NEW SEASON, NEW LOGO: INSIDE NZ REAL ESTATE’S AGENT POACHING GAME
PROPERTY NOISE | INDUSTRY ANALYSIS & OPINION
Spring brings fresh listings, brighter property photographs and renewed promises about the housing market.
For a real estate salesperson who has spent winter chasing reluctant buyers and increasingly frustrated vendors, it can also bring another thought:
Would life be better at the agency down the road?
A difficult winter can make a new office, a different commission split and a more enthusiastic manager look remarkably attractive. The grass appears greener. The recruitment pitch sounds convincing. A change of logo starts to feel like a change of fortune.
But changing agencies and changing the economics of your business are two very different things.
Public recruitment campaigns, agency announcements and a documented New Zealand court dispute show that competition for established real estate talent is real.
Whether spring produces more moves than other seasons is harder to establish. The sources reviewed for this article do not provide a nationwide monthly measure of agents changing agencies.
What they do reveal is an industry openly competing for experienced salespeople—and the relationships, reputation and potential business those people bring.
WHY A DIFFICULT WINTER CAN MAKE AGENTS QUESTION THEIR AGENCY
Consider the position of a salesperson whose recent campaigns have produced plenty of work but little income.
They have attended open homes, followed up buyers, negotiated price expectations and maintained contact with vendors. Meanwhile, their own bills have continued arriving.
When income depends on completed deals, a disappointing run can become intensely personal.
An agent may begin questioning the office’s leadership, advertising, commission structure or ability to generate opportunities. Sometimes those concerns are justified. Sometimes the wider market is the bigger problem.
A rival agency offers a simpler explanation: you need a better platform.
Our analysis is that spring can provide an appealing moment to act on that explanation. A salesperson can imagine rebuilding before the next wave of listings, refreshing their marketing and entering the warmer months with renewed confidence.
That is a plausible decision-making pattern. It should not be confused with statistical proof that spring is New Zealand’s busiest season for agency transfers.
Property Noise has previously examined the financial pressure behind these decisions in WORK FOR MONTHS, EARN NOTHING: INSIDE THE COMMISSION-ONLY TRAP FACING NZ REAL ESTATE AGENTS.
The question for an unhappy salesperson is whether the proposed move addresses that pressure—or simply gives it a different letterhead.
THE RECRUITMENT PITCH IS ALREADY IN PUBLIC VIEW
Agencies do not need to conceal their interest in people already working in real estate.
Harcourts’ New Zealand recruitment page explicitly addresses both newcomers and existing industry participants. It promotes technology, training, marketing and recognition, alongside recruitment support for business owners. Its page title includes the invitation “Make The Switch”.
Independent operator RRE Agency is more specific about experience. Its recruitment page seeks salespeople with at least three years in real estate and promotes autonomy, technology and the opportunity to retain more earnings. Those are the agency’s recruitment claims, rather than independently verified income outcomes.
These campaigns establish something important: recruitment is aimed at established professionals as well as people entering the industry.
They do not, by themselves, establish targeted approaches to particular competitors’ staff, improper conduct or a seasonal recruitment surge.
Nevertheless, the commercial appeal is straightforward. An experienced salesperson may already understand the local market, possess a public profile and have relationships built over years.
For the receiving agency, that can make an established recruit attractive in ways a newcomer cannot immediately match.
REAL EXAMPLES OF PEOPLE AND BUSINESSES CHANGING AGENCIES
Public announcements provide concrete examples of movement, although the examples below involve different circumstances and should not be treated as evidence of a single recruitment method.
CHRIS IRELAND’S MOVE TO BAYLEYS
Bayleys announced Chris Ireland’s appointment as head of retail South Island, based in Christchurch.
The announcement says he joined after two decades with a global agency and identifies collaboration and networking opportunities among the attractions of the move.
It also emphasises his established industry relationships and experience. This is a commercial property appointment, rather than a residential salesperson transfer, but it illustrates how an agency can strengthen its capability by recruiting an established professional.
SHANE COOTE’S BUSINESS JOINING RAY WHITE
Ray White published an announcement about Shane Coote and his team becoming Ray White Mairangi Bay.
The business had previously operated as Central Realty. The announcement presented the combination of local knowledge with a larger network’s systems and support as a reason for the change.
This was an existing business joining a franchise network, rather than simply an individual salesperson moving offices. The accessible announcement does not establish that it occurred this spring.
THE PAREMATA MOVE THAT REACHED THE HIGH COURT
A more contentious example appears in Team Group Realty Limited trading as Harcourts Paremata v Cardno, a High Court interim judgment dated 14 March 2024.
The judgment records that four salespeople and a sales manager resigned in December 2023 and subsequently began working with a new Bayleys office in the area.
The dispute concerned contractual restrictions and confidential information. The court granted a three-month interim injunction affecting the four salespeople’s competition within the specified area, alongside orders concerning confidential information and property.
The court declined the requested orders against the sales manager. This was an interim decision, not a final determination of every disputed issue.
The timing also matters: these departures occurred in December. The case demonstrates agency movement and the potential for disputes; it does not prove a spring peak.
Taken together, these examples show individual recruitment, business affiliation changes and a contested team departure. They should not all be labelled “poaching” as though their circumstances were identical.
WHY RECRUITING EXPERIENCED AGENTS CAN LOOK LIKE A SPORT
From an editorial perspective, parts of the recruitment contest resemble a transfer market.
A recognisable name joins a new team. The receiving agency celebrates its strengthened position. The departing office must explain the loss. Fresh photographs and updated branding announce the change.
The public language usually centres on opportunity, culture, growth and support.
The commercial calculation may be less romantic.
Can this person win listings? Do local homeowners recognise them? Will their experience improve the office’s performance? Can they help establish a presence in a neighbourhood where the agency wants to grow?
Those are reasonable business questions. But they also explain why the competition can become so intense.
Recruiting established talent can offer a faster route to capability than developing every salesperson from the beginning.
The risk is an industry culture that celebrates recruitment victories more enthusiastically than it measures the service those victories deliver to homeowners.
Property Noise previously explored the broader pressures in WHY THE NZ REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY EATS ITS OWN: AGENT TURNOVER AND COMMISSION-ONLY PAY.
IS POACHING REAL ESTATE AGENTS IMMORAL?
In Property Noise’s view, deliberately trying to unsettle a rival’s team through misleading promises, disparagement or expectations that confidential business will come with the recruit is ethically ugly.
Treating another agency’s investment in people as something to raid—and treating clients as transferable prizes—deserves criticism.
That is our editorial position. It is not an allegation that the agencies or individuals mentioned above engaged in those practices.
There is also an essential distinction.
A salesperson should be able to pursue better leadership, fairer commercial terms and a healthier working environment. An agency should be able to advertise genuine opportunities and consider experienced applicants.
An agent does not owe an office a lifetime of service simply because it provided training.
The ethical test concerns the behaviour surrounding the move: honesty, respect for existing obligations, protection of confidential information and continuity of client service.
A transparent opportunity is defensible. A recruitment strategy built on undermining competitors or exploiting private information is much harder to defend.
A BETTER COMMISSION SPLIT DOES NOT GUARANTEE A BETTER BUSINESS
For an agent considering a change, the headline commission percentage can be persuasive.
But the percentage alone says little about the eventual income.
Illustrative example: an agent receiving 70% of $100,000 in gross commission retains $70,000 before applicable fees, expenses and tax. An agent receiving 90% of $60,000 retains $54,000 on the same basis.
These are hypothetical figures, not quoted agency offers.
The lesson is simple: a larger share of a smaller business can leave you worse off.
An agency comparison should examine:
- The complete commission structure and deductions.
- Mandatory fees and personal marketing costs.
- The practical support available during difficult campaigns.
- Access to useful training, administration and supervision.
- How opportunities are allocated within the office.
- The cost and disruption of changing brands.
- What happens to existing listings and commissions on departure.
Promises of greater independence should also be tested carefully. Independence can be valuable, but it may come with more responsibility for systems, marketing and administration.
A move should solve identifiable problems. “I had a miserable winter” is a reason to review the business, but it is not a complete business case for leaving.
WHAT HAPPENS TO HOMEOWNERS WHEN THEIR AGENT CHANGES AGENCIES?
The vendor’s position deserves more attention than the recruitment announcement.
A homeowner may have chosen an individual salesperson because of their reputation or personal connection. That does not mean the homeowner’s agreement automatically follows that person to a new business.
REA’s consumer website, Settled.govt.nz, explains that an agency agreement is a legally binding contract with the relevant agent or agency. It also warns that changing agencies can create a risk of paying two commissions in some circumstances.
If your salesperson announces a move, ask for written answers:
- Who will manage the existing campaign?
- Does the current agency agreement remain in force?
- What happens to advertising already paid for?
- How will existing buyer enquiries be followed up?
- What would be required if you wanted to appoint the new agency?
- Could either agency claim commission on a later sale?
The homeowner should receive clear communication before making a decision.
A seller managing a mortgage, a purchase deadline or a family relocation should not have to untangle an agency rivalry to understand who is selling their house.
For the wider discussion about costs and incentives, read HOUSE PRICES FALL—BUT REAL ESTATE AGENCIES STILL COLLECT NEARLY $2 BILLION.
AGENCY OWNERS SHOULD ASK WHY THEIR PEOPLE WANT TO LEAVE
An agency owner upset about recruitment approaches should also examine retention.
Are commercial terms clear? Is management accessible? Does support extend beyond motivational meetings? Are struggling salespeople receiving practical assistance?
If someone is receptive to a rival’s offer, the rival may have identified dissatisfaction that already existed.
That does not excuse dishonest recruitment. It does mean that blaming the competitor may leave the original problem untouched.
An office that wants loyalty must offer reasons to stay that survive a difficult market.
The receiving agency has responsibilities too. It should describe its offer accurately, understand the recruit’s obligations and plan a professional transition.
Recruitment success should be measured by sustainable performance and client service, rather than the announcement alone.
THE PROPERTY NOISE VIEW: A NEW LOGO IS NOT A NEW HOUSING MARKET
A hard winter can make the prospect of a fresh start compelling.
Some agents will make a sensible move. Better management, appropriate support and transparent commercial terms can materially improve a working relationship.
Others may discover that buyers remain cautious, vendors remain demanding and prospecting remains difficult after the business cards change.
Our criticism is directed at an industry mindset that turns recruiting competitors’ salespeople into a trophy contest.
Developing people takes work. Keeping them through difficult periods takes leadership. Winning homeowners’ trust takes consistent service.
Those achievements deserve more attention than the latest team photograph.
Before swapping agencies, ask what will actually improve.
Before celebrating a recruit, explain what clients will gain.
And before calling spring a transfer season, distinguish the stories we can document from the pattern the industry has yet to measure.
Reporting note: This article draws on public agency recruitment pages, agency announcements, REA consumer guidance and a March 2024 High Court interim judgment. The cited moves involve different circumstances and dates. They do not establish a nationwide seasonal increase or misconduct by the named parties. The winter-to-spring explanation and ethical assessment are Property Noise editorial analysis.
SEO title: