Peter Fletcher

  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact

Perth property market report

May 13, 2020 by Peter Fletcher


Perth property market infographic from REIWADespite the economic doom and gloom reported by mainstream media lately, REIWA figures point to the Perth property market being in better shape now than it was this time last year. 

For the week ending 10th May just gone there were 527 sales across the Perth metro area. Compare that with the 505 for the same week last year. 

That’s an improvement of over 4%.

Clearly buyers have formed the view that neither COVID nor the predicted economic damage caused by the non-lockdown lockdown is reason enough to put their lives on hold.

Buyers are back and they’re buying!

But buyer activity is only half the story.

Since late 2019 listing stock levels have been trending downwards. 

Today there are just 11,611 properties on the market. Twelve months ago that number was 16,593 last year.

Over the past 12 months stock levels have fallen by 30%!

And they’ve continued to trend down despite the so-called Corona crisis, falling 5% in the past month alone. 

That decline is a clear indicator that, despite the swirling chatter about unemployment and recession, property owners believe that real estate in Perth is worth holding.

And that bodes well for the future of property prices in WA. 

I’m keen to hear your thoughts on the direction of the Perth property market in the comments below. 

Filed Under: Industry news, Real Estate Tagged With: Perth real estate, Perth real estate market, property, real estate

Mandating madness: The case against compulsory e-conveyancing

February 14, 2017 by Peter Fletcher

A photo of an insane man

Mandating madness. Photo credit: Anno Málie on Flickr

Disclosure

In the interest of full disclosure, I am: 

  • A Director of Residential Settlements, a mid-sized real estate settlement agency in Burswood, Western Australia
  • A PEXA subscriber
  • A councillor of the Australian Institute of Conveyancers WA
  • All views expressed herein are my own and should in no way be viewed as reflective of the position of the AICWA council.
  • This post has not been vetted or endorsed by AICWA.

Introduction

On 13 December 2016 the Registrar of Titles signalled her intent to require that, pursuant to powers granted to her by s182A of the Transfer of Land Act and commencing 1 December 2017, “all eligible land registry documents to be lodged electronically through an electronic lodgment network such as the one operated by Property Exchange Australia (PEXA)”. 

I oppose that requirement. In the words that follow I explain why.

The arguments I will advance are founded on protecting the long term future of all settlement agents in WA. They are also founded on the belief that conveyancers are fundamentally progressive. 

As an industry we have embraced Revenue Online without being compelled to do so by legislation. And we have actively engaged with both Landgate and PEXA with the intention of contributing our skills and expertise toward the creation of a platform that serves the needs of both conveyancers and consumers.

Individually, I support e-conveyancing. We need a more efficient system, one that uses the best technologies for the benefit of business and consumers alike.  We need to free ourselves from manual document checking and from running around picking up bank cheques on the morning of settlement. These, amongst many others, are activities that have been forced upon our industry by banks and Landgate. 

Electronic conveyancing has benefits for both consumers and conveyancers. Buyers will have their name registered on the title instantly, there’ll be less settlement delays as a result of the signatures on the Transfer of Land and the mortgage being different, and sellers will have access to their funds sooner.

But these are of marginal benefit for consumers. In the 30+ years I’ve been involved in real estate, I’ve never once had a buyer ask me how soon their name would appear on the title. Most signature mismatches can be sorted on the same day. And I’ve rarely had a seller ask for instant access to their funds.

It’s my belief that we don’t need the blunt force trauma of mandating in order for the industry to adopt it. We don’t need big business lecturing us about how to run our business. And we don’t need legislators bullying our industry into dancing to a song played by big bank executives.

I’m aware that Landgate knows about at least some of the concerns raised in this article. Still, aside from corporate speak that commits to nothing, the legitimate concerns raised by the industry and mentioned below remain unaddressed. 

In daily life I have a low tolerance for whingers, those people who clang like an empty tin can but who never offer a solution. Therefore, toward the end of this article, I propose a way forward for all of the industry.

A brief history of electronic conveyancing in WA

The Electronic Conveyancing Act 2014 was created as a result of “the Intergovernmental Agreement for an Electronic Conveyancing National Law (“IGA”) signed by all Australian States and the Northern Territory. The IGA came into operation on 21 November 2011.” The act corresponded with the Electronic Conveyancing National Law (ECNL) and created some consequential amendments to related legislation including, amongst others,  the Transfer of Land Act 1893 and the Settlement Agents Act 1981. 

The act provided for the appointment of an Electronic Lodgment Network Operator (ELNO) to provide and operate an Electronic Lodgment Network (ELN) “that enables the [preparation and] lodging of registry instruments and other documents in electronic form for the purposes of the land titles legislation.” Property Exchange Australia Ltd (PEXA, previously National E-Conveyancing Development Limited (NECDL)) was formed in early 2010 with the purpose of becoming the first ELNO. To this point it is the only ELNO in Australia.

PEXA’s activities are regulated by Australian Registrars’ National Electronic Conveyancing Council (ARNECC) who determine the rules to which ELNOs and Subscribers must adhere.

About PEXA

In addition to acting as an ELNO, PEXA has positioned itself as a virtual settlement room, replacing the existing requirement to physically attend settlement with documents and bank cheques. They predict that, as a result of the use of their services, “the conveyancing costs associated with buying or selling a property will reduce by $120 to $150 per transaction based on direct reductions in disbursements and the increased efficiency of service provision.”

According to the Landgate Annual Report 2015/16, Landgate owns a 14.31% stake in PEXA. 

Along with a variety of other fees, PEXA charge $107.80 for the lodgment of a land transfer document. 

The effects of mandating

The following tables identify the broad gains and losses that flow to various stakeholders as a result of the mandating of e-conveyancing.

PEXA

PEXA is set to become the primary beneficiary should mandating proceed. They will gain a significant increase in income over a very short period of time and the precedent set in WA will create a template for other jurisdictions to follow. For PEXA, mandating is a dream play.

Established as an effective monopoly Gain
A substantial increase in income over a very short time frame Gain
Slows down their cash burn rate, profitable faster Gain
Entrenches first mover advantage, no time for other tech companies to create a competitive offering Gain
Increases their valuation at IPO, estimated at $1 billion Gain
Creates a precedent for other jurisdictions Gain
Increase in support staff required to assist settlement agents with the transition Loss

Landgate

Landgate will also be a significant beneficiary of mandating particularly through reductions in labour costs.

Will no longer need to manually check the eligibility of documents at the point of lodgment Gain
Will be able to reduce staff numbers Gain
Will become more profitable Gain
Established as a template in the development of “a single world class registry system… operated
under a Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) commercial arrangement…”
Gain
Will be more valuable if Landgate should be privatised Gain

Settlement agents

Forced to use PEXA for most transactions Neutral
Because all  have to use PEXA no-one is at a price advantage when quoting. This gain may become neutral if the Code is amended. Gain
Significant amount of business process changes Loss
Settlement agents will find the PEXA fee easier to pass on to clients if it’s compulsory and everyone else is using it Gain
Need to invest heavily in training to teach conveyancers how to use PEXA Loss
Outside clerks will be made redundant Gain
Exposed to increased business and regulatory risk Loss

Banks

Reduced reliance on mortgage settlement services such as SAIG, FMS, Scott Ashwood Gain
Will need to retool their processes to reflect that manual checking of mortgage and land transfer documents is no longer required Loss

Mortgage settlement services/intermediaries

Will lose most of their mortgage settlement service business overnight with the an Australia-wide loss estimated at $124 million Loss

The reasons to oppose mandating

It’s the wrong thing to do by consumers

  • Despite PEXA’s claims to the contrary, their fees will “invariably passed on to the customer”. As a result, the cost of a settlement will increase by around $150.
  • Because PEXA is an effective monopoly there will be no downward pressure on their prices. Although they are required to maintain a “publicly available, equitable and transparent pricing policy” their prices are otherwise unregulated. If electronic settlements are mandated consumers are forced to accept whatever price PEXA charge.  
  • Without a competitor there’s no competitive pressure or incentive to improve the PEXA product.
  • There are numerous contracts (particularly off-the-plan contracts) that are or will be awaiting settlement as of 1 December 2017. If one or both parties to those contracts refuse to vary the definition of the term “settlement” and clause 3.4 of the Joint Form of General Conditions (JFGC) any attempt to settle electronically exposes the client to potentially significant legal risks.  

It’s the wrong thing to do by the industry

Real estate agents won’t be ready

REIWA and the Law Society of WA are currently working on amendments to the JFGC that address the issues raised by e-conveyancing. The new e-conveyancing-ready version of the JFGC is due for release in the second half of 2017. This will give REIWA and the Department of Commerce approximately 120 days to train over 12,000 real estate agents and registered sales reps on the implications to them and their clients of the changes to the JFGC. These implications will include:

  • The compulsory verification of identity for buyers. Agents who write short-dated contracts for buyers who live overseas or in remote locations may expose the buyer to legal risks including penalty interest if the buyer is unable to have their identity verified in time for settlement.
  • The effects of withdrawal notices on the settlement date. There maybe legitimate reasons why a settlement has to be withdrawn from the electronic environment. When that happens a paper-based settlement will be required and this may cause significant delays while new documentation is prepared, issued, signed and exchanged.
  • Depending on how the JFGC is written there may be changes to the way penalty interest is charged in the event of a delayed settlement.
  • There may be other issues that arise as a result of the wording of the new JFGC but these won’t be known until after they’re released.

Settlement agents will face additional risks

Settlement agents, and lawyers performing settlements,  face additional risks that include:

  • Landgate and PEXA have provided insufficient training on the platform. Untrained and inexperienced conveyancers may place consumers’ funds and legal rights at risk. It will take a significant amount of time before a substantial majority of the industry has sufficient skills and experience to be aware of and mitigate the risks created by settling electronically.
  • There are still questions over what professional indemnity insurance coverage will be available to settlement agents if a client was to incur a loss as a result of  settling a transaction on PEXA. The worst case scenario is for a client to sustain a loss and the settlement agent not have PI coverage. It will take months, if not years, before insurers will be in a position to understand the risks of e-conveyancing and price the coverage of those risks.
  • Banks are still not ready to settle online. Retooling of long-established systems will take time. Mandating places consumers at risk of a delayed settlement because banks are simply not geared up for electronic conveyancing.
  • Settlement agents are placed at risk of breaching the Settlement Agents Act and other consumer legislation if they fail to disclose the PEXA fee to their client. Rule 6B of the Code of Conduct requires that settlement agents disclose their service amount. To assist consumers to compare quotes that amount must not include government, statutory and financial institution charges. As the PEXA fee includes a component of a statutory charge (a check search) and a financial institution charge (the amount usually charged for bank cheques) it has come to inhabit a dead zone that settlement agents are being told to navigate on their own and at their own peril. If they include the PEXA fee as part of their service amount they risk breaching Rule 6B of the Code. If they don’t include it in the service amount they may be found in contravention of s44(9) of the Settlement Agents Act and face a criminal conviction. If for no other reason, all thoughts about mandating should be abandoned until this issue has been resolved.
  • Mandating will place PEXA – an effective monopoly – in a position to dictate unfavourable and onerous terms and conditions on subscribers. These terms and conditions won’t be open to negotiation and may pose additional financial and legal risks for settlement agents.

The platform isn’t ready

As much as PEXA and Landgate are spruiking the benefits of the platform, it’s a long, long way from being ready to handle large scale adoption. Just some of the issues that need to be addressed are as follows:

  • Digital signatures don’t match bank signatures. This means that a licensee can’t effectively delegate their authority to sign the transfer in the same way they would delegate their authority to sign trust account cheques to two staff members. What happens if they run a three person operation consisting of the licensee and two unlicensed employees and wish to go on holidays? Who has the electronic signature? At the moment the only option is to provide one of the employees with a digital signature and let them sign in the absence of the licensee. But this move gives the employee unlimited single-signature authority over the trust account via their PEXA digital signature. There are zero checks and balances, which is poor trust account management practice.  
  • No built in bank account verification. One of PEXA’s boasts is that funds will be available in a client’s bank account (usually) on the day of settlement. It’s a great sales pitch. But it’s fatally flawed. Why? Because there’s no built-in verification that the account number belongs to the client. With a manual settlement, cheques are banked across the counter at which point the teller checks the name on the account with the name on the cheque. It’s a simple procedure which stops often large cheques ending up in the wrong person’s bank account. But there’s no such verification procedure in PEXA. That means a $500,000+ deposit could be made into a perfect strangers bank account if, for example, a transposition error were made when the account details were entered into PEXA. I know for a fact this scares a lot of conveyancers and is why many are refusing to jump on the PEXA bandwagon. 
  • As of now, the PEXA system only handles three transactions in a daisy chain (sales that depend on each other to effect settlement). Longer chains (it’s not uncommon to have five in a daisy chain) will still require manual settlement.
  • The PEXA system doesn’t handle properties with caveats where the caveator isn’t represented by a PEXA subscriber. This scenario occurs as a result of fencing disputes, unsecured loans and domestic relationship separations. 
  • If someone bails out of an electronic settlement there are significant time and monetary costs involved in the additional work required to retroactively sign the documents required to settle manually. If electronic settlements are mandated, this scenario will happen regularly as a result of one or more of the banks involved in the transaction not having their systems ready to accommodate the issues posed by electronic conveyancing. 

Mandating doesn’t pass the sniff test

There’s something just not right in the Registrar using the power granted to them by the government of WA to nurture the establishment of an effective monopoly in PEXA, of which the Registrar’s employer is a substantial shareholder.

It’s a conflict of interest of the grandest proportion and one that the CEO of PEXA Marcus Price is well aware. A 2015 Sydney Morning Herald article noted: “Mr Price said they want to sell the business after it begins to make a profit. In part this is because they will have a conflict of interest in being both owners and customers of the system. The most likely natural owners would be retail investors.”

Through mandating, the people of WA will be forced to pay for a defective product in order to help make big banks and professional investors rich when PEXA lists on the stock exchange.

Those who point to the ASX as proof that a monopoly can be a good thing should think again! There is broad agreement that the ASX should be exposed to competition. According to Federal Treasurer Scott Morrison, “the government [is] committed to open and competitive markets which are “fundamental to a vibrant 21st century economy””.

Mandating the use of an effective monopoly when the rest of Australia is moving to open and competitive markets smacks of a greedy, short-term cash grab at the expensive of WA consumers.

What needs to be done

For the real benefits of electronic settlements to be realised, it’s important that everyone involved in the process “transition quickly”, but in an orderly manner.

If the transition isn’t orderly it will leave businesses and consumers battered, bruised and resentful.

Therefore the Registrar should immediately defer all plans to mandate electronic lodgment. This move will allow banks, settlement agents and the real estate industry the time needed to re-engineer their systems without exposing clients and small business to further risk.

ARNECC should then immediately introduce rules into their Model Operating Requirements making it compulsory that all ELNOs provide a standards-based means of interoperability between one another. Interoperability is essential if subscribers are to be allowed to choose between ELNOs. Establishing standards for interoperability will help create the certainty needed for corporations to invest in the establishment of other ELNOs.

AICWA need to continue their efforts to stop mandating, however they need to do more to assist their members achieve an orderly transition to electronic conveyancing. They should speed up the delivery of relevant training courses that address the business issues created by the use of electronic conveyancing. Course topics could include:

  • Risk management in an electronic environment
  • PEXA fee disclosure that works for the consumer without landing you in jail
  • How to deal with redundancies
  • Change management
  • Digital security
  • Services marketing

Yet, as much as the AICWA need to work hard for their members, Landgate and PEXA need to help with the heavy lifting. To speed the uptake of e-conveyancing they need to partner with AICWA to create free or low cost training to settlement agents, financial institutions and lawyers on the use of the PEXA platform. These courses need to be offered regularly, often, and at times that suit the conveyancers.

The Department of Commerce should immediately set about amending the Code of Conduct to address the issue created by PEXA’s fees. It would make sense to remove the fee disclosure requirement in r23 in their entirety and replace it with a more general requirement for the agent to act in accordance with Australian Consumer Law.

Finally, regulations should be introduced into the the Electronic Conveyancing Act 2014 or other appropriate legislation to the effect that, until such time as there is more than one ELNO, the fees charged by PEXA be capped to a maximum amount approved by the Commissioner for Consumer Protection.

These are no small undertakings. If implemented, they will ensure a better deal for the consumers of Western Australia and help make the transition to e-conveyancing smooth, orderly and quick.

If you’ve made it this far and share my view that mandating is madness, please do one or more of the following:

  • Share this post on Facebook, LinkedIn, GooglePlus and Twitter
  • Send it to your friends and colleagues via email
  • Send it to your local MP
  • Send it to your local media outlet
  • Create a Meetup group to discuss what more you can do to stop mandating

Filed Under: Business, Industry news, Real Estate, Settlement Industry Tagged With: ARNECC, Code of Conduct, e-conveyancing, ELNO, JFGC, Joint Form of General Conditions, Landgate, mandating, monopoly, MOR, NECDL, PEXA, Registrar, REIWA, SAA, settlement agents, Settlement Agents Act

Let’s hate on REA for a moment. It’s easy and it’s fun!

July 9, 2011 by Peter Fletcher

Paper with written text "I hate you, we hate you. Class."

The case for an industry led property data platform

In what follows I propose a road map for real estate agents to regain control of property marketing on the Internet. I explain why an industry owned national listing portal won’t succeed and I outline a property data platform that has the potential to level the competitive playing field, provide more exposure for agents’ listings, and improve the quality of information available to buyers and sellers.

Round and round and round we go

The Internet is an important tool for agents. It’s important because it’s important to property buyers. Put simply the Internet is an essential ingredient in the sales recipe.

Big business worked this recipe out long ago. Where once the eyeballs of buyers found their way to newspapers today they look at property web pages. Today the rivers of gold are the vast incomes generated from the pockets of real estate agents who buy the Internet advertising dream.

In the days when print media was dominant agents mustered up their courage to hate on the papers. They’d meet as collectives and agree to swap from one to the next. They made their own papers and industry magazines. But nothing much changed. They out-advertised one another and, at the end of each month, quarter and year, they bemoaned the cost of advertising and conjured up new ways to solve the problem.

For a moment the Internet was their knight in shining armour. It was cheap and often free and presented the opportunity of a lifetime. But big media aren’t big media for nothing. They know the value of a big audience.

Agents too wanted access to that growing audience. The problem was that the audience never turned up on their websites. Rather they went to where the properties could be found on the portals. More properties and sharp SEO practices brought the portals more traffic, and increased advertising and subscription prices.

So today the industry is once again on a “hate on big media” band wagon. And realestate.com.au is squarely in the firing line.

Hating was never this easy!

Real estate agents hate realestate.com.au. With a passion. They advertise their properties and themselves on the portal. They earn, in some cases, big money from the leads the site generates. But still they hate on REA. Maybe hate is too strong a word, but not by much. For, after years of escalating subscription prices and extortionate charges for premium ad placements, agents are wounded and angry.

As if to rub salt into those wounds, REA CEO, Greg Ellis, recently announced his company’s  intention to form a direct relationship with prospective property sellers. At an address to the ASX Emerging Growth Conference in London asserted that his company’s near-term strategic imperative was “building a direct relationship with the consumer.”

He went on to claim that REA would soon be in a position “…to tell every household what the value of their property is.” Indeed their strategy is already being put into effect through their subsidiaries ozhomevalue.com.au and homguru.com.au, who offer free appraisal reports to people wanting to know the value of their property.

The reason behind REA’s strategy is clear: sell leads to agents and advertising direct to home owners. And while most understand the business imperative to increase sales revenues few could see past the institutional hubris and arrogance of the announcement. In many ways Ellis’ speech has become the flash point for much subversive action by the agency community.

Prior to the Ellis speech REA was seen as greedy and uncaring but since then they were seen to be actively subverting the relationship between agent and client. In many ways Ellis had positioned himself as the embodiment of everything that was bad about his organisation.

We shall rise up and build ourselves a portal

Agents share a belief that a property portal is the peak experience for prospective buyers. For a long time now they’ve been receiving inquiries from the big portals in numbers far outweighing those achieved from their own sites.

It’s therefore understandable that the franchise and marketing groups are in discussion to form a portal to compete with REA and Domain. Imagine, a portal where agents aren’t charged exorbitant subscription fees, where a premium ad placement doesn’t require a second mortgage, and where the property is the central focus and not the portal’s income-generating ads. It’s a thought that’s alluring and attractive.

It’s also understandable that agents are deliberately reporting zero dollar sales in an attempt to blunt REA’s ability to provide meaningful sales price data to prospective sellers.

Both strategies have appeal. One promises a future that’s free from manipulation by REA, the other neuters one of REA’s key strategic initiatives.

Hang on, who’s framing this debate anyway?

The industry owned portal solution emerges from a debate framed by the portals, particularly REA and Domain.

Let’s look a closer look at how this occurs.

Both REA and Domain have deep ties to big media. REA’s majority shareholder is News Corp., the world’s third largest media empire. Domain.com.au is a Fairfax media company. It’s not surprising therefore that the business model of the portals are based on mass media.

That business model involves the usual recipe of creating lots of content, collating it into a single place, getting lots of people to consume it, then charging advertisers for access to the eyeballs. Free-to-air TV, newspapers, magazines and radio have used this recipe since their beginnings and now it’s the turn of the portals.

As long as the portal receives sufficient web traffic the business model works. It works for the portals who stand to make lots of money and it works for the agents who benefit from the buyer inquiries that are generated.

And while it works the success it achieves constrains people from imagining other models that also work. The portal, then, becomes the only available strategy to compete with another portal.

Why an industry owned portal won’t work

Creating a national, industry owned property listing portal is possible, but not easy. History shows that unifying agents around a single objective involves hard work and commitment to a long, drawn out political process.

Like never before the industry would need to be crystal clear about what it sought to achieve. In other words, why does the industry want a national portal? Rallying calls about revenge and rebellion, although warranted, are simply insufficient as the basis for a unifying vision. Sure, they stir short-term unrest but they do little to address operational tensions in the long-term.

Take for example the issue of house and land package advertising. For a national portal to be profitable it must earn an income; and that’s achieved, in the main, by selling subscriptions and advertising. Although builders and developers are an obvious source of advertising revenue some agents take the view that it’s akin to giving a competitor a free kick. They would have house and land package advertisers banned without considering the implications of the loss of revenues on subscription prices.

Then there’s the issue of relevant lead generation strategies such as REA’s home appraisal reports. If the new national portal was to create competitive offerings the inevitable question would be: Who gets the leads and why? Without a clear, commanding vision every part of the portal canvas becomes a place to contest competing values and political agendas.

Yet these are just two of the many obstacles faced by the agents of Australia to get a national portal off the ground. There are plenty more:

  • REA delivers results and that won’t change in a hurry. Agents won’t stop advertising on REA when they’re consistently receiving buyer inquiries.
  • If one franchise or marketing group breaks rank – as Ray White did in the past – then everyone will be back to listing on REA. If that happens agents will be worse off than where they started thanks to an extra subscription fee.
  • Franchisors can’t tell their agents where to list properties. Agents will list where they get the best results. That, for the moment at least, is REA.
  • A portal that’s substantially owned by franchises and marketing groups will be viewed with great suspicion by independents. Even though REA may be expensive at least they’re not my competitor. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
  • Listing portals are expensive beasts to start and run. Where are the funds coming from?
  • Sellers will demand to be listed on REA. Agents who don’t will risk losing business to agents who do.
  • Sellers are paying for the advertising. While they’re paying agents don’t care where their properties are advertised.  If the owner wants it on REA great. So long as I’m not paying for it give them what they want.

Suffice it to say there are plenty of reasons why a national portal is unlikely to succeed.

There is an alternative, one that recognises the industry’s desire to self-determination and, at the same time, one that provides a viable, cost effective counter to the dominance of the portals.

The property data platform solution

The solution I propose is an industry led property data platform (PDP) designed to improve the quality of real estate data in Australia and encourage the distribution of real estate content.

How the PDP works

Agents currently load their property listings to the web either via a CRM service, to an REI portal or direct to the portal. If they load to a CRM or an REI portal their listings are then forwarded to the paid and free services to which they’re subscribed.

In the PDP model listings would continue to be loaded to CRM and and REI portals but would then be sent to the PDP for distribution to both paid and free portals.

Property data contained within the PDP would be available by way of an API the use of which would be governed by terms of service that would protect the integrity of the data and ensure that subsequent display of the data reflected the relevant wishes of the copyright owners.

Agents not connected with an REI could load properties direct to the PDP, which would then handle their listing data in the same way as those coming from CRM’s or REI’s.

The API terms of service would require that agents, as the original copyright owners, be given control over where and when their data was shared. For example, agents may wish to load to their own site first, then to an industry portal, then to the other portals over a period of 7-10 days. This would give their site privileged position within a marketing campaign and reduce reliance on paid advertising.

To maximise improvements in data quality and portability the PDP would require the input of a broad cross-section of industry stakeholders including CRM providers, portals (both free and paid), REI’s and search companies (Google, Bing).

PDP income streams

There are a number of income streams available to the PDP including:

  1. Sale of pre-packaged real estate information e.g. sold data, suburb profiles, property research.
  2. Subscriptions from agents and developers wanting to load properties direct to PDP.
  3. API license fees from organisations wishing to access the API to build out a portal.
  4. XML feed management and maintenance on behalf of smaller portals.

How the REI’s will benefit

There are a number of benefits for the REA’s to get involved in a PDP:

  • At the moment each institute employs people whose sole responsibility it is to sort out problems with data feeds and that’s because institutes feed to so many locations. Under the PDP model they would only have a single feed to manage and that’s the one to PDP.
  • Over time the PDP would be able to create additional income streams from the creation of property information products to compete with services such as PriceFinder and RPData.
  • The PDP would position the REI’s as proactively working in the interests of their member agents to blunt the impact of the paid portals.
  • The PDP would allow the REI’s to take control of the debate about the future of marketing property on the Internet.
  • The PDP would support the development of a future industry owned national portal if ever that became a politically viable solution. Indeed the development time-frame and cost of such a strategy would be greatly reduced by having access to the vast majority of Australia’s listings via the PDP.
  • Ability to understand and predict industry trends thanks to improvements in data quality.

How agents will benefit from the PDP model

  • Reduced subscription fees as a result of the REI’s cost savings.
  • More control over where and when their data is shared. Agents could time the release of their listings to various web properties – their site, an REI site, a portal – to emphasise their website as the first place their listings are available.
  • Easy access to all free portals. All the agent would need to do is sign up for an account and let PDP do all the work uploading their listings. In fact given the right terms of service agreement PDP could automatically start loading to new free-to-list portals as their access to the PDP API was approved.
  • Access to live sold data via their API licensed data provider (CRM, REI, other).

Where to from here

There’s no doubt agents no longer see the big portals as genuine value for money. The groundswell of negative opinion demands change. But an industry owned national listing portal is unlikely to attract the broad political support required for its success. A property data portal has a far more likely to receive industry support in that it requires only the co-operation of those who stand to benefit from its success.

What happens next is largely in the hands of those in positions of leadership on REI councils across Australia. If the tone of conversations in online forums reflect the sentiment of the agency community then the REI’s have a mandate to act immediately.

With that mandate a property data portal could be operational within months and the effects of its implementation would be felt by agency almost immediately.

What you can do

If you believe the idea of an industry led PDP has merits there are a number of things you can do:

  • Email this proposal to the head of your local REI. Explain why you think it has merit.
  • Email it to your local REI councillor or representative. Ask them what they plan to do.
  • Share it on Facebook and ask your fellow agents for their thoughts.
  • Add a comment below and share your thoughts on the plan.
  • Join the Real Estate Industry group on Facebook and discuss the plan with other agents.

Photo credit: pitzyper! on Flickr

Filed Under: Industry news Tagged With: portals, property data, REA, realestateview, REIWA

Thehomepage.com.au first to add new Google +1 button

June 2, 2011 by Peter Fletcher

Google +1 buttonIn response to Google’s announcement today that their new +1 button was available for inclusion on websites, the team at thehomepage.com.au have moved quickly to make the social sharing button available throughout their site.

According to Google “the +1 button makes it easy for visitors to recommend your pages to friends and contacts exactly when their advice is most useful – on Google search.”

Now, in addition to other social sharing options, the +1 button gives visitors to thehomepage another way to share properties of interest with their networks.

According to thehomepage spokesperson, Ben Stockdale, social media is a big part of the way buyers, sellers and agents interact with real estate and the web.

“Our recent site redesign saw us add a sharing bar right at the top of almost every page”, he said.

“Individuals looking at property are increasingly sharing their recommendations on Facebook and Twitter and Google’s +1 button just makes sense and we implemented it immediately.”

Tweet

And it appears thehomepage has stolen a march on the competition. As of the publication of this post none of the other major portals have included the +1 button on their property profile pages.

“We’re looking forward to seeing great things from Google +1 but only time will tell if the new service will compete with the Facebook Like or Twitter buttons”, concluded Stockdale.

Google +1 button on thehomepage.com.au

The new Google +1 button on thehomepage.com.au

Filed Under: Industry news Tagged With: Google, Google +1, thehomepage

Perth property market takes a holiday

April 27, 2011 by Peter Fletcher

The number of residential property sales in Perth fell sharply last week as agents and owners took an extended break over the Easter/ANZAC extra-long weekend. Just 61o sales were recorded, well down on the previous week’s total of 1060.

Whilst the volume of sales were lower than the same week last year, there were only 2 working days in the past week with 3 public holidays and the weekend accounting for the balance. Almost certainly many sales went unreported and will be accounted for in next week’s statistics.

There was a small fall in listing stock levels (down from 18,206 to 18,015) despite the lower volume of sales as sellers paused their marketing campaigns over the school and public holidays.

In the northern suburbs Nollamara and East Perth continued to show strength with 11 and 9 sales respectively. In the south Thornlie, Canningvale and Forrestfield were the standout performers with 12, 9 and 9 sales apiece.

Stock volumes of both houses and units fell slightly during the week. Land bucked the trend with an increase of 20 properties to 3,102.

While few conclusions can be drawn from this week’s data it seems the trend of the market pulling in opposite directions continues. Sales of residential properties continue to show modest strength but increasing stock levels continue to exert downward pressure on prices.

Tweet

Filed Under: Industry news Tagged With: market, Perth, property

Dean Bradley Launches New Site

March 15, 2011 by Peter Fletcher

Front page of deanbradley.com.au

I’m proud to announce that Dean Bradley has just launched his rebranded web site aimed at delivering news about what’s happening in real estate in Wembley.

The site is built on the WordPress platform. Dean chose the AgentPress Child Theme by StudioPress (affiliate link).

Here’s what the new site includes:

  • Rotating feature property slider on the home page. Each featured image links through to the individual property page.
  • Email subscription form. Dean produces a regular Wembley Property Ladder report, which he emails to his client base. Site visitors can subscribe to this email from each page on the site. It’s a great way to build a database.
  • Social networks buttons that give people options to connect with Dean on other social profiles.
  • The Contact page uses the popular and heavily featured Gravity Forms plugin. At no point on the site is Dean’s email address exposed for spammers to harvest.
  • The Testimonials link provides a link to each of the published testimonials. As Dean receives further testimonials they can be added as new blog posts and these will automatically show under this link.
  • Each property page includes a photo gallery that launches a light box style photo viewer.
  • Social sharing buttons at the bottom of every post. They invite people to share his content with their friends on other social networks.
  • Interactions on his Facebook page are displayed in the sidebar. People can Like his page without leaving the site.
  • Subscribe to blog posts by RSS or email options. People can get the latest news in either their feed reader or email inbox.

In the backend of the site are a number of plugins that provide the site with additional functionality, security and performance enhancements. These include:

  • All-in-one SEO plugin. Each of the pages and posts on the site is optimised to be found easily on search engines. Dean already ranks on page 3 of a Google search for “real estate Wembley”.
  • Images are all optimised to be found on search engines.
  • BackupBuddy. Dean’s site produces multiple daily, weekly and monthly backups, one of which is stored on the ultra-secure Amazon S3.
  • Google Analytics. All of the key site performance statistics are available from within the site’s dashboard.
  • XML Sitemap. With each new post and page of content the site produces a refreshed XML sitemap that has already been submitted to Google.
  • w3 Total Cache advanced page caching that makes the site run faster.
    Tweet

What are your thoughts about Dean’s site? What’s your initial reaction?

StudioPress Premium WordPress Themes

Filed Under: Clients, Industry news Tagged With: AgentPress, Dean Bradley, Genesis, StudioPress, Wordpress

RealestateVIEW.com.au acquires myhome.com.au

August 5, 2010 by Peter Fletcher

Petra Sprekos

Petra Sprekos

RealestateVIEW.com.au General Manager Petra Sprekos today announced the successful acquisition of former PBL-owned internet property site myhome.com.au.

Ms Sprekos said that this acquisition complements realestateVIEW.com.au’s existing offer for estate agents and consumers around Australia and will substantially increase content.

“In particular, it will add to our strength in New South Wales and Queensland, with over 2,000 agencies already listing on the site in these states.

“This adds to the recent launch of realestateVIEW.com.au in New South Wales and the content-sharing arrangement with www.reiwa.com.

“RealestateVIEW.com.au and myhome.com.au will continue to operate concurrently and share content.

“To ensure a smooth transition we have retained the services of Shane Dale, former CEO of myhome.com.au and his team,” Ms Sprekos concluded.

Shane Dale, welcomed the acquisition saying, “industry and consumers need a strong industry-owned portal and the sale of myhome.com.au to realestateVIEW.com.au will ensure that is the case.”

Filed Under: Industry news Tagged With: myhome, Petra Sprekos, realestateview

About Peter

Speaker, trainer and coach. I write about living, loving and working better. Love a challenge. More...

Subscribe

Get the latest posts delivered to your inbox.

Recent Posts

  • Perth property market report
  • Mandating madness: The case against compulsory e-conveyancing
  • PEXA: Stop treating conveyancers like idiots
  • Page 1 of 365
  • Looking back, looking forward

Top Posts & Pages

  • Why saying "You've got potential" can be the worst thing to say
  • Foucault on Confession
  • Foucault on power relations
  • What Jack and the Beanstalk can teach you about the value of achieving goals
  • Page 1 of 365
  • Why I'm interested in self-writing and the hupomnemata
  • Lisa Barone on becoming a more prolific writer
  • Slow-to-act hairdresser loses unfair dismissal claim
  • The Jacob's Ladder 5000 lap challenge update
  • Legends of The Ladder - Greg Williams

Location

You can find me at Residential Settlements in Burswood.

5/170 Burswood Road
Burswood WA 6100

Let’s catch up

If you're ready to take your business to the next level, get in touch with me now.

Send me an email using the contact form or call me direct on 0419 538 838.

Connect

Connect with me on one of these social networks.
  • Facebook
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter

Copyright © 2021 · Agency Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in