Jonathan Guthrie asks whether Rightmove is overcharging for property listings, noting the site’s visceral appeal and the tension between vendors’ hopes and buyers’ fears. He argues that to prove abuse of dominance one needs proof that Rightmove’s fees exceed competitive levels and that estate agents pass those costs on to clients.

The article points to Rightmove’s long‑term operating margins of 64‑74% since 2010, far above rivals such as Germany’s Scout24 or Australia’s REA Group and even Meta’s network‑advantage profits. These margins stem from fees charged to estate agents, with small independents reportedly paying £2,000‑£3,000 per branch per month and larger networks sharing a portion of that cost. Rightmove captures about 80% of UK search traffic, and a rough revenue‑per‑property calculation yields an average of £440 in 2025. Thousands of agents and developers have filed a legal claim seeking just under £1.5 bn for alleged abuse of a dominant position.

The piece examines whether those fees are ultimately borne by sellers. Citing research on lettings agents who could not transfer a banned tenant fee to landlords, economist Nikhil Datta suggests estate agents would struggle to pass on Rightmove costs. Guthrie concludes that only a tribunal can settle the fee‑pass‑through question, while the weak competition caused by Rightmove’s network effects looks obvious. He notes Rightmove’s share price has almost halved since its August peak as the firm warns of falling profitability amid rising AI spending.