I recently discovered Brandie Young, a fellow marketer, via her first blogpost on Agent Genius. That post is interesting in and of itself. And I’ve added her blog to the blogroll here.
But this comment from a Barry Cunningham on that post is really interesting to the whole Robnecks v. Kristians debate:
You have described my business model EXACTLY. I do all the marketing, I drive SERIOUS traffic via opt-ins and registrations to our various points of entry, and each day I see loads of buyer regs coming in ASKING to be show property. So what do I do? I’m not interested in doing grunt work…I have found 25 HUNGRY almost starving agents and if they are real nice and do EXACTLY what I tell them, I shove them ready , willing and able buyer manna under the door for them to feed upon. Oh yeah…we take in EXCESS of 50%..WAY in excess!
If an agent doesn’t like it..then fine..go away. I run one ad, and have a bevy of agents to choose from.
So… if this works so well with 25 agents… why wouldn’t it work with 250? With 2,500? Backed up with actual enterprise technology and professional teams?
Anecdote is not the plural of evidence. Still… seems to me controlling the customer relationship leads to everything else.
-rsh
10 thoughts on “Interesting Tidbit…”
Hey Rob,
I suppose it could work with 250 or more agents if you could find that many willing to work under the criteria that we impose.. Nothing anecdotal about CASH!!
We have developed a really easy system wherein we deliver Buyers…not leads. I just choose not to spend my time doing the front line work.
I have detailed many times how our system works. Have also taught many…alas many don’t believe it is that simple but it really is.
If anyone wants “evidence” all they need to do is simply follow the precepts and actually DO SOMETHING!
We’re about to launch Homeapalooza…yep just like Lollapalooza it will be an absolutely remarkable series of real estate sales event wherein we will create an Alternative Nation of real estate.
Dude…this is pretty easy stuff (real estate sales) if you unplug from conventional wisdom.
We take a very contrarian approach and it works. While others want to stay on the narrow path of begging for commissions, we simply kick in the doors by doing what othes won’t and go where few dare to tread.
It’s all a bit refreshing.
The market who is actually buying LOVES the approach…why..becasue it hits them right in their sweet spot. Remember the first Lollapalooza was in 1990 or 18 years ago.
Being that most who traversed the midway of the earlier Ozzfests, Lollapalooza’s and Warped Tours were late teens early twenties at the time that would put them smack dab into the middle of the demographic that’s actually buying houses right now.
There’s some serious data to work with.
Hey Rob,
I suppose it could work with 250 or more agents if you could find that many willing to work under the criteria that we impose.. Nothing anecdotal about CASH!!
We have developed a really easy system wherein we deliver Buyers…not leads. I just choose not to spend my time doing the front line work.
I have detailed many times how our system works. Have also taught many…alas many don’t believe it is that simple but it really is.
If anyone wants “evidence” all they need to do is simply follow the precepts and actually DO SOMETHING!
We’re about to launch Homeapalooza…yep just like Lollapalooza it will be an absolutely remarkable series of real estate sales event wherein we will create an Alternative Nation of real estate.
Dude…this is pretty easy stuff (real estate sales) if you unplug from conventional wisdom.
We take a very contrarian approach and it works. While others want to stay on the narrow path of begging for commissions, we simply kick in the doors by doing what othes won’t and go where few dare to tread.
It’s all a bit refreshing.
The market who is actually buying LOVES the approach…why..becasue it hits them right in their sweet spot. Remember the first Lollapalooza was in 1990 or 18 years ago.
Being that most who traversed the midway of the earlier Ozzfests, Lollapalooza’s and Warped Tours were late teens early twenties at the time that would put them smack dab into the middle of the demographic that’s actually buying houses right now.
There’s some serious data to work with.
Barry, contrarian? (she says in mock shock and & with much love).
Continuing the newly formed love fest with Rob, I must again shower him with compliments, as he has a way to cut to the heart of the matter succinctly. Above he writes: “seems to me controlling the customer relationship leads to everything else”. Well said, sir.
p.s. you’re on my blogroll as well – so the 11 people that visit can find you!
Barry, contrarian? (she says in mock shock and & with much love).
Continuing the newly formed love fest with Rob, I must again shower him with compliments, as he has a way to cut to the heart of the matter succinctly. Above he writes: “seems to me controlling the customer relationship leads to everything else”. Well said, sir.
p.s. you’re on my blogroll as well – so the 11 people that visit can find you!
The answer to why it wouldn’t work with 250 or 2500 agents is that the business model being described depends totally on the current gross oversupply of agents combined with current market conditions. I do not believe it is a viable long-term business model. Just as there were “successful” discount companies when the market was a red hot seller’s market, there are opportunities right now for companies that focus on buyer sides.
Once the agent population thins enough (and it most assuredly will) that easy recruiting part will go away. The market swinging back the other way (which is going to be some years up the road) would shift the necessary emphasis over to procuring sellers. I have never seen a company successfully make that switch. Like the “successful” discount listing companies – they become victims of their own prior success.
The answer to why it wouldn’t work with 250 or 2500 agents is that the business model being described depends totally on the current gross oversupply of agents combined with current market conditions. I do not believe it is a viable long-term business model. Just as there were “successful” discount companies when the market was a red hot seller’s market, there are opportunities right now for companies that focus on buyer sides.
Once the agent population thins enough (and it most assuredly will) that easy recruiting part will go away. The market swinging back the other way (which is going to be some years up the road) would shift the necessary emphasis over to procuring sellers. I have never seen a company successfully make that switch. Like the “successful” discount listing companies – they become victims of their own prior success.
Russell,
None of us has a crystal ball but I can only go on experience. Been buying and houses without ever needing to seek out listings…ever. Now it’s even easier as you can see by the above.
Will it become harder to operate in this manner…who cares…one of the things we pride ourselves in is adaptability.
Like I said in brandie’s post…while others analyze and pontificate, we do it.
So while you think it won’t last, we’ll keep doing what we’re doing, keep changing as change is needed and keep accepting wire transfers into the bank account.
Whatever the future brings you can bet we’ll be changing along with it. We don’t have your years in the business but we’re a decade beyond a lot of others and our adaptability ensures profitability.
Russell,
None of us has a crystal ball but I can only go on experience. Been buying and houses without ever needing to seek out listings…ever. Now it’s even easier as you can see by the above.
Will it become harder to operate in this manner…who cares…one of the things we pride ourselves in is adaptability.
Like I said in brandie’s post…while others analyze and pontificate, we do it.
So while you think it won’t last, we’ll keep doing what we’re doing, keep changing as change is needed and keep accepting wire transfers into the bank account.
Whatever the future brings you can bet we’ll be changing along with it. We don’t have your years in the business but we’re a decade beyond a lot of others and our adaptability ensures profitability.
My comments are not a statement that a PERSON could not adapt and continue to succeed, regardless of the market conditions but that the business model wouldn’t be one that would easily scale to 250 or 2500 agents.
A caring and capable manager can always set things right. But to correctly manage 250 people the sheer number of capable managers needed is where it breaks down. What allows your business to succeed (constant looking, constant tweaking) is the very thing that prevents ramping it up to 2500 people. It is the “quality control” that goes out when it gets too bit and with that goes the business.
My comments are not a statement that a PERSON could not adapt and continue to succeed, regardless of the market conditions but that the business model wouldn’t be one that would easily scale to 250 or 2500 agents.
A caring and capable manager can always set things right. But to correctly manage 250 people the sheer number of capable managers needed is where it breaks down. What allows your business to succeed (constant looking, constant tweaking) is the very thing that prevents ramping it up to 2500 people. It is the “quality control” that goes out when it gets too bit and with that goes the business.
Comments are closed.