City speculation on Rightmove and Zoopla merger

| Rosalind Renshaw

There is City speculation that Rightmove and Zoopla could merge, according to the London Evening Standard.

It follows the acquisition of US portal Trulia by its bigger rival Zillow, who have agreed a £2.1bn deal.

The speculation is run under the headline “City bets on Zoopla and Rightmove after US mega-merger”.

The story quotes analyst Joe Rundle, of ETX Capital, who says: “[Rightmove and Zoopla] have to keep growing and monetising and there probably will have to be some consolidation in the sector to reduce cost base.

“There will be pressure on these guys to merge.”

Hmm. We’re not too sure where the pressure would come from – Rightmove investors must surely be delighted with yesterday’s results showing a 74.1% profit margin, which doesn’t exactly suggest that Rightmove needs to do much in the way of improving cost control or how it monetises itself.

As for Zoopla, it is very new on the stock market and most analysts seem to think the business is undervalued and should grow strongly.

Indeed, on Tuesday, Credit Suisse set Zoopla an “outperform” rating, saying its shares should reach 290p, so presumably its shareholders are looking for the delights still to come.

So, we can’t see either sets of shareholders hoping, let alone pressing, for a marriage.

By the way, nor can we exactly see Zoopla boss Alex Chesterman reporting to Rightmove boss Nick McKittrick – in the way that Trulia’s chief has agreed to report to Zillow’s boss.

Certain things in life just don’t happen and this is one of them.

And nor, given how long it took to get the merger of the Daily Mail’s portals and Zoopla through the Office of Fair Trading, can we begin to see a merger of Zoopla and Rightmove getting off the staring blocks in terms of the competition authorities.

Yesterday, Zoopla shares ended down 5.5p at 250p.

Rightmove shares ended down 31p at 2238p despite their excellent results: that’s the way the stock market works.

x

Email the story to a friend

More top news stories



45 Comments

  1. Trevor Gillham
    July 31, 2014 at 06:50

    Well, that would sort out the one website rule with OTM.

    Report
  2. Trevor Mealham
    July 31, 2014 at 06:56

    I have from a VERY GOOD authority High up in US MLS that the Trulia Zillow deal still needs US government approval yet. If allowed will go ahead. But the rubber stamp ink need wetting first.

    Report
  3. mark_one
    July 31, 2014 at 07:16

    What a gift OTM that would be.

    Report
  4. PeeBee
    July 31, 2014 at 08:12

    Yeah… and it will be called OnTheMeerkat… Miles Shipside will attend all the b@llsaching Seminars dressed in a smoking jacket… new strapline – "Lookeeng for prooperty vil never hef been so simples…" If that happens, 'The AM Collective' are bu99ered! ;o)

    Report
  5. wilko
    July 31, 2014 at 08:29

    "Indeed, on Tuesday, Credit Suisse set Zoopla an “outperform” rating, saying its shares should reach 290p"………..Really?..Am I missing something ???

    Report
    1. Paul H
      July 31, 2014 at 08:53

      "Credit shies set Zoopla an outperform rating"….The city are still oblivious to what's happening in January, I don't think anyone buying shares reads EYE.

      Report
      1. PeeBee
        July 31, 2014 at 09:52

        "The city are still oblivious to what's happening in January…" Yup – and so are the public (you know… the people who keep us all in jobs…)… which is of FAR more concern to me – as it should be to YOU!

        Report
        1. PeeBee
          July 31, 2014 at 09:53

          Bet I don't get a 'Like' for that post… ;o)

          Report
          1. JAM01
            July 31, 2014 at 10:11

            The little devil in me couldn't resist liking that one PeeBee.

            Report
          2. PeeBee
            July 31, 2014 at 11:29

            What surprises me more, JAM01, is that SOMEONE ELSE 'Liked' it! T'weren't me… and it sure as Sunday follows Saturday weren't any of The AM Collective…

            Report
        2. Paul H
          July 31, 2014 at 10:45

          It doesn't affect the public PeeBee…their buying/renting/selling and letting experience will still be the same. They will need to use an agent and that agent I part uses the internet when marketing a property.

          Report
          1. PeeBee
            July 31, 2014 at 11:26

            "It doesn't affect the public PeeBee…their buying/renting/selling and letting experience will still be the same."

            With all due respect – and in the nicest possible use of the term, Paul H – 6o110cks. 2/1/15 is, according to The AM Collective, going to DISRUPT THE MARKET.

            I would therefore be enthralled to know WHAT PART of "…doesn't affect the public…" can be conceived as anything other than complete and utter ********, considering the three words above.

            Report
          2. wilko
            July 31, 2014 at 13:49

            Pee Bee….YOU are the one who has bought the public into this thread " – and so are the public (you know… the people who keep us all in jobs…)… "…. No one else had mentioned, or commented on wether the public are aware of a company that hasn't launched. My original point , and paul H's response was purely in relation to the fact that an analyst had clearly failed to spot that Zoopla will immediately lose circa £1m + per month come Jan 2015 which will not, in my view, send their shares up by 40 pence.
            We all know you love to pick comments apart, like it's a competition, but please try and steer clear of manufacturing a heated discussion just so you can play your games …and try and avoid "Utter bilshut, and 6ollocks"…we all know you are really good at this type of rubbish but just because you have the ability to disguise this type of language doesn't mean to say that I (and others maybe) find it both childish and a tad offensive on this forum. It isn't needed….you are surely better than that.

            Report
          3. smile please
            July 31, 2014 at 14:54

            PeeBee Matey, Mon Ami, Bud….. I have to agree with Wilko. You seem to offer few real opinions. You just seem to pick other peoples comments apart. I am sure you enjoy this but for the vast majority it is very frustrating. You obviously have thoughts and you seem from time to time to be entertaining. I would rather you contributed to the forum with thoughts and opinions as opposed to picking others thoughts and opinions to bits.

            Report
          4. PeeBee
            July 31, 2014 at 15:29

            wilko – "YOU are the one who has bought the public into this thread…"

            Yup – because the CITY don't matter – JUST the public. Those that, sadly, have NO SAY WHATSOEVER in this matter – even though THEY are wholly paying the bill… however indirectly you care to accept that hard fact.

            "…we all know you are really good at this type of rubbish…"

            Everyone is REALLY GOOD at something, wilko. Believe it or not, I'm pretty good at other stuff too.

            "…I (and others maybe) find it both childish and a tad offensive on this forum…" Wow – I've NEVER known something to be considered "childish AND "offensive" at the same time – although maybe sticking your tongue out at a vicar would be considered such.

            Well… I'd love to say I'm really sorry – but I don't lie (or, as another poster wrapped it up last week, "more a diplomatic way of telling the truth…”) so I won't.

            I'd complain to EYEs owners if I were you – get me banned.

            I wouldn't be here gatecrashing the AM party any more – but that won't take away the potential ghosts in the machine that you all steadfastly refuse to accept.

            Report
          5. PeeBee
            July 31, 2014 at 16:14

            'smile please' –
            "I would rather you contributed to the forum with thoughts and opinions as opposed to picking others thoughts and opinions to bits."

            I have typed my thoughts and opinions – literally THOUSANDS of words – here on EYE, and also on EAT before it. MY posts have been questioned – they got responses back. All I am doing here is questioning THE WORDS of others.

            "I have to agree with Wilko."

            And I, therefore, refer you to same response I have made to him, as it is equally relevant.

            Report
          6. wilko
            July 31, 2014 at 16:59

            Pee bee ""YOU are the one who has bought the public into this thread…" Yup – because the CITY don't matter"
            Exactly my point. You decided that the "city don't matter" when others are trying to discuss the city and their analysis of the Zoopla share price(from the EYE story) . What on earth is the point of that ? By all means, start a thread of your own if it is relevant to the initial EYE story.
            With regard to reporting you to the EYE, there is no need for this. Ros and the team read the comments/views I'm sure, and if they see fit to allow you to dress up offensive expletives while firing off your views / arguments at other users then this would not be a publication that I (and maybe others) would be happy to continue to contribute to or read.
            And I haven't mentioned AM at all today…so your closing comments are not at all relevant.
            The EYE is a breath of fresh air and I really do enjoy sharing thoughts and opinions with fellow professionals.
            In my opinion, if you continue (like on the other channel) to use these forum discussions to fuel your own ego by throwing in dressed up swearing with an oversize dollop of capital letters then you really need to take a good look at yourself and your own opinion of the EYE.

            Report
          7. PeeBee
            July 31, 2014 at 18:25

            "My original point , and paul H's response was purely in relation to the fact that an analyst had clearly failed to spot that Zoopla will immediately lose circa £1m + per month come Jan 2015 which will not, in my view, send their shares up by 40 pence."

            Your 'original point' – "Really?..Am I missing something ???" – was in actuality simply to pour doubt on a statement in the article. Paul H's comment was in actuality a no more than a 'hear, hear' to yours (as per previous form…) and from there we descended into the usual shooting match. The problem is, EVERYTHING is based upon nothing more than a MAYBE. Several maybe's, actually.

            1. Jan 2015 isn't here yet. 2. There is NO GUARANTEE that Z will 'lose' a million quid a month off their top line. 3. What you, I or anyone else 'believes' might happen is relevant to the stock market – or any other market, for that matter. In evidence I offer the millions of wasted words of the prophets of doom who are, I would imagine, still heralding the impending house price crash that I have read and heard all about since somewhere in mid-2004.

            "…if you continue (like on the other channel) to use these forum discussions to fuel your own ego…" Love it. Congratulations – if all else fails pull the 'ego trip' card. Question – WHAT ego? I am, in case you missed it – AN ANONYMOUS POSTER. Why the chuff would I post anonymously if I wanted to bask in any potential glory to be had here? Congratulations again – I've never known anyone be as wide of the mark. My ONLY interest here is in the industry and those that live within it – and those they serve.

            Think what you want.

            Report
          8. wilko
            August 1, 2014 at 08:33

            "There is NO GUARANTEE that Z will 'lose' a million quid a month off their top line" Sorry Pee Bee you are very right. There is absolutely no guarantee Z will lose a £Million a month…….It will probably be more.

            Report
          9. PeeBee
            August 1, 2014 at 09:35

            Oh, well… at least you are prepared to concede that I MIGHT actually get something right – just a different "right"…

            Report
  6. JAM01
    July 31, 2014 at 10:12

    Competition is needed to keep fees low(er). If RM buys Z, the purpose behind AM is scuppered.

    Report
  7. marcH
    July 31, 2014 at 10:13

    If (big IF) the UK competition authorities were to look favourably at any putative merger between RM/Z, it would only be after OTM launches in January. OTM would be viewed as a viable competitor giving customers the choice they so evidently want and need – but (big BUT) only if we all get off our backsides and sign up….

    Report
    1. JAM01
      July 31, 2014 at 11:10

      '…giving customers the choice they so evidently want and need…' – sorry marcH, but where is that coming from? The opposite can be said to be true – customers would rather go to one site for all their property needs, not multiple sites, so that one has me a bit confused I am afraid.

      The drive for AM is agent driven, not consumer driven.

      Report
      1. PeeBee
        July 31, 2014 at 21:42

        "The drive for AM is agent driven, not consumer driven."

        More precisely, JAM 01, it is driven by ONLY SOME Agents.

        "Consumer" comes somewhere down the list of priorities – when/if I find it I'll let you know what position.

        Report
  8. Paul H
    July 31, 2014 at 11:49

    PeeBee….Durupt the market means from an agent perspective not a consumer perspective. The consumer will STILL use the internet to help them find a property. There is no change as far as I can see other then the consumer clicking in a different link on a google search page.

    A question for you….WHO'S fault is it that Zoopla and rightmove has spent millions advertising their websites? 1) the consumer 2) agents 3) rightmove and Zoopla….don't forget that both the consumer and agents have no control over the marketing budgets of a plc company?

    Report
    1. PeeBee
      July 31, 2014 at 12:13

      "Durupt the market means from an agent perspective not a consumer perspective."

      So – what you are saying above, then, is that it will cause ABSOLUTELY NO DISRUPTION WHATSOEVER to the consumer?

      "There is no change as far as I can see other then the consumer clicking in a different link on a google search page" Ahhh – so you DO actually "see" there WILL be a LITTLE bit of disruption. You just won't/can't accept just HOW BIG the little bit is or how big it will be. Iceberg mentality, Paul H.

      "WHO'S fault is it that Zoopla and rightmove has spent millions advertising their websites?" FAULT? Sorry – WHO says that the advertising you refer to is a mistake? Certainly not the companies paying for the advertising, that's for certain!

      "…don't forget that both the consumer and agents have no control over the marketing budgets of a plc company" Sorry – WHY would/should they – and what has that got to do with the price of eggs anyway?

      Report
      1. Paul H
        July 31, 2014 at 13:05

        It appears that in your eyes the consumer clicking on a different web page or looking at more than one website is a disruption of biblical proportions, one that will shake the very fabric of how people look for a property. Sorry PeeBee but that's complete nonsense. The consumer is still using a laptop or an I phone , please tell me what disruption you talk of that will lead every consumer to want to jump off a cliff as this is the picture you paint?

        "What has that got to do with the price of eggs"…Please tell me where is is written in stone that people can only search for properties on rightmove and Zoopla! You are trying to paint a Picture that searching for property must involve using rightmove and Zoopla.

        Report
        1. PeeBee
          July 31, 2014 at 14:06

          "It appears that in your eyes the consumer clicking on a different web page or looking at more than one website is a disruption of biblical proportions…"

          Did I say that? I don't think so. I am simply adding some balance to the heavily-stacked scale you are weighing everything with, matey. You are adamant that 2/1/15 will come and NOBODY will notice a dickie-bird of change. Sorry, bud but that simply ain't gonna happen and deep, deep down under all the hype and blow YOU know it will have SOME effect just as well as I do – but the AM way to deal with it is that of the ostrich.

          "…please tell me what disruption you talk of that will lead every consumer to want to jump off a cliff as this is the picture you paint?" Again – moving your stock from Portal 'A' to Portal 'B' WILL cause SOME disruption to EVERYONE. It is WHAT EFFECT that disruption will have that is the issue – but again, AM Members will deal with this – ARE dealing with this – in the manner of the said ostrich.

          There – you have my response. I'm still waiting for your answer to the questions posed above, matey… ;o)

          Report
          1. Paul H
            July 31, 2014 at 14:12

            I thought I replied to your questions, I will try and reply in detail at a later time, time to go back to the pool!

            Report
  9. Ric
    July 31, 2014 at 13:25

    Why would the AM collective be bu99ered PeeBee?…………… Just thinking out loud but lets say on 02.01.15 OTM launches woo hoo…… and RM & Z get married and the RMZ rebrand launches the same day…… well the AM Collective are on both anyway? which was always "step 1" to be on just 2 portals, one of which we control………. so now RMZ are thinking haha, we have them…… well RM would have kept them anyway, therefore the winnerS so far are Z and OTM as Z would have been in Sh1t creek by then……… and the AM collective are now happy they have just one competitor………….(This is my guess) But now RMZ would have to increase its subscriptions, My guess is because I assume to keep both sets of RM & Z shareholders happy, surely both these companies RM & Z will not be content with "sharing" profits as they are now. So increasing is the only option for them to assist on the fact RM are now not making as much as they did previously even if they hold fee's (unless RM decide we would like to merge and earn no more money and give some to Z in the process)…………………so RMZ say hi all members….as you know we are now RMZ but this will cost you more…….so will the AM collective put up with that? ……………I wouldn't, and I bet a few others will not, you may even have some non-AM members say aarrghhhhh I want to join AM and AM at this point would be well to say and you can for the same price as you could have done from minute one, (no stupid, it will cost you more now) so perhaps this means an increase in the AM collective…… the only impact for me RMZ could have is if they plan holding fee's or lowering fees and IMPORTANTLY retaining the majority of property, as lets get back to the whole point of a property portal…..its the property which makes it!…….brings you back to the AM collective now offering their properties exclusive to OTM first and RMZ getting it afterwards……………

    My own website still gets thousands of hits per month, if I had analytic results showing 4 hits per month with the stock levels I have, I would drop my site and save a bomb, but I still run it, as people still visit it, even though they know I list on RM…… I just don't get why RMZ would in anyway effect the OTM plan, if not more help the plan and make step 2 that little bit easier to achieve.

    Report
    1. PeeBee
      July 31, 2014 at 13:53

      "Why would the AM collective be bu99ered…?" Ric, matey – I was having a laugh! The entire post was a wind-up, based upon the phenomenal popularity of the Meerkat advertising brand against its' competitors.

      But… I REALLY WOULD give money to see MS in a smoking jacket – THAT ALONE would be worth the monthly subscription…! ;o)

      Report
      1. Ric
        July 31, 2014 at 14:32

        LOL…… Im on a RM rant……… sometimes I think I may just read your posts the wrong way! I think others do to sometimes………….on a side note, I have just started phase 1 of my RM exit…..So much evidence now to support Local Home Pages and Premium Listings do little and ALL of the clients I have asked in the past 6 months have said do not want or care for them. So I am about to drop EVERY product and save double digit thousands in savings as a result and these will be net savings even though the hopeless come back of I will lose my core membership discount was put to me by the RM rep……………… hoping to convince a few other local AM member agents and anyone else who will listen, great photos, catchy marketing and the price will sell the house, not a ****** sticker which reduces the image quality and highlights the house or a banner saying choose me I am the best…………………..Buyers visit RM for property NOT agent information, so I am pushing locally for a level playing field of lets all save thousands and drop products which are firstly sold to weaker agents who fall for this and then as a result we all take them to be seen to be spending as much as the next on marketing, yet we all know none of the products work………………… one area I hope AM get right, not to offer too much by way of differing products which ramp the spend up and force agents to compete over who spends the most on products……rant over……..I need to stop reading these forums, I felt so much better with my time away from that other site.

        Report
        1. wilko
          July 31, 2014 at 14:55

          "yet we all know none of the products work" I wouldn't agree that all products don't work. Featured listings (top of any search ) for our new homes developments delivers about a third more enquiries / site visits than the position within the normal pages.I find this better value than seo for new developments. I agree that the agent/valuation products are a complete waste of money as punters want to look at property not look at agents.

          Report
          1. Ric
            July 31, 2014 at 16:46

            Hi Wilko (Just my opinion) but sorry RM have failed to brainwash me on this one, ie these Products SELL houses….nah!….price, price, price, marketing presentation, right buyer and the right timing (a touch of luck too) sells houses. I would happily pay for a box if it sold my properties, but if it just meant a 3rd more people looked at it, I would really question first how RM can explain if they are saying these (extra) people then leave the site after looking at a featured property, if not….be patient save some cash and let the buyer work through the list THEY WILL GET TO THE HOUSE……………………

            And they say you get a 3rd more enquiries, how an earth would you know if that is true? Only in a parallel world with (one world) your own company selling new homes with Featured Boxes and (the other world) your own company selling the same new homes without the featured boxes would you know be able to calculate this…..or if you had done some pretty clever research to see the effect of before and after using that tool…………. BUT clever research for me fails here as: the time of year and therefore different buyers etc means it is an unfair comparable. Example: The month before you used this feature perhaps there was FACT a 3rd less active buyers for whatever reason, then when you apply the feature and monitor, a 3rd more people decided to look at houses for the first time, therefore an unfair comp. Surely they would have searched all of RM anyway not just look at a featured property……………what TRUE buyer would NOT look at all the list in their results search and settle for the properties just at the top in a box……..we would all have featured boxes if they sold more property!…………….fact is we use them as a sales tool to win a listing…… or keep an unsold client happy, but the fact is, if none of us had these boxes the buyers would still be forced to look down the list and come across the property anyway……….just a gimmick which once paid for we need to use and you use it as it was sold to you as a way to increase traffic, however it will not stop the property selling if they were not in the box….. how many of your last 20 sales were not a featured box property?…………..if they work for you though…..great.

            Report
          2. PeeBee
            July 31, 2014 at 17:52

            Ric – AMEN to all of the above. It's probably a tad too long – but it gets MY vote for Comment of the Week… ;o)

            Report
  10. Paul H
    July 31, 2014 at 20:12

    PeeBee…I have to agree with Wilko, you took this thread off on a completely different tangent that really has no bearing on the article about Zooplas share price. Out of interest do you have an opinion on this peice or do you think that the analyst has got it wrong?

    Report
    1. PeeBee
      July 31, 2014 at 21:37

      "I have to agree with Wilko, you took this thread off on a completely different tangent that really has no bearing on the article about Zooplas share price."

      POST #1 – 6.50am (7.50 real time) – "Well, that would sort out the one website rule with OTM." (Trevor Gilham)

      POST #3 – 8.16am – "What a gift OTM that would be." (mark_one)

      MY (very) tongue in cheek post regarding the supposed merger followed at 9.16am.

      Yet you both say it was ME who "took the thread off subject"!

      YOU, Paul H, then added more oil to the water 40 minutes later with your comment "The city are still oblivious to what's happening in January…" – which I felt warranted my response that has obviously got all your collective knickers in a twist.

      Of course, you will argue until blue in the face that "what's happening in January" is totally relevant to the article – but as the article is entitled "City speculation on Rightmove and Zoopla merger", the ONLY relevance to what you posted is that YOUR speculation as to what will happen in future is different.

      I respectfully suggest that accusing me of hijacking threads or turning them off-subject is the most blatant case of a pair of kettles calling a pot black-bottom you could possibly dream up in a month of Sundays.

      Seriously – you guys are a better double act than Morecambe and Wise.

      Report
      1. Paul H
        July 31, 2014 at 21:45

        Your continual use of the phrase "AM collective" sums up where your at with all this PeeBee. You replied to both mine and Wilkos comments about the city analyst getting it wrong yet your including other posters comments about AM, what's your problem here…is it the fact that Some posters have a differing opinion than you that you can't sway?!..you still havnt actually given a reply to this article published by EYE. What are your thoughts on this piece PeeBee, do you think the analyst is right or wrong?

        Report
        1. PeeBee
          July 31, 2014 at 22:03

          "…is it the fact that Some posters have a differing opinion than you that you can't sway?!.." Nope – is that YOUR problem with this – that I'm still not falling under the extremely weighty influence of The AM Collective (sorry – couldn't resist…)?

          "…do you think the analyst is right or wrong?" Why you want to know what I think is a mystery. It matters not one jot. But, in the spirit of things, and for what it's worth – I think it is highly unlikely that these two portals will merge. There – happy now?

          Report
          1. Paul H
            July 31, 2014 at 22:12

            PeeBee…anyone reading any of your posts would understand that you ain't gonna be swayed. For whatever unique 😉 reason you've made your mind up in fact it's fairly obvious that you don't want onthemarket to work.

            Report
          2. PeeBee
            July 31, 2014 at 22:29

            "For whatever unique 😉 reason you've made your mind up in fact it's fairly obvious that you don't want onthemarket to work."

            Oh, dear – for the second time today you elicit the same response from me – 60110cks.

            Sorry, wilko – blame Paul H… he made me do it!

            Report
  11. Paul H
    July 31, 2014 at 22:40

    PeeBee…you can hide behind your "it's all about the consumer claims" as much you want the simple truth is your frustrated and the one talking Cr*p.

    Report
    1. PeeBee
      July 31, 2014 at 22:46

      I take it from the above that I'm off the invite list for the Crimbo party then… :'o(

      Report
  12. JAM01
    August 1, 2014 at 03:21

    As per some of the other comments on here about the products offered by RM, I too previously fell into the trap of believing you would do better with RM Premium, stickers on the main picture display, elevated listing on the site, etc, etc. All absolute nonesense and the only winner is RM, in increased fees.

    Taking it all back to basics, a buyer who is ready, willing and able to purchase and motivated to do so, will relish seeing a property matching their requirements, in the area of their choice, at the right price on RM with no bells and whistles. 8 x nice photos, a floor plan and decent property description is all that is needed.

    In falling into the hype trap from RM marketeers, they are reinventing the wheel to add additional bonus features to encourage higher fees and the result….73% profit margin.

    Can you imagine running a £2Bn company and having a 73% profit margin. THAT is why RM fees are higher and higher each year – because Estate Agents keep on buying into the hype on Premium internet marketing, yet they then have a pop at others who are 'online agents'.

    Blimey – cut costs by going for RM's most BASIC package – forget putting all of your staff and the office photo with description on RM because guess what…the applicants do not care. They want the property and do not care a hoot about your staff or the office (on RM). Save that for your own office website.

    Upload to your own website 48 hours before RM…call the property out to your clients who have registered, as they then have a real benefit in doing so rather than 'just waiting for it to pop up on RM, so I won't call the office….XY Agents upload onto RM within 3.25 secs of a new listing being instructed….why should I call the office and give my details to them….they will just send me properties that actually match my requirements…who has the time".

    Real time data upload on RM is great, when you want to upload 48 hours after having called the property out to the hot buyers and you can then tell the vendor you are going live now on RM…doing this will get the phones ringing in the office, as buyers who do not register with your office will be missing out when they see new listings pop up overnight…with Sold STC on them. They will ring soon enough then.

    Come on guys and gals…..it is not rocket science.

    Report
    1. Ric
      August 1, 2014 at 06:40

      JAM01 – exactly.

      Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Log In Register

Back to Homepage

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.