June 4, 1942: Capitol Records opened its doors on a vision founder Johnny Mercer expressed while golfing with friends. He was tired of listening to the way everyone treated music. And the musicians. He could do better.
1946: He proved himself right. Capitol had sold a total of 42 million records. Their acts – each brilliant in their own right – were loved and adored by fans. The Pied Pipers. Les Paul. Peggy Lee. Merle Travis. Benny Goodman. Nat King Cole.
These artists mattered. Capitol Records mattered too.
By the mid 60′s, the Capitol brand had grown to international recognition aided by the superstar (top producer) artists of the day: Frank Sinatra. Judy Garland. The Andrew Sisters. Gleason. Dean Martin.The Dave Clark Five. And The Beatles.
The Capitol brand was so powerful, so inventive, so clearly recognized for its “ear,” that new artists signed to the label would automatically be premiered on radio and TV, placed on tours, and desired by consumers.
Many of you would argue that these artists would have sold millions under any label. That Capitol meant nothing to the consumer. It was all about the individual acts. You would argue that point because you think a record label, like a real estate brokerage, is simply a clearing house for its independent talent.
That is true today. But it wasn’t always. Want proof? What emotions rise in you when you gaze upon this?
I get flashbacks of my childhood. And a warm feeling.
And if I rattled off names like The Doors, The Jackson Five and Led Zepplin, I defy you to not instantly recall what their label looked like affixed to the center of the 45.
But by the mid 80′s labels stopped mattering. Like brokerages, they lost their vision. They grew without purpose. Signed anyone who could carry a tune or who vaguely resembled some other rising star. They stopped developing talent. Never innovated. And provided little value for a $18.99 CD.
Just because labels didn’t matter, opportunity for some that chose to matter, arose.
Sub Pop
By the late 80′s, major record label influence had withered. Sales were down. Small indie artists already took to the Web to merchandise and distribute in ways big label brands didn’t understand.
Seattle. A small label emerges. Sub Pop Records, credited with popularizing “grunge” amid a sea of hair bands and watered down New Wave, discovered and signed acts other labels weren’t even looking at. Soundgarden. The Shins. Mudhoney. Nirvana.
Acts that mattered.
As a result other lesser known acts within the Sub Pop roster began to matter too, catapulting this tiny little company into the world view. Sub Pop mattered so much that Geffen Records bought the rights to Nirvana and released Nevermind, one of the biggest selling records of all time.
Today you can hardly talk about the grunge scene without referencing this label. And it still matters, despite joint ventures with Warner and the loss of their independent luster.
Johnny Mercer saw a void. From that void great labels like Stax, Atlantic, Capitol, Decca and Motown emerged.
That void exists again.
I believe now would be an incredible time to start a new label.
Can a brokerage matter?
The conversations here are telling. Conventional thinking recognizes independent agents as the only brands that matter while dogmatic brokerages tied to the ball and chain of tradition have brand identities void of meaning.
I could cite ten brokerages right now that matter. But even if I couldn’t name one, I would argue vehemently that this is the condition of an industry that has lost its soul and made the choice not to matter.
A choice that can be remedied.
There are many things that are impossible in this world. Time travel. Me playing center for the Lakers. The Chicago Bears winning a Superbowl. But building a brokerage brand that matters? Not on that list.
If I were to attempt to create one I’d borrow from history. Like Johnny Mercer, I’d take note of what isn’t. What’s missing. What’s needed. I’d sign up the talent that could deliver that, package it and sell it.
And I’d hammer my value proposition on my shingle – my website. And bring on talent that shares my vision. I’d send a skywriter up and etch it into the heavens. I’d reward agents who delivered on our promise and behead those that didn’t. (Not literally).
I’d run the brokerage, handle the marketing, and dream up ways to lure the best talent in and provide unique services out. My agents, the people who connect with the consumer, would be the messengers of our collective service. Our hit records.
Together, we would build a brokerage label that matters.
Local, Mobile, Social and the future of real estate
20 Tools to Bring your Real Estate Business to the Cloud
15 Ways to Make Your Marketing Mobile
Good grief you can write.
And make me think.
I’ll be back with (hopefully) a comment far more profound than this.
Marc,
Another GOLD RECORD from the house of 1000WattConsulting.
Here is what I am hearing….
Johnny Mercer had the vision and combined it with the best talent of the day.
The combination was magic.
So to matter it will take both – Broker & Agent – working shoulder to shoulder to change the industry and redeem it’s SOUL.
Change is in the wind or is it?
Spot on Marc. I will add one thought. This is, are Brokerages even relevant in the current landscape of our industry or are they the now extinct retail outlets such as Wherehouse, Sam goody’s and the like?
Capitol Real Estate. Who’s in?
@ Jay Ditto my good man. Ditto.
‘@Jeff – I’m shooting for Platinum! What you said man. Exactly. Hey wait- talk about being able to write, dude, you nailed it in 50 words!
@Scott – This question will fundamentally segue this into another great conversation. But I believe that every single independent contractor agent is, in their own infancy – a brokerage. And if they matter to their customers, then a brokerage will alway matter be relavent. Might be called something else, but semantics aside… But to the surface of your question – yes brokerages can be ultra relavent. A brokerage of 100 agents has the might, the human resources, the $’s to do amazing things for their community and provide a backbone to its agents in ways that a single independent can’t might not be accomplish on their own.
@Bob. I love it. Yeah, yeah yeah!
Brilliant analogy and well said.
I’d probably have more to say, but I’m burnt out from the discussion on Jay’s blog!
You are right on, but now for the courage of the first step. Keep pushing us. Thanks
[...] brokerage matter talk.” We have had a lot over the last week and today we have Mark Davison with Can a real estate brokerage matter? and Jonathan Dalton with Forget Big Broker vs. Small Broker, Let’s Talk Bad Broker vs. Good [...]
The Capitol Records analogy is a good one. The name never mattered to the public, but the Artists recognized it as a great place to be and joined together each making their own name.
The same with RE Brokerages. The goal of a broker should be to support agents to become good enough to be recognized as something special and consequently build a name (brand) for themselves.I think the name of the broker is not important but the name of the agent sure is.
Build a place that offers the agents something and the good ones will come. They dont have to be MBA’s or even full time.There are many good agents out there even though we dont know who they are yet.Many are uncertain due to the demise of the franchise model that is currently underway and are waiting and hoping that things will return to the old days.Others have hung their license with a no fee broker only to find that this arrangement is certainly no Capitol Records.
The burden is on the ones wanting to be brokers, not the agents. We must offer the right situation with quality technology, including internet based marketing tools,transaction management tools,lead generation tools, the right place to bring clients for the few that want it, and a compensation package that is better than any franchise in existence today. That will be the starting point to build the brokerage of the future.Nothing less…..
Jim Canion
ConnectRealty.com
Great stuff Marc. As I mentioned in my tweet yeaterday, “Agents that show their value along with their firms”, usually win the business. I think it was Jay Thompson (my apologies if I’m wrong Jay) who recently shared about a client he met while he was with Century 21. When they met and he handed her his card she replied, “Oh your with Century 21″. His point being that the company he was with did not matter as she had met with him without knowing his affiliation. I saw it diffently. If the card had read, “Bob’s Desert Property” would she have had the same response? I doubt it. To me it legitimized him in her eyes. If the opportunity is taken at that juncture to share all the great things about the firm AND what he brought to the table, it makes a soild case for doing business together. Why more agents with don’t see this has always baffled me. I get that we are independent contractors, but we chose to affiliate with whatever company for a reason…and those reasons should be shared with your customers to help them understand your complete value proposition.
Great read Marc and dead on as alwasy.
Cheers!
@Jason –
Yep, that was me with the “Oh you’re with C21?” story.
I see your point in your interpretation. I think if the card had said “Bob’s Desert Property” there would have been no comment made — but they would have remained our clients.
This happened several times, and I can honestly say the tone of voice and the look on there faces was of complete indifference.
They didn’t care what brokerage I worked for.
Marc- your sub-pop reference hit my demographic right on the head. Sub Pop was the trusted label for me in high school in the PNW and on into college as college radio DJ. Bands transplanted themselves to Seattle to become part of the scene created in part by Sub-pop.
I agree with you that:
1. Brands should/ can matter
2. There are a handful of great real estate brands.
3. Most real estate brands are not great.
4. There is a huge opportunity.
Unfortunately, I don’t see major changes in the future. Real estate brands are like rental car companies or airlines. They spend money in all the wrong places and spend too much time arranging the deck chairs to notice the ship is sinking.
Can someone tell me the difference between Avis, Hertz, or Enterprise? If you are a business traveller, you might have some loyalty, but the average American is shopping on price. Airlines are hardly any better. Any discussion about American, United or Delta is not about which is better, but which one is worse. We all have horror stories about one of the major carriers. We probably have negative-brand loyalty. “I will NEVER EVER fly with ______ ever again.” (In my case, Delta. Thanks for the 7 hours on the tarmac. Priceless.)
I would love to see Rob Hahn interview Marc Davison (and vice versa)on “Brands and Business Models.”
I think the current business model is why so many brands are stuck. Filling desks and cubicles keeps the cash flow coming. As long as some portion of the agents are successful, so is the brand. The brand gives some legitimacy to a new untrained agent, but the experienced agent rarely receives any benefit from the brand so is happy to move if a better opportunity comes along.
Here’s how a brand could demonstrate they are serious about having “only the best agents”. Let the other half go. That’s right, purge half of your agents. They won’t do it, because those agents are the customer, not the consumers buying and selling real estate.
Brand building is reduced to a simple formula. Here’s a logo we created. Please post it wherever you can. We have a store where you can buy anything you ever dreamed of with our logo on it. A real estate brand should be more than a mashup of Cafe Press and a Ponzi scheme, shouldn’t it?
Thought so @ Jay. I almost mentioned that in your case it would not have made a shread of difference as you had already gained their trust and showed your value.
BUT…what if when she made the remark you followed that up with, “Yes I am with C21 (or whatever brokerage)and I choose to affiliate with them because they…and that helps me to better serve my customers”. Doesn’t really matter what they do or how you present it. Fact is it would have solidified the relationship even more. In most cases agents simply focus on themselves. Alll things being equal it could be the difference maker.
@Geordie – Thank you for bringing up the car rental analogy. It was thought provoking for me. While I think car rental companies are the same on the surface, a few focus on what their specific target customer wants really wants. Brokerages should learn from this.
National – Business travelers: Emerald Aisle – “Quickest Way to Rent”
Enterprise – Local rentals: “We will pick you up”
The questions each brokerage needs to answer is “Who is my customer and “What do they want.” If the answers are “Any agent who wants to work for me” or “Anybody that wants to sell a house”, the brokerage hasn’t recognized the change in the industry. It isn’t about quantity anymore. It’s about quality.
The brokerage’s customer is no longer the agent. Instead in brokerages that matter, the brokerage and agent will understand that they share a common customer. Truly successful brokerages will define their service models, recruit agents which fit that model and provide tools to deliver that model.
The first step is the hardest – Brokerages, like Capital Records, must define themselves.
One opportunity, in my opinion, is transparency. Customers in other industries demand transparency. I believe that some brokerages will focus on transparency at all levels and lead the market. I recently wrote about it on my blog. http://pulserealtysoftware.blogspot.com/2010/03/realty-services-should-be-like-online.html
Thanks for the article Marc.
Mr. Davison,
I agree with you completely, well, almost. Yes, great reference to Capitol Records, Sub Pob, etc. I myself have seen many of these bands in concert. Brokerages are facing this exact statement. Hopefully the ones that can make a statement like Sub Pop can rise above. The part that I don’t agree with is about the Bears. This is the year. Maybe. Ok, but it’s not impossible. Now the Cubs…yes I’m in that boat too.
Bart
These are great discussions – on both blogs. I would really like to see someone highlight services that “good” brokerages provide. Real, tangible service – not just more “deck chairs”. I think (and hope) that there is still a place for the boutique firm of liked-minded agents, and that they do not get run over by the large firms, who simply have more resources at their disposal.
I would really challenge anyone with a large firm to make a case for the services that are provided. If you include so called training on that list, I don’t think you are really thinking – because in nearly every case that training is so limited and so simplified, it is aimed at agents who never sold a thing in their lives and come from backgrounds and careers that did not include such skills.
It would be interesting to create a conversation about what really are those “services” and put a value on them.
A strong brokerage must set the table with a set of core values that will not be compromised. These values must be designed with the greater good in mind and thus, the associates that are out there on the front lines demonstrating the vision. Holding individuals accountable, both the broker and their associates, is critical to preserving the ideal. And…today’s brokerage must be willing to share the wealth, from mortgage, escrow and whatever other ancillary revenue streams that will be created in partnership between the broker and associate. That way, “We” becomes far more tangible and thus attainable. Without comprehensive demonstrations, you’re just another “lip service” outfit.
It can be done. You will need lots of cash, venture funded, to get it up to speed quickly while maintaining quality and the vision.
You will need cooperation from others…you local board, your vendors, your brokers, and yes…even your clients. All will have to buy in and support the endeavor.
I will bring some very cool technologies that can set you apart when your ready to launch.
@Jim
Good points. A thing on Capitol – they really did matter to consumers. An artist released on Capitol was viewed by the public as being special. In fact, as a young artist myself once, the notion of getting signed to Capitol Records meant being part of a roster of greats but it also meant attaining an edge of cred with the consumer.
@Geordie
I relate to your Sub Pop story. At the time Nirvana broke, I was developing an act out of NY and was on tour with them across the country. The predominant sound that filled the bus was the Seattle sound. It was a big deal for the group when their single topped Smells Like Teen Spirit on a handful of College stations around the US. Their dream to get signed by Sub Pop. It didn’t happen. SONY made the play.
As for major changes in the future, I would love to introduce you to where they are being made. I understand the skepticisms in real estate but the world I live in and think of, I don’t go only go by what I see or am aware of. I’d be great as a cast member on Fringe and believe strongly in all possibilities – the ones I see and ones hidden.
As for the rental cars – yes for the most part and to a point. I do Avis exclusively. Having a wizard # and the benefits of that really play into my personal needs given the traveling I do. So as I consumer I have found value in them and am loyal.
To your dream interview, that gave me a good laugh. Thanks.
Finally, you are so right in your assessment of modern day brokerage brands. That’s what it is predominantly. But not in all cases. And more and more are emerging. The funny thing is, some of them don’t even realize it.
@ Brian
All great points. I couldn’t have said it better myself. One thing – I believe a brokerage can build a powerful agent centric model and do right by the consumer too. I believe that because I know of many that have. I’d prefer not to post their names and risk leaving others out but they exist and are doing masterful jobs at retaining agents who love them because of the connections they have made with the consumer. By the are all over. Chicago, Westchester, Sarasota, Virginia, Seattle, Portland, Austin, Orange County and all points in between.
@Bart
Ahh da bears. Well given my Fringe statement above, perhaps there a dimension where the Bears might take the prize. I’ll keep an open mind for sure.
@Nick
Yup. It would be easy for a new brokerage to do this. Core values is cool but go one step deeper. Down to the fundamental DNA of what is most important to the broker. I asked this of Jay not too long ago and he told me, for him, it’s all about passion. He apologized for that thinking that might not be strong enough. I disagree. Real passion is hardcore and when it’s real, it can manifest some amazing things. So I told Jay I love that. And to stick with it. Don’t look for top producers to recruit. Or people with fabulous connections. Or agents with MBA’s. Recruit agents who with real passion. One’s truly passionate about people. About real estate. I believe that what they lack in other areas will be compensated by their passion. Collectively, a company the exudes a deep level of passion for the community and for the agents through the agents, will become a meaningful company that matters. And sales will ensue as a result.
@Barrett
Pretty much spot on. I might need your help since I have received many generous offers to start a brokerage. Man, what I have gotten myself into!!!
Thanks folks for the good… no great comments and feedback. To me, you are all people who matter!
Wow Marc, I have to “Ditto” my friend Jay, and say “Well written”. Its been a long time (looooooong) since I read an entire Blog post, but I truly enjoyed your analogies and the way the fit so well with your message. Enough “Butt” kissin, on with my comment…Brand or no Brand, a talented Agent will be successful. Brands must adjust the “old school” way of thinking and realize that Real Estate is now a “team” sport, and Individuals will not survive. As I suggested in a Geek Estate Blog post over 3 years ago, tomorrow’s (Today’s now) successful Agents will be a team, I called them Real Estate “Batman” and Geek Estate “Robin”. A person to hold to the tried and true basis of Real Estate, relationship building, and a individual who could not only see the potential in online activities, but actively engage in them. Now, The Broker/Brand must be the “Robin” to the Agent’s “Batman”. provide support in traditional ways, as well provide tools, training, and opportunity in the online endeavor. I enjoyed a 2 year stint with a Prudential Broker in The (CA) Central Valley in 2006 & 2007, because I was hired to do just that. Be the “Robin” for his Agents, but alas, the market changed that focus. While I enjoyed working with individual Agents for the next 2 years, I was always longing for another “Visionary” to come “Scoop me up” and allow me the great pleasure of doing it again, this time with so much more knowledge and tools. Enter Coldwell Banker Coastal Alliance in Long Beach CA, where I now carry the “Title” of VP of Internet Services, which really could read “Agent Advocate – Robin”. working as team, we will provide Agents with training, support, insight, and most of all the motivation to enter the Internet space, on their own, or as part of our Company E-Team. Don’t you dare tell me that it won’t work, because in just 26 days, I have sat with or am scheduled to sit with 57 Real Estate Agents in our company, and design a specific plan to assist them in entering the “I” space. After which I will follow up with them every 2 weeks for just 15 minutes to assure they are following up/through…and it will work, because we are building a team, but more to the point, as a Brand, we will “Matter”!
Thanks for the post!
Stay Blogging My Friend!
@CBRELongBeach
Holy crap. So much good conversation on this topic at several different blogs AND offline that I can’t cobble my post that I’ve been working on together because I’m too busy reading and commenting on others.
The best thing about this discussion is that the discussion is happening. Keep it up folks.
Marc,
My position is firmly in the “brokerage and brand don’t matter” camp, as I’ve lived this for 20 years as an agent and for seven as a broker/owner.
Yes, there ARE exceptions to the rule, and the Sothebey’s example you use is a good one.
But for MOST brands and MOST agents in MOST markets, brokerage and brand are entirely irrelevant to the consumer.
Todd Waller made a video today, which you can view in the blog post I wrote at http://cli.gs/PqHg7. We suspected we’d get results like we got, but even we were surprised just how meaningless brand appears to be to the people Todd ran into on the street today.
In the post I referenced, I provide the reasons WHY I think brokerage and brand don’t matter. My reasons are subjective, of course, and you’ll be the judge as to whether I did or did not make my case.
And that’s not to say that MORE brands and brokerages cannot rise up and “matter.” Of course they can.
And “now” is precisely the time and the context in which that can and will happen…
Keep on blogging, Marc. You and 1000 Watt Consulting are the best!
Best,
Michael
The problem is that brokerages don’t know that they don’t matter.
Changing the model would help make broker brands matter.
When an agent is an independent contractor he/she acts like one and works on building his/her own brand, not the brand of the brokerage. When a broker treats an agent like an independent profit center the relationship is not too strong.
The fine work of an agent should enure to the benefit of both the brokerage and agent, but often it seems it does not.
Brand SHOULD matter in real estate. If it does not, its only because the brokerage and its “artists” (the agents) are not working together in a true partnership.
The broker can do better by enhancing its agents’ careers with better “hiring” standards, ongoing support, ongoing enforcement and encouragement of standards and quality goals,training, mentoring and mutually beneficial incentives.
The agents can help build their brokerages’ brand and enhance their own reputations by embracing and adhering to their brokers’ service and quality orientated ethos.
This is how companies who employ people who make far less than real estate agents (like Starbucks and Whole Foods) manage to build great brands-one where the customer can have a favorite employee but ALSO still chose the brand.
If done correctly the brand can transcend the individual employee and endure for years, if not decades.
When the employee leaves a well run, well branded company, he takes with him a way of doing business that has been instilled by the company and will help him be successfull elsewhere. The company should not be harmed by the defection of any one employee as they can train new ones in the same fashion.
Law firms that have done a proper job of branding can confidently state: clients hire the firm not the lawyer.
Brokerages would be well served to aspire to that statement.
[...] of the RE.net world this week and does it matter. Here are a few of the better ones. Mark Davison Can a real estate brokerage matter? Jonathan Dalton Forget Big Broker vs. Small Broker, Let’s Talk Bad Broker vs. Good Broker. Jay [...]
I am too new to even know what makes a brokerage great and what makes it cutting edge. I affiliated without shopping, as I knew the brokerage owners. So, I need to know, what makes a great brokerage? And, if an agent is doing their own SMM (because the brokerage doesn’t even get it), does the brokerage even matter? Please enlighten me. I appreciate any responses.
I could jot down a hundred things that could make a broker great but what might be a better list are the simple results that ensue from a great brokerage. Like:
Profitability
Super loyal agent
Consumers who, through whatever methods that brokerage employed, desire to use that brokerage regardless of what agent they get
There are many things brokerages can do to create this. What’s important is choosing the path, staying on it, making sure everyone else does to and delivering on promises each and every time.
That’s my simple definition of great.
Hope it helps
I love your line
“..are doing masterful jobs at retaining agents who love them because of the connections they have made with the consumer.”
This is the entire game.
Consumer Relevant Brand > Passionate Agents > Future of Real Estate
Again, you are visionary. My sense in the trenches is that the “old guard” is losing its grip and a new team is coming to fruition.
Aloha,
Keahi
Marc,
I have been reading a lot of the comments on both your and Jay’s blogs. Great conversations in both places. I was particularly caught by the comments by Rob Hahn, in opposition to you.
I think the disconnect is not about different understandings of the Real Estate industry or a broker’s role. To me, the issue is that Rob is looking at the current and past, and establishing that as a basis for the the way things should be in the future. While you are using that same information to point out the visionary potential for the future.
The very mentality that Rob takes on this topic is exactly why what you have argued is true. As long as people take Rob’s approach, the breakdown continues. The industry is in a tumultuousness state, and some cling to past research to guide a steady path forward, while others look for opportunities to do something different and exceptional.
Creating a brokerage that matters in exceptional. It is not the way things are done now. Brokerages don’t matter, but if one could, it could change the way things are done. The fact of the matter is, the brokerage is the backbone and support structure for agents. Viewing this as an insignificant or weak aspect of the home sales process is a serious mistake.
Great agents can excel without a great brokerage brand behind them, but a great brokerage could cultivate an entire team of great agents – and that would be exceptional!
Keep writing Marc, thanks.
– Erik Florida
@Erik
Lot’s a great comments indeed. Kudos to Jay for taking this issue so dear to me and giving it greater airtime.
I think the differences tween myself and others go deeper. I believe brokerages matter now and have mattered in the past. And that at any given moment in time some agent from a no frills Acme like brokerage has lost a listing to agent B because agent B works for a reputable national or locally recognized brokerage. To not recognize that, to not give that reality equal billing is curiously strange to say the least.
Brokerages always mattered. Century 21, a brand I often volley with because they are so large and could be so much more, matters. Just look at how much money they raise for Easter Seals. They matter. They could matter more and that’s why i push them.
Houlihan Lawrence, a local Westchester brand matters in ways too many to count. The volume of $’s they have raised for Breast Cancer is astonishing and the tireless efforts to increase these amounts by the family that owns that company is worthy of public recognition. They matter. And I think even a company like could matter even more.
Keller Williams, a brand that is often hard to describe donates so much to their causes I can’t even beging to voice my affection for Gary Keller and what his organization does with their profits. They do matter. They could certainly do things to matter more.
In every town, in every city, there are brokerages with agents that do things that never get talked about. The agent that helps a family move boxes into their new home after the sale and commission check was cashed. They do it because these agents really love their clients. They matter. As a result of their good work, they reflect well on their brokerage. Both matter as a result.
Over the last year or two brokerages have spent ridiculous amounts of money investing in new websites. Creating video. Vast image libraries. I could name a dozen off the top of my head. As a result people who use their sites can now really learn what it’s like to move to their communities by virtue of this amazing content. To their agents, this is the stuff that matters! To the users of that site – consumers – that matters so much.
In my opinion, the debate is not about the mechanics of what was or is and I agree with you, that approach seems counter productive. But it sure provide a comfy blanket to those brokers who like to operate with a backwards strategy.
You wrote “Great agents can excel without a great brokerage brand behind them, but a great brokerage could cultivate an entire team of great agents – and that would be exceptional!”
I agree completely Erik. Brenda raised a very wise son!
marc
@Marc
Thank you Marc.
It is good to see there are brokers out there already making a difference. I see the brokerage’s position in the home sales process as a huge potential for progress in the industry. Something I would like to see, and love to be a part of.
I have no formal education or experience in real estate (other than being raised by an agent/broker/owner) but I am intrigued by the industry and the changes that are occurring. I think an outside perspective can help foster fresh ideas and change.
For example a marketer from the music industry! (Nahh, that would never work…)
Or maybe a web designer/digital communicator (the skills I am developing).
Thanks again for putting your thoughts online, for all to enjoy, learn from, and think about.
– Erik Florida
How could I not chime in on this topic…There is so much that can be done. So often Brokers and brands, focus on bringing in revenue. A pretty smart focus, but they focus on it at the expense of quality. I have been guilty myself at times. Fear sets in and you keep an agent that you know isn’t giving an excellent customer experience because you are afraid to lose the income.
You can’t be excellent if everyone can play. The best of the best select. They don’t select mediocre, they select the best, they trade the rest and they don’t compromise excellence.
I agree with Erik, big surprise, a great agent can get by without a great broker because the position can be very autonomous. A great broker though has nothing unless he has great agents and that means you pick and choose.
Thanks Marc for keeping valuable conversations going.
I totally agree with the main message and actually verified this in quantitative research, but there is a difference and sometimes brand does matter more. I will let you know I work for a Real Estate brand that does mater to consumers. So I am biased, but our clients were surveyed in our research and they did see as much or more value in the brand. United Country Real Estate is highly differentiated as a brand and valued by those who know the brand because it represents much more and totally unique marketing in real estate. United Country is the largest national franchise brand focused on lifestyle property, voted #1 by Dun and Bradstreet and the Wall Street Journal because they offer national advertising of local listings – that is totally different – no other Real Estate company does that – it’s what sellers want and what most helps buyers. You have to offer something different that is needed or brand does not matter.
As far as the argument that brands matter because they give to charitable causes, I don’t buy that. I have been a brand marketer for over 20 years and what is core to brand value should be what the brand promises that is unique, different and important to consumers in that industry. I am not saying charity is not important, but it does not help you sell my property or find me a property of my dreams – they are unrelated. When I was at Coke we gave millions to charitable causes, primarily education for underprivileged kids, and that was great, but in the end Coke has to provide a better beverage – that’s what the brand is about. I think many brands focus on this because the don’t offer anything better than the other brands for consumers in that industry. Real estate sellers want better marketing, buyers want an easier time finding what they want from a trusted agent.
Brokerages really matter when the agent has done a poor job for the client. I often hear . . “I’ll never deal with that “company” again” when I call a disgruntled prospect. If everything went well, the client loves the agent, not the company.
@mike duffy
I’m perplexed by your comments.
You tout United Country Real Estate as a brand that matters, but I’m not clear on your argument.
“they offer national advertising of local listings – that is totally different – no other Real Estate company does that”
I have no idea what that means. Isn’t every listing a local listing? What exactly are they doing that every other company isn’t?
United Country’s slogan is “Find Your Freedom” (R) or maybe it’s “National Marketing, Local Expertise” TM – but neither are particularly distinct from the masses of real estate brands.
The Mission Statement helps a little more:
“United Country Real Estate is committed to providing the most unique and comprehensive customer service for individuals interested in owning property in rural America. Through a network of highly qualified real estate professionals, we offer an unequaled inventory of properties nationwide. All of our energies are devoted to the single objective of ‘Uniting Buyer and Seller’”
When I take out all the puffery that is common to the rest of the industry all that’s left is a single word.
Rural
Why not build your brand around that?
Brokerages used to matter but I agree that the branding is so watered down in the public’s eyes it just doesn’t matter anymore. The public perceives most brokerages as the same. There are very few brokerages that are different from the mainstream norm. Agent’s are responsible for their own destiny and can’t rely on a brokerage to help them along.
I know a “traditional” brokerage where agents spend zero on personal marketing, have no pics on b’cards and average 35 transactions per, with the lowest producing agent in the store doing 17. (there are 13 agents total), that is 455 transactions a year they are third in the market. The other companies in the top ten all have over 30 agents (that do promote themselves).
No teams, all individual agents, all but one agent was brand new to the business, the average agentin their market does six sides per year. This happens because of their brand. The brand resonates with consumers in there market. Ask these extremely successful agents if brand matters…one agent has left this company in three years and it was not her choice.
This brand took away market share from the bottom 97% of the market, the top agents have maintained. The “good” agents at “brands that don’t matter” are dying….
A consistent, clear message works.
I do agree, the first great real estate brand will not be one most of us have heard of yet. And it certainly is not recruiting branded agents.
Just an observation.
@Scott
Good observations. Thank you for sharing this. Can you share with us who this brokerage is?
@Marc ChangingStreets.com, the original office in the cultural metropolis of Flint MI.