July 23, 2025 • 30 mins
Hosts Ciaran O'Brien and Peter O'Malley delve into serious allegations against one of Australia’s top agents, accused of misleading vendors and manipulating commission structures for personal gain. Sparked by a series of Sydney Morning Herald exposés, we examine the broader implications for consumer protection, transparency, and regulatory oversight in real estate.
We also discuss:
- Commission incentives and alleged buyer deception
- Family-linked property deals raising ethical red flags
- Fair Trading’s response and the role of public accountability
- Auction clearance rates breaking above 50%
- The RBA holding rates amid economic stagnation
- What lies ahead for vendors as the market edges toward spring
As always if there is a specific topic you would like for us to cover, please reach out and let us know!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
All down, all silent, going, going, going, go on son
Congratulations.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Welcome to the Current Market Insights podcast
brought to you by HarrisPartners Real Estate.
Each episode we chat with realestate author and industry
leader, peter O'Malley, todiscuss the current property
market conditions and provideinsights to assist you on your
property journey.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Hello and welcome to another edition of Current
Market Insights.
I'm your host, kieran O'Brien,and with me, as always, is my
good friend, mr Peter O'Malley.
Peter hello, kieran, great tosee you, great to see you, peter
.
It has been too long since wesat down and caught up.
We've had a bit of a break foranyone on the podcast who may or
may not have noticed just torecoup and get some things in
(00:49):
order.
But we are back and, peter, Iwant to talk about a really
interesting topic today.
Since we've been on hiatus or Ihave anyway many, many things
have happened in the industry.
You know the market's done whatit's done and there's been, you
know, the usual kind of ebbsand flows.
But one of the things we talkedabout prior to our taking a
(01:11):
little sabbatical was the ACCCstarting to look into, you know,
underquoting and concerns andfair trading starting to make
some noise about things thatwere going on.
And then, just this month,there was an article put out in
the Herald that was referencedas one of the agents or an agent
(01:31):
in Sydney's West who was underinvestigation or being looked at
for some possible underquoting.
But the article has reallylooked at some interesting kind
of goings on.
I might let you tell ourlisteners a bit more about it,
but I think for me it's anindication that these agencies,
for better or worse, areactually starting to take notice
(01:51):
of what could be consideredinappropriate behaviour in the
industry.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
Thanks, kieran.
Look, they're taking notice ofunscrupulous conduct because of
the complaints that are beingmade and the seriousness of the
allegations.
So there's been two majorarticles written against this
agent at the moment and thesales tactics are nothing short
of what you'd expect from thewharf of Wall Street.
Really, they're prettyunconscionable and they're not
(02:18):
unlike the issues that wediscussed with the Wight office
down in Oakley, victoria, in anearlier episode and it comes
back to this in the article inthe Sydney Morning Herald
article which was run in June,they talked about the agent one
of Australia's most prolificreal estate agents turbocharging
(02:39):
his commissions with a uniqueincentive scheme, and that's a
very generous assessment forwhat has apparently transpired.
So there's a couple of thingshere that I don't like, funny
enough.
The first thing I don't like isI don't like seeing anyone
trial by media, and there's beentwo serious leaks against this
particular real estate agent,and if he has done no good,
(03:02):
charge him.
Yep, I think that is the pointthere.
But backgrounding him, it wasthe front page of the Herald on
a Saturday morning about three,four weeks ago Big big photo of
him as well, and there's prettyvicious allegations outlined
against him.
I'm not here to say thatthey're true or untrue.
The Herald have obviously donetheir investigation because
(03:24):
they've been confident enough tophotograph him, name him, shame
him and put him on the frontpage of the photograph.
But I'm not a fan of trial bymedia, but look, the tactics
that he's adopted will make anyfair and reasonable person
outraged.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
So there's a couple of things I want to ask you
about.
Obviously, we'll go into thearticle in a little bit more
detail, but and outraged.
So there's a couple of things Iwant to ask you about.
Obviously, we'll go into thearticle in a little bit more
detail, but given what's goingon, let's just look globally,
nationally, whatever it might be.
Why do you think the Heraldwould run a full page front page
story on this?
Do you think that it's areflection of public sentiment?
Do you think that the story isactually that kind gross in
(04:04):
terms of its possible misconduct?
Or you know what?
Do you think the rationale ishere to make it such a media
spectacle?
This?
Speaker 1 (04:10):
was mentioned by the Fair Trade Minister, I think it
was in the New South WalesParliament.
Right, he was saying that theultimate punishment for real
estate agents who underquote isto name them and shame them.
Yeah, so basically, we weretold you, you know you, you were
here, you know, we were toldthe department of fair trade was
, uh, um, beginning a massivecrackdown and a blitz about 12,
(04:33):
15 months ago in the industryand to have your stuff together
and do the right thing, becausewe'll catch you and we'll find
you out.
Since that time, the amount ofunderquoting that takes place in
the real estate market has onlyworsened.
Yeah, and that is a clearadmission.
Despite the big data technologythat the Department of Fair
Trade have adopted to monitoreverything and the extra people
(04:54):
running task force, they don'tknow how to catch agents in the
act.
They don't know how toprosecute the few big
high-profile prosecutions thatthey've made.
Some of them have fallen overon technicalities.
So, as I said, the Minister forFair Trade said that one of the
greatest deterrents for realestate agents underquoting is to
(05:16):
name and shame those that do it.
As I say, I'm not a fan oftrial by media.
Tighten the laws laws, clearthe rules up and then monitor
them and uh, if you're lookingfor it, um, you will find
underquoting.
Speaker 3 (05:29):
But you've got to think like a real estate agent,
not only thinking like abureaucrat yeah, and I want you
know I was here when fairtrading mentioned or talked
about what kinds of things theywere looking at from a
compliance perspective, whichyou know.
I always wonder if you warn,your, your quandary, that they
you know what they need to keepan eye out for you, in some ways
prepare them to front run thatright.
(05:50):
You mentioned that some of theallegations look at an
aggressive kind of incentivescheme, and to me it rings of a
topic that you have writtenabout and we have spoken about
before, which is this idea ofwhat's the kicker.
You know, the use of a kickerscheme or an incentive sliding
scale, whatever it might be, inagency agreements, given that
(06:14):
that's something that's not newin the industry.
What about this particularapproach?
Is media worthy and worthy ofFair Trading's attention?
Speaker 1 (06:22):
Yeah, great, great question, kieran.
And look, I read what isalleged here and couldn't
believe what I was reading,because I just couldn't imagine
doing to someone what is allegedin this article.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (06:36):
So, basically, it's alleged, the agent went to his
client and said look, we've gota reserve of 135, and I'm
putting this into my words We'vegot a reserve of 135.
We've got no interest in thehome.
It's Monday, the auction's onSaturday, the campaign's in
(06:59):
trouble.
You need to sell.
Look what I'm prepared to do tohelp us get sold on Saturday,
mr and Mrs Vendor, is I'mprepared to take my team off all
the other properties and putthem exclusively on yours and do
whatever needs to be done toget your auction to the reserve
of 135 on Saturday.
(07:21):
Now, if the team do a great joband they manage to get above a
certain figure, as a reward formy team putting this extra
effort in, would you be preparedto pay them 20% above a certain
price point as an incentive tokeep working hard?
I don't know what the situationwas, kieran.
(07:43):
Clearly they needed to sell.
Clearly they were vulnerable.
Clearly they trusted theiragent.
They agreed to all of this.
Unsurprisingly, on the Saturdaythe auction was a roaring
success and it triggered thekicker that was introduced in
the final week of the campaign,where the real estate agent
(08:04):
earned himself a jumbo-sizedcommission.
Now, to that point, in thevendor's mind, that's all fair
play and they could live withthat.
When they went to congratulatethe home buyer on purchasing
their home, the home buyer spiltthe lollies and said well, I
was here on the first week, Iwas always buying this home In
(08:25):
my mind, absolutely love it, umand just was effusive in their
praise and had been on the hookthe whole time and was just
waiting for auction day to comearound yeah and it was at that
point that the vendors inquestion who, um, you know,
there's a photograph of them inthe article they outed
themselves the vendors.
They didn't hide in the shadowsan unnamed client.
They put themselves front andcentre and they said very
(08:50):
clearly it was at that pointthat we realised we'd been
played.
Speaker 3 (08:53):
Yeah, I mean, we have a.
You're speechless?
No, well, I am, because it's oneof those things where my first
thought was, surely, you knowand I can't speak for the
mentality of the agent inquestion but just my logical
mind says, surely I couldn't getaway with that, like just in my
head.
I think that is so brazen thatand so easy to kind of track and
(09:15):
keep, you know, a tab onsomeone's movements throughout a
campaign that I couldn't justso openly go and and run what is
a lie alleged a lie to getthese people to give up more
money, which is why I'mspeechless, because I think that
you know salespeople chasingcommissions that's part of life,
you know, that's what manyindustries encourage, it's not
(09:36):
abnormal.
And when you're selling youexpect you have to pay your
agent a commission.
What I found really, I guess,distressing in in the article
was the fact that in all of thecases mentioned, the reserve had
already been set, theexpectations had already been
laid out for the vendors as towhat was happening, and all of a
sudden yeah all of a sudden youknow there's actually no
interest, let me get yousomething better.
(09:56):
And of course it was there, uh,in the article I think it
mentions there was on thisparticular day that they
referenced there was eightauctions or ten auctions or
something, and half of them hadhad this occur, uh, where the
vendors openly said absolutely,we got you know screwed or or
misled or whatever it might be?
um I in in that kind of scenario?
(10:17):
I mean, we have talked aboutreserves getting absolutely
blown away in situations wherethere's underquoting.
Do you think that that's thecase here as well?
Do you think that some of theseproperties are being
underquoted for the sake ofblowing a stronger auction day
result, or do you think thatthese were alleged opportunistic
(10:37):
cash grabs with certain vendorsthat might be more amenable or
pliable at the time of auction.
Speaker 1 (10:45):
Look until there's a charge that is put forward
against the agent in questionand sticks.
They are allegations, butthere's a flavour here, and let
me say this, that if what's inthe newspaper article is true
which would be a big risk forthe Herald to write it if it was
(11:07):
not true, I think you'll findthe reality is even worse.
Speaker 3 (11:12):
Yeah, because this is what they could find right.
Speaker 1 (11:14):
This is what they felt comfortable printing.
Speaker 3 (11:17):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (11:17):
So this is not taking an extreme position on what's
been happening.
This is being saying we're safeto print this stuff and and and
and and the reality will be willbe more frightening.
Now what I will say about theregulator?
This trial by media tactic thatthey're using, that I don't
like it.
It it may have beendeliberately written to
(11:40):
encourage others who've been avictim of this, to enlighten
them.
Well, hang on.
That sounds very similar towhat happened to me.
Or give them the confidence tostep out and tell their own
story to the regulator as wellwhich I mean it makes sense,
right people?
Speaker 3 (11:58):
you, particularly in very high-profile public
industries like real estate.
You know trial by media iseffective.
If that's what they're tryingto do, do you think that I mean?
What do you think the actualoutcome will be here If all the
allegations are proven true andif all of this you know comes
out in the wash, that this wasquite prolific, had gone on for
(12:19):
ages and there was worse?
Whatever it might be, what doyou think the regulator actually
does?
Speaker 1 (12:24):
You have to strike him off.
Well, we've spoken about thisin the past.
You can't be allowed to operateand do this.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
Agencies have been caught doing things that are
illegal under the regulationsbefore, and they get so weakly
punished.
There's levels, though.
Speaker 1 (12:39):
I agree this is next level tactics.
As I say, this is a wolf ofQuaker's Hill stuff.
This is outrageous and youwould have to strike him off if
you were able to prove these ina and I agree that should happen
, ideally right.
Speaker 3 (12:59):
But what you know?
Do you think you know?
The agent in question is partof a much larger conglomerate or
group who, to my reading of thearticle, not protecting but
backing his position here.
Do you think?
Speaker 1 (13:14):
that the regulator.
Well, he was qualified.
He's very, very lucrative tothe Ray White network.
Speaker 3 (13:18):
Of course, but do they get punished here as well,
because surely they know what'sgoing on?
Speaker 1 (13:23):
The article quotes Tim Snell from the Ray White
Group.
Ray White's Group, new SouthWales.
Chief Executive Tim Snell,quote unquote acknowledged that
a bonus scheme must be fullytransparent and agreed upon in
advance with the vendor.
We understand that Joss Teslindoes not have a standard
(13:44):
template of an incentive bonusand each agreement is unique to
the circumstances of each sale.
So he's acknowledging kind ofwhat's in the Herald's article
but saying it's agreed upon inadvance.
But the way it's agreed uponit's when the vendor is at their
most vulnerable and, accordingto the article, agreeing to it
(14:07):
on a misled basis.
Ie there's no buyers.
But I'll put an extra effort infor you when the couple who are
named in the article, theRuffleys, subsequently found out
there was a buyer there allalong.
Speaker 3 (14:21):
Yeah, that's just a form of fraud.
That's deception.
Well, it's a misleading conductright which the ACCC has a
position on which consumer lawheavily protects, which
obviously Fair Trading.
Look at yeah.
Speaker 1 (14:34):
And this goes on.
The article goes, and this isthe crux of the issue.
A spokesperson for the agentsaid his incentivized
commissions are agreed upon atthe start of an agency agreement
, but correspondence and textmessages seen by the herald show
that, at least in the examplesgiven in this article, the
(14:57):
incentives were introduced tothe seller only in the days or
the nights before the auction.
Speaker 3 (15:04):
Yeah.
So I imagine there's a blanketblock or line or something in
the agency agreement that saysyou know there may be some
incentive, commission-basedsituation, et cetera, which
obviously he's then doing lateron in the campaign when you know
he feels comfortable, that heon in the campaign when, when
you know he feels comfortablethat he can get the, the profit
that he wants, um, it's a look,it's a particularly interesting
(15:26):
case.
It's not the only thing, uh, thearticle talks about.
Obviously.
It does talk about um this thisparticular day, you know it
uses the one example of howroughly 50 went through this
scenario, but it also talks alittle bit about the agent and
members of his family alsoselling and buying properties
from vendors, which is notillegal but is obviously a bit
(15:49):
of a gray area in terms of howit's conducted.
I mean, there's not, you know,we don't need to talk too much
about this, but to me it paintsa bit of a picture of someone
who, uh, uses situations whenvendors might be confused or
stressed or anxious to achievean outcome that benefits him uh,
(16:10):
you know, in a in a muchgreater way than it does them, I
think yeah, look, I, I can seehere they're.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
They're um like the.
All you can say is the Heraldhave obviously done their
research on this, but we'll giveour listeners an extract from
the article.
I'm just rereading it again,having read it three weeks ago,
and it just stinks.
Speaker 3 (16:39):
They don't hold the punches, mate.
Speaker 1 (16:41):
It just reads so badly that you would think that
Joss Teslin will sue for, or theagent in question would sue for
, defamation.
It's not defamation if it'strue, though, is it?
And it's not defamation if it'strue and the Herald would
protect.
But here we go.
Here, look, one of the fewlacklustre results on that
fateful day in March was afour-bedroom family home
(17:05):
opposite Western SydneyParklands at Bungarebe.
It was originally listed withhopes of matching a recent
$1,340,000 sale up the road, butafter buyers gave negative
feedback and despite objectionsfrom the owners, teslin
suggested a reserve of just amillion dollars to get an uplift
(17:28):
in price.
Sounds like conditioning, sothey're being conditioned.
Your house is nowhere near asgood as the one that went for
1.34.
Speaker 3 (17:35):
They've got a left-turning toilet yep, that
kind of thing.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
Yeah, we've got to reduce the reserve price by 30%
to stimulate the bidding.
It says in my book Inside RealEstate.
A lot of people don't realise,kieran, that once a property
meets the seller's reserve, theseller must legally sell the
property.
Speaker 3 (17:53):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
And if they refuse to sign the contract, saying, well
, hang on.
We only said a million dollarsbecause the agent said it would
stimulate the bidding and itstopped at $1.2 million you
still have to sell it and theauctioneer can sign on your
behalf.
It's called lack of control.
You actually hand over thesignability of your asset to a
stranger you've met on the day.
Speaker 3 (18:13):
Which, again small segue, is why in your book you
talk a lot about take the timebefore you sign any agreements
or anything to do your research.
Yeah, anyway, that's an aside.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
The four-bedroom house in Bangaribi was passed in
at auction, but it later soldto the agent's wife.
Speaker 3 (18:35):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
The night before the auction.
There were four or fiveregistered bidders expected, but
none turned up on the day andTeslin's spokesperson said it
was passed in with no bids.
Instead, the house sold underthe auction conditions.
After the auction to one of theagent's family members and a
consent form was signed by thevendors agreeing to the agent's
(19:00):
interest in the purchase Titlerecord show, it was purchased by
the agent's wife for $1,020,000.
So similar house sales for 134.
We've got no interest in yourhouse.
Let's set a reserve where youlegally got to sell it for the
highest bid above $1 million andstimulate some interest.
Oops, no one turned up.
(19:20):
That's okay, I'll get you guysout of a pickle.
I'll get you guys out of apickle.
My wife will buy your home foressentially rock bottom price
and the agent was paid a$30,855,000 commission for his
efforts in the process.
Speaker 3 (19:41):
Which means the vendor's got less than a million
Correct.
Yeah, yeah, Again.
These are.
You know I can only comment onwhat's in the article, but it
certainly doesn't paint a goodpicture.
It doesn't paint a good picture.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
Yeah, it'll be interesting to see where that
one goes.
That's the second big articlewritten on this fellow.
The first one was alluding towhere it was all going, but some
of the bigger, morehigh-profile journalists at the
Herald got hold of that one andthat's yeah, that's savage.
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Look, it'll be interesting to see, and you know
it doesn't escape me also thatthe higher a flyer you are,
obviously the more scrutiny youcome under and the more that the
media is going to look forthese sensational pieces.
So we need to wait and see whatthe fallout will be ultimately.
But I mean it certainly at acursory glance.
If you, if you trust thatthey've done due diligence with
their journalism, it doesn'tpaint a good picture, and if it
(20:38):
is all found to be below boardand something wrong has occurred
, then personally, you know, Idon't know the guy, but I
certainly hope that anyone whorips off people through
unethical practice gets theirjust desserts.
That's my preference.
But if he has done nothingwrong, then I certainly hope
that you know it's it.
He has the ability to recoverthe image because, as you say,
(20:58):
trial by the media can beincredibly damaging to those who
haven't done anything wrong.
Yeah, it is, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Look, uh, yeah, it'd beinteresting to see what comes of
that as we uh, as we move on.
Then, peter, it has been, as Isaid earlier, quite a little
while since we caught up, so Ireally am hoping you can get our
listeners up to speed on thecurrent market conditions, in
(21:20):
particular what the clearancerate's doing and how the market
is kind of looking.
And I'd also just love to getyour quick thoughts on how the
market actually feels out on theground, because I, you know, we
haven't spoken for a while,which means I've been a little
bit out of the loop and I, youknow, have been thinking, or
wondering what it has been likeas a buyer on the ground across
(21:41):
Sydney at the moment.
Speaker 1 (21:41):
Look last weekend the auction clearance rate from 743
auctions was 53.6 percent andthe week before, from 759
auctions, it was 55.5 percent.
So auction clearance ratesnudged past 50 percent
consistently for the first timesince last august.
So that's suggesting thatvendors are accepting a little
(22:04):
bit more where market conditionsare at, because it was getting
down at to the low 40s these are.
for anyone listening for thefirst time, these are sqm
researchers numbers who onlyprovide an auction clearance
rate on the tuesday after theweekend, unlike some of the
other bigger media houses thatwill quote the auction clearance
rate on a saturday night, whichtends to be more a higher
(22:27):
clearance rate because thesuccesses are pushed forward
where the failures are held back, whereas SQM research have got
a more exhaustive process,albeit slower, to get more
accurate results, butnevertheless the auction
clearance rate is pushing up.
The market was wrong-footed bythe RBA, not cutting rates, so
(22:48):
probably could have been nudging60% if the RBA had have cut
rates.
So how's things on the market?
There's buyers out there, butthey will steer down properties
that are at the wrong price orproperties that don't meet their
brief or properties thatrequire extensive capital to
repair them.
So, in a word, people say how'sthe market?
(23:10):
In a word, patchy.
There's good results happeningout there, absolutely, but as an
agent you've got to work forthem.
Speaker 3 (23:17):
there's not many easy sales I've only really got two
questions for you, pete.
First is uh, you mentionednumber of auctions 743, I think
you said or 740 odd um.
That's obviously lower thansome of the numbers we've talked
about over the last six months.
Certainly is that a reflectionof the winter period, do you
think?
Certainly is yeah, okay, soit's not.
It's not off trend, necessarily.
Speaker 1 (23:37):
Yeah um and and um.
There's no doubt that a lot ofpeople were away on these school
holidays, yeah, yeah.
So it kind of felt like theydidn't give the rate cut.
In early july, school holidayswere upon us and people just
flicked the off switch in manyways and said I'll deal with
this later, if not just wait forthe august rate cut.
The reason the august rate cutwon't give people and I'm
(24:00):
assuming in that comment, ofcourse, that there will be a
rate cut.
I think there will be, but um,the reason that won't give the
market the stimulus that thejuly one would have is the rba
broke its own promise to thepeople with that decision on
July 8th.
They have told us for two yearsthey're data dependent.
When the data supports it,we'll cut and we'll deliver the
(24:22):
data delivered and then theymade a gut call decision, which
was clearly wrong.
And I say it was clearly wrongbecause the unemployment came
out a few days later and showeda jump, and you've got to
remember that unemploymentjumped after the May rate cut.
Speaker 3 (24:41):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
So we've now got a situation where interest rates
are going down, butunemployment's going up.
Speaker 3 (24:46):
Which we have talked about a few times.
Yeah, it's a possibility.
Speaker 1 (24:48):
Yeah, yeah, so that shows that the RBA's judgment
call that they made in July tosit on the fence is the wrong
one and it will hurt peopleaccordingly.
So you've got that the RBA brokefaith with the people by not
cutting when, if you followedtheir own thinking for the last
(25:10):
two years, a rate cut was a lock.
And the other reason is is thenext rate cut is going to clash
or coincide with the surge inspring listings?
Yeah, now, um saw a great quotetoday, um, from westpac.
They put it out and, um, theyhave a view that the Australian
(25:31):
economy is struggling and not asstrong in 2025 as what it was
in 2024.
Westpac throws cold water onTreasury's hope that the private
sector would take the economicgrowth baton from the public
sector.
Quote-unquote from Westpactoday.
(25:51):
Kieran, the recovery in theeconomy, not the property market
, the recovery that was gaining,the recovery that was gaining
traction through the second halfof 2024, has stalled in the
first half of 2025.
Quote unquote.
And that goes to the point thatwe were talking about before
you had your hiatus period, that, anecdotally, we were speaking
(26:15):
onto the ground.
Who was saying economicconditions are really tough and
deteriorating.
We've got a rate cut in may,but clearly, from what westpac
is saying, it has not doneenough yeah, it's interesting
too.
Speaker 3 (26:27):
I obviously we can't take too much, or not not maybe
not the same level of notice ofthe us that we may have in years
gone by, but I was only readingsome data this week that showed
, I think, the US has had threesuccessive inflation kind of
rises, or you know inflationarydata increases, which you know.
They're in an environment wheregetting a rate rise would be
(26:48):
near impossible, given theobstruction to the Fed.
But also they're in a bit of aweird scenario where their
inflation is going up and theeconomy is doing some strange
things obviously.
So I have to wonder whether theRBA is in some way influenced
by what's going on.
There is so much global chaosthat I think you're right,
people did need to disconnect alittle.
(27:10):
The only other question I hadfor you so the raise in interest
rates, the rising clearancerate over the last few weeks,
with a hold on interest rates,would you take that sort of four
in a row as evidence ofsomething of a bounce or a
recovery, or do you think it'sjust a bit of an anomaly?
(27:32):
I mean, what do you think isdriving, you know, albeit subtle
increase in clearance rates?
Do you think there is?
You know you say there arebuyers, but they've been quite
astute.
I can't imagine borrowing hasgotten significantly easier in
the last six to eight weeks.
I can't think of any factorsreally that would make the
clearance rate rise, other thanperhaps lower stock.
Speaker 1 (27:54):
I think lower stock is the primary one and I think a
lot of the successful auctionsnearly half again were sold
prior.
Speaker 3 (28:04):
Yeah, okay.
Speaker 1 (28:04):
So if you're talking about an auction campaign that
climaxes on the 19th of July orthe 26th of July, it's fair to
say that you started thatcampaign in mid to late May.
Speaker 3 (28:21):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (28:22):
So if you've taken an early offer, you've taken the
early money, the good moneybefore the RBA decision, which
it looks like essentially halfthe people did.
You weren't exposed to thatThen any vendor that had maybe a
slightly aggressive reserve.
He's suddenly scaling theirreserve back a little bit in
their own mind to meet themarket.
(28:43):
Because you go to auctionbecause you really want to sell,
and the buyers are saying, well, there will be a rate cut in
august.
By the time I settle, the ratecut will still be here anyway,
so I'll go with it yeah, yeah,it's, uh, yeah, interesting
period ahead.
Speaker 3 (28:58):
I certainly think the RBA.
It's disappointing.
They didn't cut you and I hadspoken a lot about it and we
expected they would.
Based on the data and the trendwas certainly indicating it was
time to do so again.
I hope you're right aboutAugust and I I'm, you know, like
many people needed a mentalbreak from the world in July.
I think that's not not uncommon, but certainly interesting to
(29:18):
see what happens.
I know we're at an interestingprecipice, as you say, because
if they do cut rates leadinginto the spring cycle, there's a
sudden influx.
You know, we could see a bit ofa surge in in pricing again if
people are feeling moreconfident and of course, all of
that contributes to inflationand the cycle continues.
So you know, interesting timeahead, as always.
But really really good chattoday, peter, really interesting
recap and a great article.
(29:39):
I certainly look forward tofollowing it over the coming
months.
Yeah, good on you.
Thanks Kieran, thanks Peter,and thanks to everyone for
listening to Current MarketInsights.
We look forward to speakingwith you next time.
Speaker 2 (29:48):
Thanks for joining us on the Current Market Insights
podcast.
Thanks for joining us on theCurrent Market Insights podcast
brought to you by HarrisPartners Real Estate, the
podcast providing real estateinsights you won't find anywhere
else.
All down, all silent, going, going, going, go on son
Congratulations.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Welcome to the Current Market Insights podcast
brought to you by HarrisPartners Real Estate.
Each episode we chat with realestate author and industry
leader, peter O'Malley, todiscuss the current property
market conditions and provideinsights to assist you on your
property journey.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Hello and welcome to another edition of Current
Market Insights.
I'm your host, kieran O'Brien,and with me, as always, is my
good friend, mr Peter O'Malley.
Peter hello, kieran, great tosee you, great to see you, peter
.
It has been too long since wesat down and caught up.
We've had a bit of a break foranyone on the podcast who may or
may not have noticed just torecoup and get some things in
(00:49):
order.
But we are back and, peter, Iwant to talk about a really
interesting topic today.
Since we've been on hiatus or Ihave anyway many, many things
have happened in the industry.
You know the market's done whatit's done and there's been, you
know, the usual kind of ebbsand flows.
But one of the things we talkedabout prior to our taking a
(01:11):
little sabbatical was the ACCCstarting to look into, you know,
underquoting and concerns andfair trading starting to make
some noise about things thatwere going on.
And then, just this month,there was an article put out in
the Herald that was referencedas one of the agents or an agent
(01:31):
in Sydney's West who was underinvestigation or being looked at
for some possible underquoting.
But the article has reallylooked at some interesting kind
of goings on.
I might let you tell ourlisteners a bit more about it,
but I think for me it's anindication that these agencies,
for better or worse, areactually starting to take notice
(01:51):
of what could be consideredinappropriate behaviour in the
industry.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
Thanks, kieran.
Look, they're taking notice ofunscrupulous conduct because of
the complaints that are beingmade and the seriousness of the
allegations.
So there's been two majorarticles written against this
agent at the moment and thesales tactics are nothing short
of what you'd expect from thewharf of Wall Street.
Really, they're prettyunconscionable and they're not
(02:18):
unlike the issues that wediscussed with the Wight office
down in Oakley, victoria, in anearlier episode and it comes
back to this in the article inthe Sydney Morning Herald
article which was run in June,they talked about the agent one
of Australia's most prolificreal estate agents turbocharging
(02:39):
his commissions with a uniqueincentive scheme, and that's a
very generous assessment forwhat has apparently transpired.
So there's a couple of thingshere that I don't like, funny
enough.
The first thing I don't like isI don't like seeing anyone
trial by media, and there's beentwo serious leaks against this
particular real estate agent,and if he has done no good,
(03:02):
charge him.
Yep, I think that is the pointthere.
But backgrounding him, it wasthe front page of the Herald on
a Saturday morning about three,four weeks ago Big big photo of
him as well, and there's prettyvicious allegations outlined
against him.
I'm not here to say thatthey're true or untrue.
The Herald have obviously donetheir investigation because
(03:24):
they've been confident enough tophotograph him, name him, shame
him and put him on the frontpage of the photograph.
But I'm not a fan of trial bymedia, but look, the tactics
that he's adopted will make anyfair and reasonable person
outraged.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
So there's a couple of things I want to ask you
about.
Obviously, we'll go into thearticle in a little bit more
detail, but and outraged.
So there's a couple of things Iwant to ask you about.
Obviously, we'll go into thearticle in a little bit more
detail, but given what's goingon, let's just look globally,
nationally, whatever it might be.
Why do you think the Heraldwould run a full page front page
story on this?
Do you think that it's areflection of public sentiment?
Do you think that the story isactually that kind gross in
(04:04):
terms of its possible misconduct?
Or you know what?
Do you think the rationale ishere to make it such a media
spectacle?
This?
Speaker 1 (04:10):
was mentioned by the Fair Trade Minister, I think it
was in the New South WalesParliament.
Right, he was saying that theultimate punishment for real
estate agents who underquote isto name them and shame them.
Yeah, so basically, we weretold you, you know you, you were
here, you know, we were toldthe department of fair trade was
, uh, um, beginning a massivecrackdown and a blitz about 12,
(04:33):
15 months ago in the industryand to have your stuff together
and do the right thing, becausewe'll catch you and we'll find
you out.
Since that time, the amount ofunderquoting that takes place in
the real estate market has onlyworsened.
Yeah, and that is a clearadmission.
Despite the big data technologythat the Department of Fair
Trade have adopted to monitoreverything and the extra people
(04:54):
running task force, they don'tknow how to catch agents in the
act.
They don't know how toprosecute the few big
high-profile prosecutions thatthey've made.
Some of them have fallen overon technicalities.
So, as I said, the Minister forFair Trade said that one of the
greatest deterrents for realestate agents underquoting is to
(05:16):
name and shame those that do it.
As I say, I'm not a fan oftrial by media.
Tighten the laws laws, clearthe rules up and then monitor
them and uh, if you're lookingfor it, um, you will find
underquoting.
Speaker 3 (05:29):
But you've got to think like a real estate agent,
not only thinking like abureaucrat yeah, and I want you
know I was here when fairtrading mentioned or talked
about what kinds of things theywere looking at from a
compliance perspective, whichyou know.
I always wonder if you warn,your, your quandary, that they
you know what they need to keepan eye out for you, in some ways
prepare them to front run thatright.
(05:50):
You mentioned that some of theallegations look at an
aggressive kind of incentivescheme, and to me it rings of a
topic that you have writtenabout and we have spoken about
before, which is this idea ofwhat's the kicker.
You know, the use of a kickerscheme or an incentive sliding
scale, whatever it might be, inagency agreements, given that
(06:14):
that's something that's not newin the industry.
What about this particularapproach?
Is media worthy and worthy ofFair Trading's attention?
Speaker 1 (06:22):
Yeah, great, great question, kieran.
And look, I read what isalleged here and couldn't
believe what I was reading,because I just couldn't imagine
doing to someone what is allegedin this article.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (06:36):
So, basically, it's alleged, the agent went to his
client and said look, we've gota reserve of 135, and I'm
putting this into my words We'vegot a reserve of 135.
We've got no interest in thehome.
It's Monday, the auction's onSaturday, the campaign's in
(06:59):
trouble.
You need to sell.
Look what I'm prepared to do tohelp us get sold on Saturday,
mr and Mrs Vendor, is I'mprepared to take my team off all
the other properties and putthem exclusively on yours and do
whatever needs to be done toget your auction to the reserve
of 135 on Saturday.
(07:21):
Now, if the team do a great joband they manage to get above a
certain figure, as a reward formy team putting this extra
effort in, would you be preparedto pay them 20% above a certain
price point as an incentive tokeep working hard?
I don't know what the situationwas, kieran.
(07:43):
Clearly they needed to sell.
Clearly they were vulnerable.
Clearly they trusted theiragent.
They agreed to all of this.
Unsurprisingly, on the Saturdaythe auction was a roaring
success and it triggered thekicker that was introduced in
the final week of the campaign,where the real estate agent
(08:04):
earned himself a jumbo-sizedcommission.
Now, to that point, in thevendor's mind, that's all fair
play and they could live withthat.
When they went to congratulatethe home buyer on purchasing
their home, the home buyer spiltthe lollies and said well, I
was here on the first week, Iwas always buying this home In
(08:25):
my mind, absolutely love it, umand just was effusive in their
praise and had been on the hookthe whole time and was just
waiting for auction day to comearound yeah and it was at that
point that the vendors inquestion who, um, you know,
there's a photograph of them inthe article they outed
themselves the vendors.
They didn't hide in the shadowsan unnamed client.
They put themselves front andcentre and they said very
(08:50):
clearly it was at that pointthat we realised we'd been
played.
Speaker 3 (08:53):
Yeah, I mean, we have a.
You're speechless?
No, well, I am, because it's oneof those things where my first
thought was, surely, you knowand I can't speak for the
mentality of the agent inquestion but just my logical
mind says, surely I couldn't getaway with that, like just in my
head.
I think that is so brazen thatand so easy to kind of track and
(09:15):
keep, you know, a tab onsomeone's movements throughout a
campaign that I couldn't justso openly go and and run what is
a lie alleged a lie to getthese people to give up more
money, which is why I'mspeechless, because I think that
you know salespeople chasingcommissions that's part of life,
you know, that's what manyindustries encourage, it's not
(09:36):
abnormal.
And when you're selling youexpect you have to pay your
agent a commission.
What I found really, I guess,distressing in in the article
was the fact that in all of thecases mentioned, the reserve had
already been set, theexpectations had already been
laid out for the vendors as towhat was happening, and all of a
sudden yeah all of a sudden youknow there's actually no
interest, let me get yousomething better.
(09:56):
And of course it was there, uh,in the article I think it
mentions there was on thisparticular day that they
referenced there was eightauctions or ten auctions or
something, and half of them hadhad this occur, uh, where the
vendors openly said absolutely,we got you know screwed or or
misled or whatever it might be?
um I in in that kind of scenario?
(10:17):
I mean, we have talked aboutreserves getting absolutely
blown away in situations wherethere's underquoting.
Do you think that that's thecase here as well?
Do you think that some of theseproperties are being
underquoted for the sake ofblowing a stronger auction day
result, or do you think thatthese were alleged opportunistic
(10:37):
cash grabs with certain vendorsthat might be more amenable or
pliable at the time of auction.
Speaker 1 (10:45):
Look until there's a charge that is put forward
against the agent in questionand sticks.
They are allegations, butthere's a flavour here, and let
me say this, that if what's inthe newspaper article is true
which would be a big risk forthe Herald to write it if it was
(11:07):
not true, I think you'll findthe reality is even worse.
Speaker 3 (11:12):
Yeah, because this is what they could find right.
Speaker 1 (11:14):
This is what they felt comfortable printing.
Speaker 3 (11:17):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (11:17):
So this is not taking an extreme position on what's
been happening.
This is being saying we're safeto print this stuff and and and
and and the reality will be willbe more frightening.
Now what I will say about theregulator?
This trial by media tactic thatthey're using, that I don't
like it.
It it may have beendeliberately written to
(11:40):
encourage others who've been avictim of this, to enlighten
them.
Well, hang on.
That sounds very similar towhat happened to me.
Or give them the confidence tostep out and tell their own
story to the regulator as wellwhich I mean it makes sense,
right people?
Speaker 3 (11:58):
you, particularly in very high-profile public
industries like real estate.
You know trial by media iseffective.
If that's what they're tryingto do, do you think that I mean?
What do you think the actualoutcome will be here If all the
allegations are proven true andif all of this you know comes
out in the wash, that this wasquite prolific, had gone on for
(12:19):
ages and there was worse?
Whatever it might be, what doyou think the regulator actually
does?
Speaker 1 (12:24):
You have to strike him off.
Well, we've spoken about thisin the past.
You can't be allowed to operateand do this.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
Agencies have been caught doing things that are
illegal under the regulationsbefore, and they get so weakly
punished.
There's levels, though.
Speaker 1 (12:39):
I agree this is next level tactics.
As I say, this is a wolf ofQuaker's Hill stuff.
This is outrageous and youwould have to strike him off if
you were able to prove these ina and I agree that should happen
, ideally right.
Speaker 3 (12:59):
But what you know?
Do you think you know?
The agent in question is partof a much larger conglomerate or
group who, to my reading of thearticle, not protecting but
backing his position here.
Do you think?
Speaker 1 (13:14):
that the regulator.
Well, he was qualified.
He's very, very lucrative tothe Ray White network.
Speaker 3 (13:18):
Of course, but do they get punished here as well,
because surely they know what'sgoing on?
Speaker 1 (13:23):
The article quotes Tim Snell from the Ray White
Group.
Ray White's Group, new SouthWales.
Chief Executive Tim Snell,quote unquote acknowledged that
a bonus scheme must be fullytransparent and agreed upon in
advance with the vendor.
We understand that Joss Teslindoes not have a standard
(13:44):
template of an incentive bonusand each agreement is unique to
the circumstances of each sale.
So he's acknowledging kind ofwhat's in the Herald's article
but saying it's agreed upon inadvance.
But the way it's agreed uponit's when the vendor is at their
most vulnerable and, accordingto the article, agreeing to it
(14:07):
on a misled basis.
Ie there's no buyers.
But I'll put an extra effort infor you when the couple who are
named in the article, theRuffleys, subsequently found out
there was a buyer there allalong.
Speaker 3 (14:21):
Yeah, that's just a form of fraud.
That's deception.
Well, it's a misleading conductright which the ACCC has a
position on which consumer lawheavily protects, which
obviously Fair Trading.
Look at yeah.
Speaker 1 (14:34):
And this goes on.
The article goes, and this isthe crux of the issue.
A spokesperson for the agentsaid his incentivized
commissions are agreed upon atthe start of an agency agreement
, but correspondence and textmessages seen by the herald show
that, at least in the examplesgiven in this article, the
(14:57):
incentives were introduced tothe seller only in the days or
the nights before the auction.
Speaker 3 (15:04):
Yeah.
So I imagine there's a blanketblock or line or something in
the agency agreement that saysyou know there may be some
incentive, commission-basedsituation, et cetera, which
obviously he's then doing lateron in the campaign when you know
he feels comfortable, that heon in the campaign when, when
you know he feels comfortablethat he can get the, the profit
that he wants, um, it's a look,it's a particularly interesting
(15:26):
case.
It's not the only thing, uh, thearticle talks about.
Obviously.
It does talk about um this thisparticular day, you know it
uses the one example of howroughly 50 went through this
scenario, but it also talks alittle bit about the agent and
members of his family alsoselling and buying properties
from vendors, which is notillegal but is obviously a bit
(15:49):
of a gray area in terms of howit's conducted.
I mean, there's not, you know,we don't need to talk too much
about this, but to me it paintsa bit of a picture of someone
who, uh, uses situations whenvendors might be confused or
stressed or anxious to achievean outcome that benefits him uh,
(16:10):
you know, in a in a muchgreater way than it does them, I
think yeah, look, I, I can seehere they're.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
They're um like the.
All you can say is the Heraldhave obviously done their
research on this, but we'll giveour listeners an extract from
the article.
I'm just rereading it again,having read it three weeks ago,
and it just stinks.
Speaker 3 (16:39):
They don't hold the punches, mate.
Speaker 1 (16:41):
It just reads so badly that you would think that
Joss Teslin will sue for, or theagent in question would sue for
, defamation.
It's not defamation if it'strue, though, is it?
And it's not defamation if it'strue and the Herald would
protect.
But here we go.
Here, look, one of the fewlacklustre results on that
fateful day in March was afour-bedroom family home
(17:05):
opposite Western SydneyParklands at Bungarebe.
It was originally listed withhopes of matching a recent
$1,340,000 sale up the road, butafter buyers gave negative
feedback and despite objectionsfrom the owners, teslin
suggested a reserve of just amillion dollars to get an uplift
(17:28):
in price.
Sounds like conditioning, sothey're being conditioned.
Your house is nowhere near asgood as the one that went for
1.34.
Speaker 3 (17:35):
They've got a left-turning toilet yep, that
kind of thing.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
Yeah, we've got to reduce the reserve price by 30%
to stimulate the bidding.
It says in my book Inside RealEstate.
A lot of people don't realise,kieran, that once a property
meets the seller's reserve, theseller must legally sell the
property.
Speaker 3 (17:53):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
And if they refuse to sign the contract, saying, well
, hang on.
We only said a million dollarsbecause the agent said it would
stimulate the bidding and itstopped at $1.2 million you
still have to sell it and theauctioneer can sign on your
behalf.
It's called lack of control.
You actually hand over thesignability of your asset to a
stranger you've met on the day.
Speaker 3 (18:13):
Which, again small segue, is why in your book you
talk a lot about take the timebefore you sign any agreements
or anything to do your research.
Yeah, anyway, that's an aside.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
The four-bedroom house in Bangaribi was passed in
at auction, but it later soldto the agent's wife.
Speaker 3 (18:35):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
The night before the auction.
There were four or fiveregistered bidders expected, but
none turned up on the day andTeslin's spokesperson said it
was passed in with no bids.
Instead, the house sold underthe auction conditions.
After the auction to one of theagent's family members and a
consent form was signed by thevendors agreeing to the agent's
(19:00):
interest in the purchase Titlerecord show, it was purchased by
the agent's wife for $1,020,000.
So similar house sales for 134.
We've got no interest in yourhouse.
Let's set a reserve where youlegally got to sell it for the
highest bid above $1 million andstimulate some interest.
Oops, no one turned up.
(19:20):
That's okay, I'll get you guysout of a pickle.
I'll get you guys out of apickle.
My wife will buy your home foressentially rock bottom price
and the agent was paid a$30,855,000 commission for his
efforts in the process.
Speaker 3 (19:41):
Which means the vendor's got less than a million
Correct.
Yeah, yeah, Again.
These are.
You know I can only comment onwhat's in the article, but it
certainly doesn't paint a goodpicture.
It doesn't paint a good picture.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
Yeah, it'll be interesting to see where that
one goes.
That's the second big articlewritten on this fellow.
The first one was alluding towhere it was all going, but some
of the bigger, morehigh-profile journalists at the
Herald got hold of that one andthat's yeah, that's savage.
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Look, it'll be interesting to see, and you know
it doesn't escape me also thatthe higher a flyer you are,
obviously the more scrutiny youcome under and the more that the
media is going to look forthese sensational pieces.
So we need to wait and see whatthe fallout will be ultimately.
But I mean it certainly at acursory glance.
If you, if you trust thatthey've done due diligence with
their journalism, it doesn'tpaint a good picture, and if it
(20:38):
is all found to be below boardand something wrong has occurred
, then personally, you know, Idon't know the guy, but I
certainly hope that anyone whorips off people through
unethical practice gets theirjust desserts.
That's my preference.
But if he has done nothingwrong, then I certainly hope
that you know it's it.
He has the ability to recoverthe image because, as you say,
(20:58):
trial by the media can beincredibly damaging to those who
haven't done anything wrong.
Yeah, it is, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Look, uh, yeah, it'd beinteresting to see what comes of
that as we uh, as we move on.
Then, peter, it has been, as Isaid earlier, quite a little
while since we caught up, so Ireally am hoping you can get our
listeners up to speed on thecurrent market conditions, in
(21:20):
particular what the clearancerate's doing and how the market
is kind of looking.
And I'd also just love to getyour quick thoughts on how the
market actually feels out on theground, because I, you know, we
haven't spoken for a while,which means I've been a little
bit out of the loop and I, youknow, have been thinking, or
wondering what it has been likeas a buyer on the ground across
(21:41):
Sydney at the moment.
Speaker 1 (21:41):
Look last weekend the auction clearance rate from 743
auctions was 53.6 percent andthe week before, from 759
auctions, it was 55.5 percent.
So auction clearance ratesnudged past 50 percent
consistently for the first timesince last august.
So that's suggesting thatvendors are accepting a little
(22:04):
bit more where market conditionsare at, because it was getting
down at to the low 40s these are.
for anyone listening for thefirst time, these are sqm
researchers numbers who onlyprovide an auction clearance
rate on the tuesday after theweekend, unlike some of the
other bigger media houses thatwill quote the auction clearance
rate on a saturday night, whichtends to be more a higher
(22:27):
clearance rate because thesuccesses are pushed forward
where the failures are held back, whereas SQM research have got
a more exhaustive process,albeit slower, to get more
accurate results, butnevertheless the auction
clearance rate is pushing up.
The market was wrong-footed bythe RBA, not cutting rates, so
(22:48):
probably could have been nudging60% if the RBA had have cut
rates.
So how's things on the market?
There's buyers out there, butthey will steer down properties
that are at the wrong price orproperties that don't meet their
brief or properties thatrequire extensive capital to
repair them.
So, in a word, people say how'sthe market?
(23:10):
In a word, patchy.
There's good results happeningout there, absolutely, but as an
agent you've got to work forthem.
Speaker 3 (23:17):
there's not many easy sales I've only really got two
questions for you, pete.
First is uh, you mentionednumber of auctions 743, I think
you said or 740 odd um.
That's obviously lower thansome of the numbers we've talked
about over the last six months.
Certainly is that a reflectionof the winter period, do you
think?
Certainly is yeah, okay, soit's not.
It's not off trend, necessarily.
Speaker 1 (23:37):
Yeah um and and um.
There's no doubt that a lot ofpeople were away on these school
holidays, yeah, yeah.
So it kind of felt like theydidn't give the rate cut.
In early july, school holidayswere upon us and people just
flicked the off switch in manyways and said I'll deal with
this later, if not just wait forthe august rate cut.
The reason the august rate cutwon't give people and I'm
(24:00):
assuming in that comment, ofcourse, that there will be a
rate cut.
I think there will be, but um,the reason that won't give the
market the stimulus that thejuly one would have is the rba
broke its own promise to thepeople with that decision on
July 8th.
They have told us for two yearsthey're data dependent.
When the data supports it,we'll cut and we'll deliver the
(24:22):
data delivered and then theymade a gut call decision, which
was clearly wrong.
And I say it was clearly wrongbecause the unemployment came
out a few days later and showeda jump, and you've got to
remember that unemploymentjumped after the May rate cut.
Speaker 3 (24:41):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
So we've now got a situation where interest rates
are going down, butunemployment's going up.
Speaker 3 (24:46):
Which we have talked about a few times.
Yeah, it's a possibility.
Speaker 1 (24:48):
Yeah, yeah, so that shows that the RBA's judgment
call that they made in July tosit on the fence is the wrong
one and it will hurt peopleaccordingly.
So you've got that the RBA brokefaith with the people by not
cutting when, if you followedtheir own thinking for the last
(25:10):
two years, a rate cut was a lock.
And the other reason is is thenext rate cut is going to clash
or coincide with the surge inspring listings?
Yeah, now, um saw a great quotetoday, um, from westpac.
They put it out and, um, theyhave a view that the Australian
(25:31):
economy is struggling and not asstrong in 2025 as what it was
in 2024.
Westpac throws cold water onTreasury's hope that the private
sector would take the economicgrowth baton from the public
sector.
Quote-unquote from Westpactoday.
(25:51):
Kieran, the recovery in theeconomy, not the property market
, the recovery that was gaining,the recovery that was gaining
traction through the second halfof 2024, has stalled in the
first half of 2025.
Quote unquote.
And that goes to the point thatwe were talking about before
you had your hiatus period, that, anecdotally, we were speaking
(26:15):
onto the ground.
Who was saying economicconditions are really tough and
deteriorating.
We've got a rate cut in may,but clearly, from what westpac
is saying, it has not doneenough yeah, it's interesting
too.
Speaker 3 (26:27):
I obviously we can't take too much, or not not maybe
not the same level of notice ofthe us that we may have in years
gone by, but I was only readingsome data this week that showed
, I think, the US has had threesuccessive inflation kind of
rises, or you know inflationarydata increases, which you know.
They're in an environment wheregetting a rate rise would be
(26:48):
near impossible, given theobstruction to the Fed.
But also they're in a bit of aweird scenario where their
inflation is going up and theeconomy is doing some strange
things obviously.
So I have to wonder whether theRBA is in some way influenced
by what's going on.
There is so much global chaosthat I think you're right,
people did need to disconnect alittle.
(27:10):
The only other question I hadfor you so the raise in interest
rates, the rising clearancerate over the last few weeks,
with a hold on interest rates,would you take that sort of four
in a row as evidence ofsomething of a bounce or a
recovery, or do you think it'sjust a bit of an anomaly?
(27:32):
I mean, what do you think isdriving, you know, albeit subtle
increase in clearance rates?
Do you think there is?
You know you say there arebuyers, but they've been quite
astute.
I can't imagine borrowing hasgotten significantly easier in
the last six to eight weeks.
I can't think of any factorsreally that would make the
clearance rate rise, other thanperhaps lower stock.
Speaker 1 (27:54):
I think lower stock is the primary one and I think a
lot of the successful auctionsnearly half again were sold
prior.
Speaker 3 (28:04):
Yeah, okay.
Speaker 1 (28:04):
So if you're talking about an auction campaign that
climaxes on the 19th of July orthe 26th of July, it's fair to
say that you started thatcampaign in mid to late May.
Speaker 3 (28:21):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (28:22):
So if you've taken an early offer, you've taken the
early money, the good moneybefore the RBA decision, which
it looks like essentially halfthe people did.
You weren't exposed to thatThen any vendor that had maybe a
slightly aggressive reserve.
He's suddenly scaling theirreserve back a little bit in
their own mind to meet themarket.
(28:43):
Because you go to auctionbecause you really want to sell,
and the buyers are saying, well, there will be a rate cut in
august.
By the time I settle, the ratecut will still be here anyway,
so I'll go with it yeah, yeah,it's, uh, yeah, interesting
period ahead.
Speaker 3 (28:58):
I certainly think the RBA.
It's disappointing.
They didn't cut you and I hadspoken a lot about it and we
expected they would.
Based on the data and the trendwas certainly indicating it was
time to do so again.
I hope you're right aboutAugust and I I'm, you know, like
many people needed a mentalbreak from the world in July.
I think that's not not uncommon, but certainly interesting to
(29:18):
see what happens.
I know we're at an interestingprecipice, as you say, because
if they do cut rates leadinginto the spring cycle, there's a
sudden influx.
You know, we could see a bit ofa surge in in pricing again if
people are feeling moreconfident and of course, all of
that contributes to inflationand the cycle continues.
So you know, interesting timeahead, as always.
But really really good chattoday, peter, really interesting
recap and a great article.
(29:39):
I certainly look forward tofollowing it over the coming
months.
Yeah, good on you.
Thanks Kieran, thanks Peter,and thanks to everyone for
listening to Current MarketInsights.
We look forward to speakingwith you next time.
Speaker 2 (29:48):
Thanks for joining us on the Current Market Insights
podcast.
Thanks for joining us on theCurrent Market Insights podcast
brought to you by HarrisPartners Real Estate, the
podcast providing real estateinsights you won't find anywhere
else.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.