Belvoir Lettings has become a plc and is set for further expansion.
One of the UK’s largest letting franchises, it listed on AIM on the London Stock Exchange on Tuesday.
The previous holding company, Kilima Holdings, has now been liquidated and replaced with Belvoir Lettings plc.
Belvoir managing director Dorian Gonsalves said: “This marks an important milestone in the evolution of our national brand. We are now in a position to focus on our future growth as a public company.
“Primarily the funds raised from the placing will enable us to fund acquisitions and execute our ambitious expansion plans. We will also be in a position to help franchise owners acquire competitors within their territory. We will be proactively targeting key competitors, and assisting with an operations strategy.
“More importantly, the flotation will enable us to provide assistance with funding for the right opportunity, although this will depend on individual circumstances.
“The strength and identity of our national brand is testament to the combined commitment of the franchise network and the team at central office.”
Belvoir chairman Mike Goddard, who founded the company in 1995, said: “We are delighted to be debuting on AIM. The Belvoir franchise operates in the stable and growing UK residential lettings market and is excited about its expansion plans to continue to grow its presence in this market.
“The response from our new institutional and private shareholders, including many Belvoir franchise owners, has been very encouraging, and we look forward to life as a public company.”
Belvoir plans to grow its network nationally, but has made it plain that it will stick to the private rental sector. This is in contrast to competitor Martin & Co which made known its ambitions to expand into sales some months ago, although it has not made any announcements about any plans to raise funds for further expansion via the stock exchange. Currently, Belvoir is unique in being the only stand-alone lettings company to be listed and one of only a handful of agents on the stock exchange at all.
%20(002).png)
.jpg)
Comments
I'm not personally convinced about this flotation. It seems the primary motivation was to release funds for the founders retirement. It will be interesting to see if the (competent but uninspiring) board can deliver growth, or whether this whole episode is simply an exercise to attract a private purchaser.
I know it wasn't Ray who thinks I am delusional or on drugs but he seems to think I have a professional Axe to grind which was still posted as an attempt to discredit my post which was a reasonable and informed "there but for the grace of (appropriate deity) go you" reply to the Charles Lawson story.
Hi Steve yes I have a bit to do as well!!
Understandable mistake and maybe dwelling in the past is a habit in one's twilight years (as someone described me the other day in a post!!). Hear hear to weeding out the rogues.
Robert I think Ray Evans is a good guy and I'm sure he didn't call you a crackpot - maybe it was a smackhead?!!!
Anyway I like that description about bottom feeders but I fear their tenants may be the biggest losers.
Have a good week-end all I still don't work Fridays (well most of them!!)
Sorry IO, I'd assumed that when you referred to the "Oxford stories" you were referring to the Charles Lawson case. An understandable mistake methinks?
I've enjoyed sparring with you today but real work is calling.
Good luck to Belvoir, strong competition is healthy for all of us, and I trust we all agree that rogue agents, wherever they may be should be weeded out and cosnigned to history.
You don't want to associate yourself with me Industry Observer, apparently my posts are viewed as the delusional logic of a crackhead!
I have a lot of time for both Martin and Co and Belvoir and have great respect for their efforts to weed out the wrongdoers. Both have had their moments in the last few years but their genuine efforts to do the right thing means they have come through those instances well with their respective reputations enhanced.
I will take a personal pride in the comments about the Belvoir re-brand, I had a very talented team, Ben, Simon and Leo who did the Design work on that account but it is sad that the talent in CFPDesign House has now been dispersed across the country.
Who is tracking down the non-franchise rogues? That is a work in progress Steve, the description I heard this week; “they will become bottom feeders with a client base of appropriate landlords and tenants”
Steve
It was you that raised the issue of delinquent franchisees and rooting out rogues in franchise networks, not me. Maybe it is you that needs to move on?
Several years ago? Time must fly even quicker for this old dog then as I don't seem to recall it being that long ago but maybe it is
Anyway when I referred to "pigeons coming home to roost" it was in relation to all letting agents and how they are handling advance monies from students or anywhere else. Nothing to do with whether they are franchisees or not - obviously must have accidentally hit a still raw nerve?.
But as it has been raised I stand by my comments about Ian snatching victory from the jaws of defeat - I have never seen such a brilliant table turning PR exercise in my life. To blame Government for allowing more than one scheme and thus enabling franchisees to pinch money - genius.
Mind he is right no need for anything more than DPS as sensibly the Scots are adopting.
Criticising SAFEagent really wasn't the best of moves either.
Hey ho
IO - As I said earlier, I respect Belvoir. I believe choosing Martin & Co was the right decision from me, I hope that many Belvoir franchisees feel Belvoir was the right choice for them. In practice I think both brands will do well (though perhaps with different strengths and going about things in different ways) in the medium term.
This isn't the place to discuss why I chose one over (or why I discounted Castles and Northwood altogether), suffice to say it was a combination of gut feeling and pragmatic stuff such as the availability of the particular territory I wanted.
I'm lost as to why you can't move on over the rogue franchisees though. Yes, its fair to say that the earliest cases for both Martin & Co and Belvoir suddenly came out of the woodwork and smacked the franchisors in the mouth (how's that for mixed metaphors?).
Yes its also fair to say that, with hindsight the franchisors should have seen it coming and put controls in place much sooner.
However, we're talking about events from several years ago. Martin & Co (and presumably Belvoir) really do carry out regular audits and due diligence exercises on their franchisees client accounts nowadays. Rogue franchisees (along with the well-intentioned but incompetent) DO get found and dealt with. There are no such safeguards where independent agents are concerned.
Nicking the client money and not getting detected reasonably quickly would be very difficult for a Martin & Co franchisee nowadays. For an independent who was careful and kept his fraud within certain limits it would be very easy indeed. Too easy.
@SFL
Oh dear knew our new found friendship was doomed!!
I take your point but blinkered in this modern business age means dead in the water, not ploughing on through it. Belvoir has always tweaked the rudder here and there when needed, especially in their brilliant rebranding plus Mike Goddard being such a good 'front' man even to the extent of Chairing the BFA.
The last act of a dying organisation is to bring out a fresh set of rules (Tom Peters I think) and in terms of changes at M&Co you may care to ponder that one Steve.
The other point is you make a very valiant defence for delinquent franchisees, almost as good as the disgraceful PR Ian got out of the disaster, but to try and make out that it was internal policing that flushed them out does you no credit Steve.
You and me both know that in M&Co or Belvoir or anywhere else it would have been panic last desperate hope calls from clients to HO and an increasing number of them that would have triggered closing down a franchisee.
Not a regular internal audit.
You never did say what impressed you so much about M&Co or indeed whether you'd considered Castle Estates or Northwood.
Oh well I'll just have to try and find yet another new friend or settle for being Billy No Mates!! Robert May looks a good prospect - seen his posts on this Oxford students story?
The problem is, when you reach a certain size, you can't change course that easily. Lettings provide, what corporate players would describe, as 'good quality earnings' - i.e. recurring income. Sales simply don't, you are only as good as last months figures. AIM will assist in the franchise expansion and also provide a possible 'exit route' for all participants when such is deemed appropriate. Shrewd and very wise strategic move I would say.
IO - on your main point we can agree to differ. A company which is "ploughing on like an oil tanker" could be "focused, with a clear vision" or it could simply be "blinkered". Equally a company which changes direction could be "indecisive" or it could be "quick to adapt to changing marketplaces". Only time will tell which is correct.
It is fair to say though that (to use Harry Hill's turn of phrase) Belvoir will now have to take their pants down in public whereas Martin & Co will have no such issues when deciding strategy.
I really hope you're right about chickens coming home to roost for some agents. Martin & Co and Belvoir (admittedly belatedly) started actively searching out and "outing" the rogues in their networks a few years ago. Who is actively searching for and outing the independent rogues? The answer is "no-one" and I bet there's a whole shed-load of them out there.
Some commentators naively thought the franchise groups had a particular problem with rogue agents, completely missing the point that the franchisors were (by-and-large) the only people actively seeking them out.
It stands to reason that you'll identify more crooks if you actually go out and look for them.
Proper licencing would help. A compulsory client account audit similar to the one I had to go through when I joined ARLA would be a good start
Industry Observer - I thoroughly agree with your sentiments, particularly the marine metaphors.
Steve
Each to their own of course. My comment was meant to be more along the lines of Belvoir sailing serenely on like a huge oil tanker (was going to say cruise liner but that may not be so appropriate) whereas Martin & Co is all over the place with initiatives which, if I may say so, are often uturns from previous policies, like this sales and moving away from retail premises insistence.
Did you look at the other two main independents when you started, Castle Estates and Northwood?
And what above all else made you choose M&Co?
Seen the Oxford stories? Pigeons are going to come home to roost I am afraid for some agencies, or should do.
IO - Thank goodness for that, something we can disagree about. I've found myself in the disconcerting position of agreeing with you several times recently.
The good thing about NOT being a plc is that it doesn't matter if other people think you're a rudderless ship. You can take a long-term view about things without being under pressure to deliver short-term profits for the shareholders.
I looked at both Belvoir and Martin & Co when I first entered the industry. I respect Belvoir as a competitor (both at local franchisee and national franchisor level) but I've always believed Martin & Co was the right way for me to jump and that hasn't changed.
Well done to Belvoir a company with a clear plan.
Martin & Co started with sales alongside lettings about 20 years ago, then let it drift off, now in the most difficult sales market in a generation decides to go back into sales. Plus virtual franchisees etc.
Looks a bit rudderless to me