, not a portal

The established portals' dominance in property is actually great for Google, because it means others have to invest heavily in paid for search to get a look in at the top of the search results or toil late into the night adjusting keywords for years. Google is unlikely to want to compete with the major portals both because it is not a portal itself and because the portals help it to generate revenue, but it is likely to believe there is serious paid for search revenue to be generated from the 'long tail' of property advertisers, namely agents. Google Property Search may actually end up linking through to individual properties on Rightmove, Primelocationet al, in which case, the status quo would be maintained.

3. Agent websites compromise the user experience

You only need to look to Globrix to understand how far we are from Google stealing everyone's thunder. Globrix' site is just about as slick as you get in portal world and their property database (although not complete) is as good as one needs to claim to have 'complete' UK coverage. Despite this compelling combination and consequent success, they haven't really troubled the paid for portals. I would actually classify Globrix as a search engine rather than a portal, because to present properties fully, Globrix does and Google will rely on users leaving their sites to view property information in full on an agent's own website. This is where they fall down.

There are so many completely rubbish estate agent websites out there, it compromises the user experience massively when a slick site like Globrix links through to a property page on an agent's website that was clearly designed (badly) in 1998. Poor presentation and poor navigation on the agent site would discourage serious property hunters from repeatedly using Google Property Search, not to mention the potential for property listings to be duplicated or out of date. Some agents already have a great website with fantastically presented properties, but this still doesn't help Globrix or Google, because of the inconsistency in the presentation.

Rightmove has always carefully managed uniformity. Their property listings are consistently presented and as much as this has been a frustration to agents keen to achieve stand out, it has helped Rightmove generate a loyal user base who are comfortable with browsing the site. This is because they are familiar with how all the information on a property is set out. Rightmove have never allowed their listings to click through to the agents' own websites because of the loss of control that comes with this.

What next?

Google Property Search will come to the UK. Not today, not tomorrow, but soonish. That's about the only thing we can be certain of. What happens after that is open to huge conjecture. In a world of a successful Google Property Search, agent websites would need to be more fluid. Property pages would need to be the landing pages or individual properties would need their own websites in the same vane as the Estate Create tours. Think about how this works elsewhere, if you search for a product which Amazon or eBay list, it doesn't click through to the homepage, it goes directly to the product page, but most importantly here, Amazon and eBay attempt to persuade that visitor to delve deeper into their own sites by displaying offers, functions and other product suggestions similar to the product they have found.

There will be agents that 'get it' and raise their game significantly in this arena, and fast. Those will be the ones who are able to say to vendors "oh yes, all our properties are optimised to appear on the new Google Property Search" and leverage a point of difference from the competition, but they won't be saying in the same breath "and that's why we stopped listing on Findaproperty, Rightmove, Primelocation, etc." Why? Because every single one of their competitors would cite it as a reason not to list with that agent.

We're number 1! So what?

SpicerHaart got wrapped across the knuckles by the ASA last week for claiming to be the number 1 agent in Harlow. A claim that one of their competitors, Kings Group took exception to. Despite a lengthy disclaimer on the ad, the sources of data were called into question by Kings Group and the ASA upheld the complaint that the claim made by the ad broke their guidelines in relation to substantiation and truthfulness. You can read the full detail of the adjudication here.

The measurement for being number 1 in Harlow that SpicerHaart used was market share. Probably one of the most important benchmarks an agent should look at in assessing their performance against the competition. In a constantly expanding and contracting marketplace, market share is the only constant point of comparison.

From a marketing perspective, being number does 1 matter. If you've got more listings and sold more properties than anyone else, your success will influence others choice of agent by virtue of what they see around them. In certain circumstances being number 1 helps win more business in itself. The best example of this is probably on Google. If you're number 1 in search results this will attract more traffic to your site. You get to be number 1 because consensus took you there though, not the other way round. Consensus can be a powerful factor of influence. If enough people do something or say something, then others will follow the crowd. That is why we queue. That is why millions of us signed up to Facebook without much idea about what it was or why we should be on there. It's just that everyone else was doing it.

Perversely, many estate agents' efforts to stand out from the competition; claiming to be number 1, claiming to be the local experts, often lead them to being perceived to be just like the competition. Why? Because, they're all making the same sort of boastful claims about themselves. If you're doing this, you're actually conforming to the consensus that this is how agents should talk about themselves.

Be careful before you hang your hat on being number 1, especially if others are also trying to use the same peg. As I have written about previously, it's no good you talking about how good you are, you need to find somebody else to do that for you. The market share numbers may speak for themselves, but if they're not credible, and I mean 100% irrefutable, you run the risk of appearing to be another arrogant agent making boastful, unsubstantiated claims.

Sometimes, number 1 isn't favourable anyway. BT are number 1 in their marketplace. British Gas are also top dog in theirs. Does that make consumers more or less attracted to these brands? They're big. Does that mean they're clever? Does that mean I can expect a personal service? Does it make you feel valued as a customer when a company devotes their marketing spend to boasting about their own success rather than talking about their customers?

Being number 1 should actually be a byproduct of being the best. If you do everything better than your competitors, you should naturally enjoy greater success. Focus on the aspects of your business that will make you or keep you at number 1 and market the benefits of those separators to customers rather than your domination of a particular postcode.

Tweeting new listings

Despite having been around for a fair old while, Twitter is currently enjoying a meteoric rise in popularity and has steadily climbed the list of the UK's most visited websites thus far in 2009.

For the iltwitterate amongst you, Twitter is a social micro-blogging site; a what? A social network that lets you post very short statements (there is a 140 character limit) known as "Tweets". Much like the status feature on Facebook, Twitter can be used by the individual to inform their friends or "followers" about what they're doing, what they're thinking, or to pose a question.

Ignoring the affront that Twitter poses to Facebook in providing a broadcast mechanism for people's self-obsession and randomness, it does have more sensible applications and some are using it to keep applicants abreast of new properties and other news that they can't get on their own website or the portals quick enough. A good example of this is gumtreefltLDN

Twitter is almost instantaneous, the moment you click the update button, your followers will be able to see your Tweet. If you are serving a fast-moving rental market with typical tenants in their twenties, you will definitely find your audience receptive to receiving updates via Twitter, probably more so than phone or e-mail.

If you do have a conventional webpage for the property, you can link through to it. Twitter compresses web addresses using TinyURL and other services to help keep you within the character limit.

Another example of someone using Twitter for properties is Globrix, who have a Twitter page called PropertyPorn which they use to showcase some of their nicest pads, but this is more of a novelty than a way of actually promoting listings seriously.

If you think that promoting your properties through Twitter is worth a try, ask one of your more web-savvy negs to set it up for you. It won't take them long, it won't cost you anything and may just give you a useful new channel for marketing your listings and maybe a point of difference from your competitors for a while at least.

5 reasons why you should let your staff use Facebook at work

It's a fairly widely accepted notion that if you treat people in a particular way long enough, they will start to behave like it.

For example, a jealous wife who accuses her husband of being unfaithful (when he isn't). Most of us have heard of stories where, after enough years of relentless accusation, the man will say to himself "well I'm getting as much grief as if I was actually knocking someone else off, I might as well make all the grief worthwhile!".

So, how do you treat your staff? Like adults who are old enough to make decisions for themselves? Or like school children who need to be governed like wild animals?

"If I let my staff use Facebook, they wouldn't do any work!" That just isn't true. If you employ people who don't want to work, then they wont work, whether you let them use Facebook or not.

I recently sat next to 2 men at a seminar at the Institute of Directors. They ran a lighting consultancy and employed about 30 people. The subject of staff using Facebook came up and they proudly boasted that they had spent £20,000 on an IT system specifically designed not only to prevent staff using sites like Facebook, but also to track which websites they are using and how long they spend on them.

Now, if you employed 300 people I might understand, but 30? What a waste of time and money, and how demoralising for their staff. You might as well say: "You are forbidden from having any communication with members of your family or friends during working hours".

This is not the 1950's and young talented people do not want to be treated like untrustworthy school children.

If you treat people like trustworthy adults, then most of them will behave as such. People respond to how they are treated.

So, imagine what it would do to your staff's morale and also to your image if you made an announcement to them as follows:

"We know that Facebook is a great way to keep in touch with your friends and family, but we also know it can be a big distraction. We'd like you to feel free to use Facebook at your discretion, in moderation, but please watch out for it becoming a distraction. We'd suggest 5-10 mins, 2 or 3 times a day."

You will have a happy crew, who will think you're great, and for this reason alone they will want to produce better results for you.

In any case, anyone with an iPhone or a Blackberry can get on Facebook without your computers - I bet some of you didn't know that!

So, don't waste precious time and IT money blocking websites your staff want to use. Just ask them to use their judgement and not take the p*ss. They'll love you for it.

So, as promised here are 5 real reasons why you should let your staff use Facebook:

    1. It will make them very happy, and that in itself can be hard to achieve!

    2. Using Facebook actually lowers the number of personal emails, phone calls and text messages sent

    3. Your staff will become better communicators

    4. Its a waste of management time policing a no-Facebook policy

    5. Facebook now has 200 million members worldwide - you can't ignore that sort of popularity and you just look like a dinosaur if you do!

So, if you have had a no-Facebook policy, why not consider reversing it and making yourself look up to date and your staff very happy in the process.

I promise you that, on the whole, they wont abuse the privilege!

Questions Questions...

One of the spurious upsides to a reduction in the number of applicants registering is that agents can devote more time to each and do a better job of sorting the wheat from the chaff. It is clear from research that a number of estate agency firms have carried out, that less than 10% of registered applicants actually buy. Therefore the quicker and more accurately negotiators identify the "make me money" from the "cost me money" customers, the better.

However, during the many mystery shopper exercises my company carry out, the vast majority of agents fail to even establish whether the applicant is married, has children or has specific access needs for work, schools and/or hobbies. Still fewer take the time to really understand the applicant's true underlying motivation and ability - the common approach is to fill boxes in on a screen which only really scratches the surface.

Assuming one accepts that selling properties is all about matching benefits with needs, it is clearly difficult to perform that function without knowing the second half of that equation.

Much of our sales training focuses on the essential stage of qualifying prospects through highly skilled questioning and listening. The numerous types of question (including open, closed, ted, assumptive etc etc) and listening techniques (reflective statements, summaries etc etc) are the vital tools in the salesperson's toolbox.

One company we trained last year have added two simple questions into their qualification approach which have paid off handsomely - "How many people will be living in the property?" and "How much has your Financial Adviser confirmed you can pay for a property?"

It is doubtless self-explanatory what the benefits are of the information gleaned from the aforementioned questions, and with other techniques introduced via our training, the company involved has sharpened up their act considerably in identifying the right prospects to spend time with and sales results have improved significantly.

When I attended my first training course as a junior negotiator in 1983, I remember the trainer (a genius from whom I learnt so much) telling me that one of the attributes of high-performing salespeople was nosiness. His words of wisdom are as true now as they were then

Estate agency owners might be well advised to arrange a mystery shopper exercise to find out just how "nosey" their staff really are...

Julian O'Dell,

TM training & development