31–40 of 97 posts
$270M loss on $3.7B in revenue. If they can get opex down, there's some serious money to be made and a lot of growth left here. In my neighborhood I'm seeing more and more houses go up for sale with Compass signs.
Their single biggest expense is “commission and other transaction related expenses” which clocks in at just over 3B. I don’t know how much control they really have over commissions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their single biggest expense is “commission and other transaction related expenses” which clocks in at just over 3B. I don’t know how much control they really have over commissions.
True but maybe the “industry standard” agent cut is open for “disruption.” (Personally I can’t fathom what the agents do today that adds $10k-$100k of value). They’ll find some data to support that they make agents more efficient and then reduce their cut. And when the agents complain, there aren’t going to be many people crying for them, especially the ones on Bravo.
Was the notion that their technology is their secret sauce abandoned? Did the platform just not meet the stated goals? The promise of their software seems gone and they look like a plain old real estate company trying to buy their way to market share with investment money.
Its a little silly how easily a company can categorize itself as a technology company. Many of the IPOs from the past two years suggests having a website and/or having an app doesn't just make you into a tech company (WeWork is a good example of this). Compass is no doubt eager to foster unreasonable expectations for growth that surpasses the business they're actually in (as real estate brokers) and prefer to imbued…
Agreed. This point from the S1 stood out: > on average, 88% of our agent teams used our proprietary technology platform at least once per week, This doesnt sound like they built some insane tech that everyone needs to use all the time. So how exactly is the a differentiator?
Its a little silly how easily a company can categorize itself as a technology company. Many of the IPOs from the past two years suggests having a website and/or having an app doesn't just make you into a tech company (WeWork is a good example of this). Compass is no doubt eager to foster unreasonable expectations for growth that surpasses the business they're actually in (as real estate brokers) and prefer to imbued…
In my view, Compass is in the same boat. They want to become the middleman between buyers and agents in real estate. It's a platform play just like AirBnB. Not sure if they'll succeed, but I disagree with the premise that this is just some magic pixie dust. They need tech to scale (and there already seems to be enough to rival AirBnB).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're making a purchase/sale of several hundred thousand dollars, having someone with you who has done this many times before is easily worth 5% or so. Is every agent good? Well certainly not. But it's a high-stakes transaction that most people have never done before, or have done only once before, so having a veteran of many such transactions walk you through it is easily worth a few percent of the total cost.
> easily worth 5% Easily worth a couple grand, maybe. A percentage like that? No chance in hell.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True but maybe the “industry standard” agent cut is open for “disruption.” (Personally I can’t fathom what the agents do today that adds $10k-$100k of value). They’ll find some data to support that they make agents more efficient and then reduce their cut. And when the agents complain, there aren’t going to be many people crying for them, especially the ones on Bravo.
If you're making a purchase/sale of several hundred thousand dollars, having someone with you who has done this many times before is easily worth 5% or so. Is every agent good? Well certainly not. But it's a high-stakes transaction that most people have never done before, or have done only once before, so having a veteran of many such transactions walk you through it is easily worth a few percent of the total cost.
> On the date of this prospectus, Robert Reffkin, our founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, will hold all of the shares of our Class C common stock > Each share of Class A common stock is entitled to one vote per share. Each share of Class C common stock is entitled to 20 votes per share I'm surprised no one has proposed laws trying too crack down on founders have super-control of their company through stock…
There's no case to be made that "super control" inherently leads to unethical behavior. It may, however, negatively impact the stock price, since less investors will likely want to invest in a company with limited controls on governance. Most companies aren't Facebook and don't have Facebook growth, so ignoring them is an option.
> On the date of this prospectus, Robert Reffkin, our founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, will hold all of the shares of our Class C common stock > Each share of Class A common stock is entitled to one vote per share. Each share of Class C common stock is entitled to 20 votes per share I'm surprised no one has proposed laws trying too crack down on founders have super-control of their company through stock…