breaking news

Industry will shrink, says franchise head

2579 people have read this article
Wednesday, 07 December 2011

Simon Parker

A recent claim that one major Australian real estate network will fail within the next two years has gained support from the head of a major Victoria-based franchise group.

Nigel O’Neil, CEO at hockingstuart Group, told Real Estate Business that he agreed with Professionals Real Estate Group chief executive Glyn Morgan that one major real estate franchise group will collapse within the next two years.

“With the current weakness in the property market I believe we're going to experience a period of major rationalisation,” Mr Morgan said last week.

“I agree with Glyn that there is likely to be rationalisation in the Australian real estate landscape during 2012 and beyond, with those franchisors that provide little more than a brand likely to come under pressure as 'full service' franchise groups grow in stature,” Mr O’Neil said.

“I think those businesses that have large amounts of debt will be rationalised first, along with those brands that are unknown by the consumer, your ‘no name’ or localised brands, if you like.”

Mr O'Neil, whose franchise group has more than 40 offices, said agency principals must take a close look at their cash flow if they’re to survive.

“The key is understanding cash flow…clearly understanding the ebbs and flows of real estate,” he said.

“If they’re holding a lot of unpaid vendor paid for advertising (VPA), and [factoring in that] days on markets have doubled over the past 12 months, they’re carrying the value of that stock, it will be quite stressful in their businesses, as an example.”

He added that any new entrant to the market would struggle to survive. This followed Mr Morgan’s claim that established franchises would come under pressure from new firms or international companies moving into the Australian market. This included Keller Williams (KW), the second largest real estate group in the US, which boasts around 80,000 agents and 690 offices.

“History shows that it has been difficult for U.S based franchise groups to successfully enter the Australian real estate market due to the difference in how the markets operate, with arguably the Australian market more developed than the US market in terms of what agents offer clients and what franchisors offer franchisees,” Mr O’Neil said.

“What is likely to happen is that the growth will come from quality localised Australian franchise groups that are listening to their franchisees and changing to meet the evolving needs of the consumers.

“These businesses will continue to attract quality professionals that can keep pace with the changing landscape and observe the industry as the inevitable consolidation occurs.”

Using Melbourne as an example, Mr O’Neil said most of the dominant real estate groups are Victoria-based that have grown a niche in various parts of the city.

“There’s no really significant player out of the US or interstate that operates in Melbourne,” he continued. “Why is that the case? I think the agents in Melbourne have developed very strong local understanding and local knowledge to make sure that they offer vendors [what they want] and to attract buyers.”

E-mail
 

Comments  

 
0 #6 Greg Vincent 2011-12-19 19:07
David, currently banning Private Sellers wouldn't provide enough commission $$$ within an agent's service area for an agent to survive.

For franchise groups to remain relevant into the future they will need to move faster. As Rupert Murdoch said, "it's no longer the big that beats the small but the fast who beats the slow" and their agents will need to adapt strategically to the changes.

The last 3 years we have experienced a moderate change - during the next 3 years we will experience an order of magnitude change and strategical adaptation will play a major role in the success or failure of an agency and/or franchise group.
Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
+1 #5 Milton Rendell 2011-12-16 10:05
There are number of groups that have struggled to keep pace with the changes that real estate has taken in the last twenty years particularly what a franchise needs to provide for its franchisees. Many are more like rent a name rather a true franchise that did work many years ago but not in todays market. I think the fact that some groups will accept anyone into their group has placed enormous pressure on their brand reputation as well as their support resources. Will be interesting to see how it does go over the next couple of years.
Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
0 #4 Geoff Baldwin 2011-12-07 18:46
I agree franchisors can no longer try to adapt a MacDonalds approach to real estate whereby they try to make  one size fit all. It's critical to tailor services to the individual situation & needs of each franchisee.  As for any particular brand just evaporating, it's unlikely but what is likely is an amalgamation of brands & we have already seen this happen over recent years where say Roy Weston (a WA group similar in size to Hocking Stuart) was swallowed by Harcourts) This is nothing more than evolution & the end result is hopefully an overall better industry.
Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
0 #3 Geoff Baldwin 2011-12-07 18:45
Agree & disagree with Nigel's comments. Have spent considerable time in the US & do not consider ours to be better however it is different. Huge US offices are more sustainable due to a huge population whereas our population cannot sustain warehouse approach. Having said that, I have learnt a lot from the US. Like most successful formulas they are a healthy mix of approaches & our growing success in WA comes from my own experience & systems blended with the impressive resources & IP of our American associates & others.
Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
-1 #2 Geoff Baldwin 2011-12-07 18:14
Private sales have been around since day dot and they are not going away. Private sellers aren't "trading" David, they are simply selling their own house just as they can sell their own car, boat, etc. There is no way any government could or should disallow people sellingntheir possessions themselves if they choose as much as it may frustrate us agents. It is up to us to show them the advantages of using our services. Also, in regards to paying thousands of dollars to promote a franchisors brand, if that's what they find themselves doing then they should leave. On the othe hand, if they are benifitting from the resources, IP, training, support, benchmarking, systems, buying power, group promotions, marketing oh..., and being associated with a major brand then they probably have no issue in justifying their investment? :-)
Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
0 #1 David Hedges 2011-12-07 17:22
As the major part of an agency's budget is advertising it would be hard for a principal of a franchise to read O'Neil's advice "agency principals must take a close look at their cash flow if they are to survive" and not wonder why they're paying thousands of dollars to promote their franchisor's brand. The reality is that real estate agents who are still trading have already cut their costs to the bone- its called Real Estate Business Management 101, Nigel. The easy answer to increasing cash flow is getting more sales and to achieve that the government must ban private sales of real estate- after all, we are highly regulated, need a licence to operate and have to get CPD points every year - private sellers don't. What other industry allows unlicensed people to trade?
Quote | Report to administrator
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh