Tuesday, 15 April 2008

Globrix gunning for top spot

Property technology posts that Globrix is number two in terms of traffic, just behind rightmove.

This is excellent news for agents and all in the online property industry as it shows clearly that users have adopted the new generation of property search engines and therefore agents no longer need to spend vast sums on the old marketing portals.

What will be the response of the marketing portals I wonder? They have already been developing technology to try and compete with newcomers, but the new generation of property search engines are beginning to make themselves heard. Indeed Globrix, Nestoria and Zoomf alike are all chipping away at the traditional marketing portals and it is surely only a matter of time before we see realignment, mergers and takeovers happening within the established market.

I may sound like a broken record, but now is the time for agents to invest in their websites, invest time in very basic SEO work and ensure that their sites and their properties are found easily by the search engines. Come and see us!!

This change in the industry opens the door for more development, much of which is already out there waiting to be embraced by agents. Now is the time ladies and gentlemen.


Anonymous said...

First of all property technology claims Globrix is number two in terms of number of properties, NOT traffic. Huge difference. Even the number of properties will contain duplicates (whereever I search, I find duplicates in their results).
Second, the claim cites a Globrix press release as sole source.

I will add another source: Rightmove had over 3mio unique users in March (comscore), Globrix 246 (comscore). That's place 22, not two.

The traffic is bought with a marketing campaign both online (Google adsense) and offline (e.g. the London paper). So at least some 'vast sum' has been spend... with no income (e.g. banner ads) on Globrix. Will the traffic go down if Globrix runs out of money?

It's impressive for market entry though.

Anonymous said...

Globrix claimed to have more listings, not more traffic.

They abuse their figures the way a fat woman abuses her too-small dress. She pulls it down here and pulls it up there, desperately trying to be respectable and to hide some embarrassing truths.

For example, they claim to be number two based on listings, but the established metric is UBs. The inclusion of duplicates and sold listings in their database makes listings laughable as a metric.

And, rather than report monthly UBs, they report cumulative UBs over all the months since they launched. Did they decide the monthly figure was too pitiful to say out loud? Apparently so.

A business unwilling to face reality about its strengths and weaknesses is not only misleading others, it is misleading itself. And, in the fast-moving web world, where you have to act quickly based on the best information, that's the first step towards oblivion.

Anonymous said...


Property Owl said...

Fair point regarding the traffic/listings, slip of a late night button.

Thanks for the comments and comscore results.

With reference to duplication, I have mentioned before that any search engine is only as good as the listings they can crawl. Again, important for agents to work on basic website design and SEO for the engines. Of course, engines need to work on duplication from different feeds and the like as well.

As for buying traffic, I would first address why they are spending as suggested? One primary answer, brand recognition.

With reference to funds drying up, the alternative view is of course one where users adopt the brand, leading to a natural reduction in marketing spend on traffic.

Naturally it would be fantastic to have that luxury and perhaps the real question is whether it can establish brand recognition, retain and then grow traffic.

Rightmove has that brand recognition, but relies on agents paying large sums to have their properties 'listed'. Question two is therefore, will agents remain paying such sums to be 'listed' if the engines retain and grow traffic?

Anonymous said...

I have been watching this market closely and I think it's a great start for them. Any new comer into any established market has plenty of barriers to entry to tackle. In terms of traffic there is the simple truth that brand recognition takes some time, and the keyword competition for traffic from google for natural listings is enormously competitive, especially in property. Bearing in mind that the viral impact on Globrix is very immature, and their google ranking will take time to mature I think they stand in an excellent position. I am starting to see Globrix mentioned on agents websites, that kind of exposure is small but hugely valuable.

Regarding the property count, it will become irrelevant - Globrix and others have a business model that allows them to reach market saturation, whereas the other paid listing model by its very nature can't achieve this - it was always vulnerable to a new comer with this kind of model.

Anonymous said...

Same commenter as #1 here.

Besides all points we heart against which numbers Globrix uses I think I would have done the same. It's marketing and PR. If "number two in [ABC]" gets you into the press it's fair game. Same for the "fastest growing [ABC] website" I keep reading in press releases of various new companies.

The business model of showing free content (properties in this case) and adding ads (text or banners) next to it, works in a lot of places on the Internet. Sometimes it's a matter of scale, brand or keeping your own costs down. I'm happy for any disruptor in the property market if it offers a value for internet users/searchers.


Anonymous said...

Just to add to this debate - one comment stated that Globrix has no banners - I am looking at the site now and see hundreds across the South East - I assume that the agent banners on the right are paid for which would mean that hundreds of agents are already paying for these banners...that is pretty impressive for a business that launched in January in a tough market. It will be interesting to see how they get on in the coming months. Also isn't Globrix part owned by Mr Murdoch? Last time I looked he had a bit of cash :-)

Anonymous said...

Is anyone going to say tell us what a UB is?

Anonymous said...

A UB is a Unique Browser which is actually more appropriate than Unique Visitor.

As a Unique Visitor is a Unique cookie id during a given time period, it should really be UC.

Australians use UB I believe.

As for this very interesting an heated debate. Why is everyone so upset about Globrix claiming number 2? Who cares to be honest. For an estate agent, leads are king, quality leads.

It's quite good that one property related website/search engine has started the debate - how should we measure a sites value to the consumer and to the agent.

rightmove is no. 1 for the highest price it charges agents and UVs.

Globrix is no. 22 for UVs - and no. 3 for an idea that is certainly not original (nestoria, properazzi), but smart for getting NEWS' backing.

So the site that delivers the most value to its customers, agents and consumers, will eventually lead this market. It certainly won't be the one sending press releases desperate to show everyone its RANK.