vs
Hubble
Seek vs Hubble
Hubble charges you 10% commission. Seek doesn't.
No agent. No fee. No me.
| Seek | Hubble | |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage | 15,000+ spaces globally | UK only |
| Tenant fees | None — ever | None to tenant (but broker earns 10% of deal) |
| Broker commission | £0 — operators pay flat subscription | 10–20% of annual rent — broker commission on closed deals (hubblehq.com/host) |
| Direct-to-operator | Yes — every enquiry goes direct | No — routed via broker team |
| Reverse marketplace | Broadcast — operators pitch you | No — you search, they match |
| Spaces available | 15,000+ globally | 5,000+ UK offices (source: Sifted.eu 2021) |
| Time to shortlist | 60-sec quiz → operator proposals within hours | 2–5 business days via account manager |
We're not going to pretend they're not good at some things. They are.
Hubble On-Demand covers 200+ locations in 12 countries — useful for frequent travellers who need a desk in multiple cities.
Day passes and week-long bookings suit temporary or project-based teams better than Seek’s model.
Hubble lists 1,000+ part-time options across 250+ London buildings — strong for organisations needing occasional hot-desk capacity.
If you have a relationship with a specific broker for complex requirements, Hubble can facilitate that. But it comes with the commission attached.
These aren't arguments. They're structural differences you can verify yourself.
Hubble earns 10–20% of your annual rent when you sign. That cost has to come from somewhere. Seek charges operators a flat subscription — not a success fee.
Seek lists 15,000+ buildings globally. Hubble has 5,000 UK spaces. Different scales.
Every enquiry goes straight to the operator. You negotiate with the person who owns the building. No broker in the middle.
Hubble is UK-only. Seek covers multiple countries. If your search spans borders, you only need one platform.
Hubble’s founder built something great. But he’s incentivised to keep the broker in the room. Seek removes the room.
Hubble earns 10–20% commission on every closed deal — that’s its revenue model
Removing commission would collapse Hubble’s unit economics — it cannot do so without restructuring entirely
Tushar Agarwal built a platform whose success depends on fees he structurally cannot remove
Seek operators pay £125/month flat — no commission on your deal, ever
Hubble earns commission on your deal. Seek doesn't. That's not a feature gap — it's a structural difference in incentive. See how Seek works \u2192
On a \u00a3100K/year, 5-year deal with a broker \u2014 that's \u00a350,000 in fees. See the breakdown.
| Lease size | Broker fee (Hubble 10%) | Seek |
|---|---|---|
| £30K / year | £3,000 | £0 |
| £50K / year | £5,000 | £0 |
| £100K / year | £10,000 | £0 |
| £500K / year | £50,000 | £0 |
| £500K × 5-year | £250,000 | £0 |
Broker fee based on 10% commission on annual rent (source: hubblehq.com/host). Seek charges operators a flat monthly subscription \u2014 no commission on your deal.
Three-minute quiz. Operators pitch you directly. No broker, no fee.
3 minute office Finder →I built the thing that makes my job obsolete.
Peter spent years as a commercial property broker watching tenants pay 10–15% of their annual rent in fees they didn't see coming. Seek is his answer: a direct-to-operator platform where operators pay a flat subscription and tenants pay nothing. The incentive structures are completely different.
Broker fees are typically 10% of the annual rent — sometimes 15%. The figures below show what that actually means on a lease. Seek charges operators a flat monthly subscription. There's nothing equivalent.
60 seconds. Tell us your team size, location, and move-in date. Operators whose spaces match will pitch you directly — no broker, no commission.
3 minute office Finder →No account creation required.
See exactly what a broker would charge on your lease — and what you keep going direct with Seek.