Mal and Gina, so we know you as buyer agents – what’s the “off-market selling” you do?

In a buy sell, on the sell, we manage the whole process. Our focus is price, strategy, presentation, agent selection, execution, and extras, all of which are largely ignored in many off-markets, big mistake.

Price: The most abused tool in your toolkit. Get it right and it’s off to the races, get it wrong and you’re mucking out the stables. Why is so little testing done on price prior to going to market? Why is your decision made on who tells you the highest number or who sounds the most credible, when neither of those is consistently the best strategy to get the best price.

Strategy: When the average bidders at auctions in this market is 1, why is the only strategy suggested by the agent quote ‘em low and watch ’em fly at auction. Don’t worry about the sales pitch of somebody else’s miracle auction, give me the logic on why 1 bidder auctions, quoted low, are a plus for you. They are not, they are efficient for the agent and good for the buyer.

Presentation: Why is there an unwritten law that if you are selling your home off-market: it’s ok to look less than its best? Some of our strongest arguments with our off market selling clients are about spending money on presentation. You need to do it, even if the agent says oh, she’ll be right. That’s total BS. Why would we go out on a limb if we didn’t know it makes a difference – why does an agent not push as hard as we do: turnover and lack of time.

Agent selection: You really wonder about some sellers when they say I am going with such and such, as I know her, or he is a mate, or he has been ringing me a lot for a long time (why isn’t he or she ringing buyers for existing selling clients). WTF. Would that cut it at work?

Does Ross Lyon or Brad Scott make their selections on mates or who is best for the job? The coaches they replaced have been hailed as hardly done by nice guys – but Ross and Brad are very different – a clear plan, good support and they don’t select their mate or who rings them up all the time – they select who is best for the job, after they have been through a series of tests.

Why narrow the field in your first act. Wouldn’t it make more sense to have more agents, bringing more buyers and wouldn’t it make sense to keep more agents on your side?

How do you feel when you are rejected? Pissed off and angry at who rejected you? Probably – so what do you think agents who didn’t get your job are saying to a buyer when asked about your home? Let them have a chance to sell it if they have the best buyer.

It doesn’t feel like rocket science, there is so much history and self interest in how some currently sell.

Competing: What do you want agents to compete on – promises or results. Huh? Why make your final selection on glossy brochures and a slick sales presentation – it’s a pointer for sure – but when all are slick and glossy (all look so similar) doesn’t it just become a case of mine is bigger than his, choose me.

What about bring me the offers – from multiple agents? Why not test credentials in an off-market competition? Agents tell you it’s all about competition to get you the best, well get them to compete. We compete all the time.

But be careful – if you can’t manage the public narrative, then multiple agents instead of a better deal, become a fight to the bottom.

Execution: For all the not so nice things you can say about agents – there is one huge plus – their ability to focus on cutting a deal. It’s brilliant. But what happens if that deal is not in your best interests right this second? There seems to be no pause and reflect button on our agent friends at times. We encourage pause and reflect and then accept or keep going.

Extras: How can your agent take the time to give you something extra when they have 6 to 10 campaigns running this week – sorry I can’t see you at this time or this time or this time, but I can see you at 10.57 in my office for 3 minutes – and you’re the client. The buyers must be getting less.  Catch 22 – if they are not full on, then do you want them?

Solution: Let them do what they do best – call and call and call and combine them with someone who can bring strategies to the table like a mexican wave, another buyer, another agent and advice to hold until we get a competing buyer and more.

Real Life: This week the off-market above was a multi-agent home where we ran a mexican wave in Marketnews over the Easter weeks and sold in the low $4m’s having been bought in the high $2m’s during Covid – nothing done to it. It’s a great home.

Multi-agent Off-market began Feb 4 with a welcome meeting:

1. Selling client was a reader of marketnews – unhappy with agent advice she had received.
2. She rang us. We made a presentation to be open and look at all angles.
3. We were given an authority, organised a contract, produced an SOI and gave access. The 4 off-market ducks.
4. Gina replaced the styling with a new style.
5. We selected to go off-market with a multi-agent strategy.
6. We replaced the photography.
7. We ran a mexican wave in Marketnews
8. Solid interest in Week 1 from 1 buyer, via an agent.
9. We at marketnews produced buyer 2 with solid interest in Week 3
10. Selling client and agent and James Buy Sell meeting: strategy to make it happen as we now had 2 solid and understood buyers.
11. An auction (we do love them when the ingredients are there) was organised over the phone and strong competition from mid $3m’s and on the market to over $4m. Agent did a great job. The buyer bought well.
12. The buyer came from a marketnews mexican wave and looked at a beautifully presented off-market home and competed against another buyer from another agent – the brilliance of multi-agent.
13. The total cost to our client was less than $10,000 for furniture, touch-ups, photos, contracts etc. and total agent fee was no more @ 2.2% split 50/50 with winning agent.
14. Job done: Buyer bought a rare home well and the seller got what she wanted.
15. Money: James Buy Sell Multi-Agent increase was $1.25 million or 45%.
    Melbourne Median increase during the same time was 7.1% (reiv)
    Aspendale Median increase during the same time was 9.5% (reiv)
    Increase taking local agent opinion of value and not the result was: 21% (SOI)
    The price in this volatile market was a record for area property type.
    This graph above shows this and is to scale.