Revenue share is not the only way for brokers to get value

From Stuart Glendinning

The article on lead generation in Mortgage Strategy December 9 was interesting and topical.

In it, mortgageforce MD Rob Clifford claimed that revenue share “has got to be the fairest way [to purchase leads]. The only way a broker can be certain a lead is worth buying is if someone is sharing the income”.

Well, revenue share has its place and if an intermediary can obtain quality mortgage leads on this basis it makes sense to take advantage of it as it is effectively risk-free. But it is wrong to suggest that this is the only way a broker can obtain value for money. The Professional Advisor Alliance deals with significant volumes of leads as many UK websites use mortgage comparison tables powered by www.moneysupermarket.com which supplies its leads exclusively to the PAA. The logistics are against implementing a revenue share mechanism, so pay per lead is the most efficient method.

It is true that if an intermediary purchases a lead without a guaranteed conversion rate there is a risk that they may end up paying for leads with no sales achieved. But a risk-free way of acquiring incremental business is the stuff of Alice in Wonderland.

At the PAA there is no start-up or exit fee, leads can be capped, there is a holiday/sickness &#39switch off&#39 option and the intermediary is only subject to seven days notice to quit. Robert&#39s suggestion that the PAA “doesn&#39t really care if a broker makes nothing out of it” is nonsense. This is a long-term initiative and the low cancellation rate from brokers is testimony to its value.