August 6, 2025 • 27 mins
Hosts Ciaran O'Brien and Peter O'Malley uncover the deceptive use of “fictitious buyers” by agents—an unethical tactic designed to pressure genuine buyers into overpaying. Peter explains how this differs from the previously discussed “phantom buyer” strategy, and outlines how buyers can protect themselves from falling victim to false competition.
We also cover:
- Why written confirmation from agents is crucial
- The legal implications under consumer law
- The importance of understanding where an agent’s duty of care lies
- Ongoing vendor hesitation ahead of expected August rate cut
- Low stock levels contributing to increased auction competition
- Clearance rates rising to 55.4% as market momentum builds
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, gone.
So 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 (00:30):
Hello and welcome to another edition of Current
Market Insights.
I'm your host, kieran O'Brien,and with me is my good friend Mr
Peter O'Malley.
Peter, hello.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
Kieran, how are you going?
How was your week?
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Look always good weeks for me, peter.
I'm so absurdly optimistic thatI enjoy every week, regardless
of what's happening, although Imust admit I do enjoy that the
sun has started to come out alittle bit more.
The mornings are slightlybrighter when I get up and about
, so it's been a nice change.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
This week I didn't get to catch up with how your
footy team went this week.
What happened there?
Look?
Speaker 3 (01:01):
every year, I think one of the rugby league sides
has to make a decision to letthe other sides look really good
.
And this year, you know, wayneBennett thought that he'd just
get Souths to really take onefor the team and the league and
make all the other sides lookgreat.
So you know, a tactical movefrom Wayne.
He knows what he's doing.
He's been super coach foralmost as long as I've been
(01:22):
alive.
So, you know, don't get tooexcited.
Don't get too excited.
I am saddened actually to thinkthat the Panthers are making
such a storm toward the finalsand they've got the referees on
side and now everyone else is onside.
So, you know, could we beseeing a five-peat Dirty?
Speaker 1 (01:40):
dirty play from the trainer Wasn't happy to see that
.
But in good news, the Tigersgot up.
That was a victory and a halfthat was.
Speaker 3 (01:46):
That was, and it's caused its own storm on social
media with the whole LockieGalvin debacle, but we don't
talk about that because he's nolonger in the inner west as we
like to think about it.
Moving on then, peter, as muchas we could do a podcast about
football, I guess I really wantto talk to you about an article
that you've written for yourmonthly newsletter, the Real
(02:07):
Estate Report, where you talkabout the concept of a
fictitious buyer.
Now, I'm sure many of ourlisteners have thought about,
heard about, maybe experiencedthis concept.
But to open up the conversationtoday, if you can take us and
our listeners through what afictitious buyer is and really
what has spurred on this articlefor you to kind of, you know,
(02:31):
get some information out therefor people.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
Thanks, kieran.
Well, look, in the past we'vespoken about the phantom buyer.
I'm not sure if you rememberthat one.
I do yep.
And the phantom buyer is wherethe real estate agent will
invent low offers in the name ofa buyer to explore the vendor's
bottom line.
So the vendor might want $1million and the agent says look,
I do have a buyer at $900,000.
That's all I've got at themoment.
(02:54):
How do you feel about that?
And it's like well, I don'twant to sell for $900,000.
I want $1 million.
Well, would you be prepared tocounter offer that buyer at
900,000 at a price somewherebetween 900 and a million?
Now that buyer at 900 doesn'treally exist, not really serious
about purchasing the subjectproperty.
(03:15):
What the agent's doing is usingthe phantom buyer to sort of
erode the vendor's confidence intheir price, if you like, and
and soften them up.
What we're talking about today,the fictitious buyer, is the
buyer that's used in reverse tothat situation and that's the
one where the real estate agentblatantly invents another blind
(03:36):
buyer at a higher price thanwhat a genuine buyer has offered
as a way of nudging them up.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
And the reason we're talking about it today is
there's an agent on the centralcoast not in Sydney who did a
TikTok video on this and waspicked up by the mainstream
media who, to my surprise, weresurprised that that was a tactic
real estate agents adopt.
Speaker 3 (03:59):
Yeah right.
Would it not be considered evensimilar to dummy bidding, like
in that sphere of misleadingtactics, to just encourage.
Completely dummy bidding.
Yeah, well, that's why I'msurprised that the media is
surprised that this is a thingNow, dummy bidding is
technically having a fictitiousbidder there on the day of the
auction for which there's a$22,000 fine.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
Yep, a dummy bidder stroke a fictitious bidder
during a negotiation is becomingmore common, unfortunately, and
buyers need to be aware of it.
So we started getting onto this.
Late last year when one of myfriends was looking to purchase
in the area, there was aproperty with an auction guide,
(04:43):
I think, of 3.25 down inbelmaine.
She said to the agent I'minterested in this.
And the agent said look, we dohave a buyer interested in it,
so if you um want to buy thehome, you're going to have to go
to 375 to get it right andshe's gone.
Well, if you've got.
If you've got 375, count me out.
I I ain't paying 375 for theproperty.
(05:04):
Um, go ahead and sell it tosomeone else sold two days later
for 3.45 yeah, 10 below yeahyeah well, um, but just you know
clearly there was never anotherbidder close to 375.
He had the sale and he went flyfishing trying to get a high
price from someone who mighthave been emotionally engaged in
the property.
Around the same time.
(05:31):
Over in Leichhardt, funnyenough, with the same firm, we
heard the story where someonewho'd purchased the property for
well above what the marketprice for the property was when
he bought it moved in and theneighbour who knew there was no
interest other than him on theproperty, said hey, you paid a
pretty big price for thisproperty.
Why did you go so hard on it?
He said oh, there was heaps ofcompetition, the agent said, and
(05:52):
it was like a free-for-all.
It was very competitive so wedid our very best to get it
before the other buyers did.
Before the auction yeah.
And the neighbour, to theircredit, didn't sort of let the
kid out of the bag but explainedthe situation to us that they
had spoken to the previousvendor and the new owner.
The new owner thought they werein a hyper-competitive
(06:13):
situation against multiplebidders and the previous vendor
said I'm delighted with theprice I got because there was no
one else Classic fictitiousbuyer scenario.
This agent is obviouslycompeting against such tactics
in his marketplace in terrigaland he's gone public with it
look, it's a.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
It's a good thing.
I think that the people arespeaking up about this.
We, you know, we have spokenbefore about some of the dodgy
tactics that do go on for ourlisteners.
Then what?
What safeguards are there inplace?
I know we always talk about doyour research, try and get a you
know, a sense of what themarket's actually doing, look
for comparables, et cetera.
But what safeguards do buyershave when they're dealing with
an agency to know that they'renot getting played?
Speaker 1 (06:52):
Look, not many, but there's a few things in place
here.
So a couple of years ago we hada salesperson who had a really
strong offer on a property wewere selling and the purchaser
was a barrister and beforeexchanged and we've had this
more than once, you'll rememberdown at Balmain, this happened
(07:13):
to me.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
But that was after exchange, that I think that
buyer asked you to show proof ofthe other buyer, Correct, but
in this case with the barrister.
The barrister put oursalesperson on the record and
said can you write to me andconfirm that you have another
purchaser who's made an offer onthis property?
Yep, and he wasn't going to doanything with that information
other than hold on to it.
And and he wasn't going to doanything with that information
(07:37):
other than hold on to it.
And the salesperson said well,what do I do?
And I said well, there'sanother buyer, so put in writing
, there's another buyer whom hasmade an offer.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (07:50):
And that's what buyers should do if they feel
like they're negotiating againsta fictitious buyer and the
article that you referenced thatwe're putting out in August
says exactly that you shouldmake the agent at the get-go
confirm that there is anothergenuine buyer who's made an
offer on this property.
Now the agent doesn'tnecessarily have to tell you
what that other buyer hasoffered.
Some agents do.
Some agents don't disclose whatthe other offer is.
But you should not have aconversation with the agent
(08:13):
looking for comfort, becauseconversations blow off into the
wind.
Yeah, written communication ison the record for all time.
And if you're like that poorperson over in leichhardt who
thought you're in a hypercompetitive situation, that's
why you went to that price andthen you realize that you'd been
blatantly lied to, that you'rein a hyper competitive situation
.
I need your best price todaybecause it's selling and you
(08:37):
realise you'd overpaid bydeceptive and misleading conduct
.
You've got an ability forretribution.
You can't take a conversationinto the courtroom three months
later or six months later andsay this agent misled me into
paying the price I did by unfairmeans.
But if they put it in writingthat they have another offer and
they don't, here's some chance.
Speaker 3 (08:59):
So in reality, what uh?
You know what?
What would happen in thatscenario?
Do you think I would assumethat there's unless something
comes to light early in theprocess pre-settlement?
I'm not sure.
Would it be grounds for uhcontract void if it was found
that that had occurred?
Speaker 1 (09:14):
I know not contract void you, you.
It's happened in melbourne yepit's a historical issue, but, um
again, a barrister type person,uh overpaid wildly for a
property, being told thatthey're in a hyper competitive
situation.
I think he was given even priceguidance of where he needed to
get above, which was again afictitious line.
Yep, and I don't know how, or Idon't quite remember how he
(09:37):
found out, but he sued the agentsuccessfully and won.
Before uh writing the articleand speaking with you today, I
just rang the lawyer and saidhave I got this right that the
tactic we're discussing here isdeceptive and misleading conduct
?
Speaker 3 (09:51):
and he said yes, it is under the ACCC act yeah, okay
, so if nothing else, the buyercould potentially get some
recourse through consumer law orthe ACCC Act.
Yeah, okay, so if nothing else,the buyer could potentially get
some recourse through consumerlaw or the ACCC to get some
recompense.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
But you know, sadly they will still have paid the
price.
The consumer has means.
Speaker 3 (10:05):
Yeah, okay, it is one of those challenging scenarios
because I think in many waysreal estate is a simple but also
a very complex process, right,for a lot of people.
They've never engaged inpurchasing a home before.
It's very high stakesfinancially.
It's often very high stakesemotionally.
It involves contracts andthings that you know people
don't have a lot of exposure to,and you do put a lot of trust
(10:27):
in your agent or the agentsyou're dealing with to give you
good advice and to give you theright advice to hopefully help
you get your home.
But, as you kind of point out,and as this agent in the Central
Coast has, there are some lessscrupulous operators that we
have talked about before who cantake advantage of people who
are very new to the game orperhaps less experienced than
(10:47):
others.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
Yeah, look, I would just correct there that as a
purchaser, you should put notrust in the selling agent.
That's not to say the sellingagent can't be trusted, but the
selling agent is usually beingpaid a substantial sum to act on
the vendor's behalf.
The agent's fiduciary duty isto act on the vendor's behalf
(11:11):
and, to put things in the bestpossible light, on behalf of the
vendor.
As the article says, creating afictitious buyer does not fall
under fiduciary duty yeah thatfalls under deceptive and
misleading conduct.
But I would say to allpurchasers you can like the
vendor's agent.
As a purchaser, you can takeeverything they tell you at face
(11:32):
value and then check and testthat what you've been told is
correct and put the agent on therecord in writing for the
things that you wish to question.
But you must never put yourblind faith in the vendor's
agent because you will getwashed downstream.
That doesn't apply to certainagencies.
(11:53):
That applies to our own agency.
That that equates across thespectrum.
As a purchaser, you must knowthe vendor's agent is not
working for you look, absolutely, I I should clarify.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
I was making the point.
Uh, I think that buyers have toput trust that the seller's
agent, at the very least, isbeing honest and not deceptive.
Uh, it was more the point ofcourse their responsibilities to
the seller and we have talkedabout that Look really
interesting topic.
We've talked about the Fantabuyer before and the fictitious
buyer.
It's something for potentialbuyers to look out for.
(12:25):
It will be interesting to see,with all of the activity around
real estate at the moment andthe increased pressure from
regulators and it's in the mediaa lot more.
It'll be very interesting tosee in the coming months whether
you know the, the fair tradingand the ACCC begin to to put a
bit more pressure on agencies tojustify things.
Uh, if anything, you know itmay increase the, uh, the
(12:46):
administrative load or the, thelegislative record keeping for
agencies to make sure thatthere's some verifiable or
provable who knows right.
But I I would like to hope thatmore stories like this will
actually change the industry forthe better and make the whole
process a little bit moreseamless and trustworthy than it
currently is in some spaceswell, what was interesting?
Speaker 1 (13:05):
there was a nearly 100 comments on this agent's
social media post from consumers, and the overwhelming majority
of them said something like thishappened to me.
I told the agent, forget it,I'm out, and then two days later
, the agent was chasing me, ofcourse yeah so there's clearly
rampant situations where agentshave got nothing.
(13:27):
They've under quoted below whatthe vendor wants to trigger
activity.
They've only stimulatedinterest from one buyer.
Now they've got to get theprice back up to what they told
the vendor.
So how do you do that?
You create the fictitious buyerbecause you know if you get to
auction day with that one buyerit's just your one buyer, the
(13:47):
vendor and the real estate agentstanding there and there's no
competitive pressure in thesituation, handing all four aces
back to the buyer.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
Yeah, it's certainly harder to come up with a
fictitious bid when you'restanding at auction with them in
front of you right, look,interesting topic, and we'll
certainly follow anydevelopments as they do come
through.
Moving on then, peter, I wantedto touch on briefly.
We're very close now to thenext meeting of the RBA where
they will make, or shouldhopefully make, an interest rate
(14:17):
decision that's favorable formost people.
Is the, you know, still the,the expectation.
I think, given that we havetalked about what's been
happening in the marketimprovement in conditions, the
inflation's going well I thoughtwe should just very briefly
talk about what the the currentchatter is around the RBA's
potential movements next weekand whether or not you still
think we're on track for the cutyou predicted last time we
(14:40):
spoke, and whether anything'schanged that may alter your I
guess your drive for howaggressive they might be Look.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
I did see one piece of information that some people
in the money markets are againspeculating that the cut could
be larger than 0.25%.
I don't have all of the data orthe information that the RBA
has.
Obviously I think they shouldbe cutting by more than 0.25%
(15:08):
and I think they made a majorerror not cutting in July.
And the people that I speak todon't read graphs on the whole,
they just operate in the realeconomy and I'm not just talking
about people necessarily in theinner west or necessarily just
in Sydney, but you know, whenyou're a real estate agent you
speak to 100 people a day rightacross the country for different
(15:30):
reasons, and the currentinterest rate setting is highly
restrictive.
It's doing damage to theeconomy and only the RBA really
know why they didn't move inJuly.
But the data that's come outsince certainly has made a rate
cut in August, essentially alock, and will they go any
(15:53):
heavier?
As far as the real estate marketgoes, vendors and purchasers
are looking for different thingsat the moment, which they're
slightly connected, but they'redifferent.
Vendors are looking for higherprices from these rate cuts.
There's a lot of stock that'sbeing held back in anticipation
of the rate cut, with thevendors hoping that pushes
(16:14):
prices up and improves themarket.
Stock this winter is lower yearon year than last winter and I
think a big reason for that isthe lack of rate cut in July saw
some people knowing that if itwasn't happening in July it was
almost certainly happening inAugust.
I think the delay in the ratecuts saw a lot of people say
(16:35):
we'll just hold back our listinguntil they cut in August and go
then.
So buyers are looking for anuplift in stock levels because
stock is so low and vendors arelooking for an uplift in prices
as a result of the rate cuts.
So I think there will be, asthere is most springs, but this
year there will be a surge oflistings and I say that because
(16:56):
there's such a lack of stockover the winter period so a
couple of points to I want totouch on there.
Speaker 3 (17:02):
We spoke last week briefly about the rate cuts and
where you know where you feltthe rba was kind of sitting and
what the the money markets weresaying.
I raised the point to you thatI thought you know, do you think
they would consider a 50 basispoint or 0.5% cut?
And from memory you're a littlebit sort of hesitant, thinking
maybe they wouldn't go soaggressive their language wasn't
quite there and that maybe thatwasn't the support wasn't there
(17:25):
necessarily, despite the data.
You know we commented on thefact that the data was quite
compelling.
Has much changed in the weekthat you now think they will go
more aggressive, or is it reallyjust a continuation of the same
, with the data kind of holdingfirm that really we are
struggling, the rates are stillat a restrictive level and we
(17:45):
have a little bit more to go toreally get people back on track?
Speaker 1 (17:48):
Look, I think they'll go with 0.25.
Contract look I, I thinkthey'll go with 0.25.
Um the rba are at a point wherethere's enough conflicting data
out there.
They can reach for any data thatjustifies any decision they
make next week yeah so theycould probably reach for data
that justifies a hold, even evenall their hidden data they have
(18:10):
.
Yeah, that's right, and theyused for a long time the data
dependent line about inflation,yep, and then in July they
swiveled away from that.
So there is no doubt there's acase for a larger and the reason
I say a larger than 0.25% cutis we're not on a 0.25% cycle
(18:35):
because there was a 0.15%reduction during.
COVID yeah, so there is a casethat it'll be somewhere If
they're going to go larger than0.25, it's not necessarily.
0.5 is what I'm suggesting.
You know, if I had to placemoney on it, I would say a 0.25%
cut.
Speaker 3 (18:55):
Okay, I mean, it's the weird perfectionist in me
would love to see a 0.35,because that would bring it down
to a neat 3.5 cash rate.
But I'm not sure the RBA makestheir fiduciary decisions based
on my kind of obsessive,compulsive needs.
But we'll certainly see.
I hope they go for a bigger cut, I think you know.
We have talked about the idea,though, that inflation is good
(19:17):
but unemployment's sort of alittle bit up.
We we're at this weird period,uh, and as you have talked about
, with stock holding for thisspring, you know rate cut cycle
and then into we could see aboom across the property market
and then, you know, flow on thiswhole series again, right, I
mean not to the same level.
Speaker 1 (19:34):
I think if we're going to see any sorts of boom
in the property market betweennow and Christmas, it will be
isolated to sectors.
Speaker 3 (19:42):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (19:43):
So there's no chance, for example, that the
one-bedroom high strata levymarket is going to boom in this
environment.
Speaker 3 (19:52):
So the rate cuts themselves, are you suggesting
that at their current level, anyshift is really not sufficient
enough to increase the borrowingcapacity for those you know
single income first home buyers,to make a big difference in
that space, or could you not?
I?
Speaker 1 (20:05):
mean supply and demand supply and demand.
Speaker 3 (20:07):
But could you I guess there is much more of those,
but you could also argue withthe government, the federal
government's kind of incentivesaround you, you know,
encouraging first home buyersand this high density focus they
have.
Could we not see some of thosecombined at this perfect storm
of, you know, governmentincentives plus lower interest
rates, plus, you know, just afrenzy to get back or into the
(20:27):
market for the first time, wecould actually see a bit of a
broad boom in some respects.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
No, I'm a little bit different to a lot of commentary
on that, and the reason beingis that the cash rate, what is
it at the moment?
3.85.
3.85.
That's the cash rate BeforeCOVID.
So December 2019, the cash ratewas 1.25, something like that.
Somewhere there yeah yeah,property market market was doing
(20:55):
okay, but it was by no meansbooming.
So point 3.85 down to 3.5 cashrate, which is a mortgage rate
of five and a half, that's.
That's not enough to set pricesracing.
You would need a series of cuts.
So you've got to remember.
The RBA openly acknowledgedthat the current rate setting is
(21:15):
restrictive.
We are strangling the economy.
Speaker 2 (21:17):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (21:17):
And then when you go and talk to people, how's things
in your restaurant?
How's things in yourhairdressing business?
How are things going with yourprinting business, whatever it
might be, how's your tilingbusiness?
How's your plumbing business?
Even the handyman said to methe other day.
He said, mate, you know gettingpayment and people approving
jobs, he said it's very, verytight out there.
(21:40):
This is a guy doing $250, $550handyman jobs.
Yeah, so they've openly got the.
They're strangling the economy.
They know what they're doing.
Speaker 3 (21:50):
I accept all that.
I have to wonder, though andmaybe I'm alone in this thought
process but surely some of thisis relative to the timing for
people trying to enter right.
So if you are someone who issaving for a purchase in 2018,
2019, when the cash rate is 1.25, whatever it is, and you don't
quite make it in the market andit balloons up to 4 and a
(22:11):
whatever percent, that'sincredibly crippling, incredibly
crippling.
But if you are someone who'ssaving in the last few years
where the cash rate has beenhigh and aggressive and all of a
sudden it comes down a fewpercent, relatively speaking,
that's a huge load of pressureoff for those people and I
wonder, like it is obviouslyrelative to, you know, when we
had 0.1 percent and things werecrazy, uh, that's, that's a like
(22:34):
system-wide boom, right, butrelatively speaking, some of
these cuts for some people, Ijust can't imagine.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
They're not going to be in combination with the
government incentives, they'renot going to be boosters Without
boring our listeners with thesame two points that every
podcast comes back to openborders and a lack of new
dwellings.
People say all the time how'sthis all going to play out?
Property prices are going to goup.
It's like no, no rents aregoing to go up.
(23:02):
Yeah, which they are.
That's which they are, yeah.
So all the points that you'reedging at there are playing out
in the rental market, not thesale market.
Speaker 2 (23:11):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
Because the rental market is less permanent than
buying a property.
And you talk flippantly aboutsaving.
Speaker 3 (23:18):
Yeah, which is hard.
Speaker 1 (23:20):
How does a tenant save at the moment?
Well, mate.
Speaker 3 (23:23):
My wife and I went through this for years and years
and years and years and yearsbefore we finally got into
property.
How do you save?
Speaker 1 (23:29):
with jobs and this is what's been created, right, of
course, is the next wave ofhomebuyer that you're talking
about coming through becausethere's a need.
They can't come through becausethe money they were saving that
was going into a deposit isgoing into the weekly rent.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (23:42):
So there's systemic issues there, and this is what I
said about the Laborgovernment's victory in May.
On the path they're on, theyare going to crunch the people
that put their faith in them.
Speaker 3 (23:53):
Yeah, not just the young ones.
I feel like every governmentdoes this.
Yeah, them, yeah, not just theyoung ones.
I feel like every governmentdoes this.
Yeah, well, yeah, theyultimately make decisions that
crush their own voter base,right, that's right.
They take them for granted.
Yeah, of course, yeah.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
And then you know another topic which we weren't
going to talk about today, butthe government have come out and
said that we're upping theamount of international students
coming into the country by25,000 a year.
That's nationwide, not Sydney.
A lot of them will end up inSydney.
What do you think that'll do torents?
Speaker 3 (24:18):
To be fair, not to defend the government here, but
they did cut internationalnumbers in.
Anyway, that's neither here northere.
I mean, it is one of thosethings.
Right, the government is usingany lever they can to
artificially boost productivityand make the GDP look good,
correct?
I saw Chris Binns recently.
I don't follow too closely, butpersonally socials.
You know, the first of likeseven 3d printed houses were
(24:39):
ready.
It only took, however long he'sbeen premier for that, I just
anyway.
We're not going to spend timeon that.
It's madness, the we are so farbehind in so many sectors that
everything we talk about now Ihave no doubt that our
contemporaries in 25 years willbe doing a podcast about the
same issues.
Peter should, should they be solucky.
That's it.
As we wrap up today, then, asis customary, I would love you
(25:01):
to run our listeners through SQMresearchers, market numbers.
What's the market wrap lookinglike in terms of data as opposed
to just subjective observationson the ground?
Speaker 1 (25:11):
Look it's creeping up Auction clearance rate for the
week, 55.4% up from 53.5% lastweek, so 2% jump and I think up
from 50% the week before maybeso pretty solid rise yeah it's
climbing Interesting.
I wasn't expecting this onlower volume.
Speaker 3 (25:28):
Yeah, so I think last week was 800.
And the week before that wasabout 730 odd.
Speaker 1 (25:33):
No 755.
Speaker 3 (25:34):
Yeah, okay, so it averages out about $7.75
somewhere, not too bad yeah.
Speaker 1 (25:40):
So look pretty decent week Low stock levels.
Vendors who are serious aboutselling can sell, because
there's people there that wantto buy their property.
I guess the only other one,which is kind of interesting, of
the sales that occurred $178were prior to auction, 240 under
the hammer yeah right, sothey've been pretty even like in
(26:04):
recent memory, they've beenpretty much neck and neck what's
sold prior and hasn't uh,whereas we're starting to see a
few more creep.
Speaker 3 (26:11):
I mean, how many though uh withdrawn this week,
because I think last week wasabout 20 or 30 odd.
It wasn't substantial, but it'sagain been relatively
consistent.
Speaker 1 (26:20):
Well, the new word for withdrawn is rescheduled.
Speaker 3 (26:24):
Sorry, yeah, I shouldn't be so negative.
Sorry, how many were, you know,relaunched?
Speaker 1 (26:30):
So 104 were rescheduled and only six were
withdrawn and 24 sold.
Speaker 3 (26:36):
after the auction Okay, so I mean, mean really
that's.
It still shows that the wrongproperties going to auction are
being rescheduled, as you liketo call it, or as the market
likes to call it.
But interesting to see theauction number creeping ahead of
the sold prior, which to mereinforces what you say there's
a little bit more buyer activityand confidence there to bid on
(26:57):
the properties that are worth it.
Speaker 1 (26:59):
Yeah, indeed, that's a pretty decent outcome actually
.
Speaker 3 (27:02):
Yeah, really good Great topics today, peter.
I love when we talk aboutthings that are a little bit
juicy.
To be honest, I do like puttingthe heat on people doing the
wrong things out there.
So, as always, thank you forcoming in and thanks for talking
with our listeners.
Good on you, thanks Kieran,thanks Peter, and thanks to
everyone for listening toCurrent Market Insights.
We look forward to speakingwith you next time.
Speaker 2 (27:21):
Thanks for joining us on the Current 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, gone.
So 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 (00:30):
Hello and welcome to another edition of Current
Market Insights.
I'm your host, kieran O'Brien,and with me is my good friend Mr
Peter O'Malley.
Peter, hello.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
Kieran, how are you going?
How was your week?
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Look always good weeks for me, peter.
I'm so absurdly optimistic thatI enjoy every week, regardless
of what's happening, although Imust admit I do enjoy that the
sun has started to come out alittle bit more.
The mornings are slightlybrighter when I get up and about
, so it's been a nice change.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
This week I didn't get to catch up with how your
footy team went this week.
What happened there?
Look?
Speaker 3 (01:01):
every year, I think one of the rugby league sides
has to make a decision to letthe other sides look really good
.
And this year, you know, wayneBennett thought that he'd just
get Souths to really take onefor the team and the league and
make all the other sides lookgreat.
So you know, a tactical movefrom Wayne.
He knows what he's doing.
He's been super coach foralmost as long as I've been
(01:22):
alive.
So, you know, don't get tooexcited.
Don't get too excited.
I am saddened actually to thinkthat the Panthers are making
such a storm toward the finalsand they've got the referees on
side and now everyone else is onside.
So, you know, could we beseeing a five-peat Dirty?
Speaker 1 (01:40):
dirty play from the trainer Wasn't happy to see that
.
But in good news, the Tigersgot up.
That was a victory and a halfthat was.
Speaker 3 (01:46):
That was, and it's caused its own storm on social
media with the whole LockieGalvin debacle, but we don't
talk about that because he's nolonger in the inner west as we
like to think about it.
Moving on then, peter, as muchas we could do a podcast about
football, I guess I really wantto talk to you about an article
that you've written for yourmonthly newsletter, the Real
(02:07):
Estate Report, where you talkabout the concept of a
fictitious buyer.
Now, I'm sure many of ourlisteners have thought about,
heard about, maybe experiencedthis concept.
But to open up the conversationtoday, if you can take us and
our listeners through what afictitious buyer is and really
what has spurred on this articlefor you to kind of, you know,
(02:31):
get some information out therefor people.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
Thanks, kieran.
Well, look, in the past we'vespoken about the phantom buyer.
I'm not sure if you rememberthat one.
I do yep.
And the phantom buyer is wherethe real estate agent will
invent low offers in the name ofa buyer to explore the vendor's
bottom line.
So the vendor might want $1million and the agent says look,
I do have a buyer at $900,000.
That's all I've got at themoment.
(02:54):
How do you feel about that?
And it's like well, I don'twant to sell for $900,000.
I want $1 million.
Well, would you be prepared tocounter offer that buyer at
900,000 at a price somewherebetween 900 and a million?
Now that buyer at 900 doesn'treally exist, not really serious
about purchasing the subjectproperty.
(03:15):
What the agent's doing is usingthe phantom buyer to sort of
erode the vendor's confidence intheir price, if you like, and
and soften them up.
What we're talking about today,the fictitious buyer, is the
buyer that's used in reverse tothat situation and that's the
one where the real estate agentblatantly invents another blind
(03:36):
buyer at a higher price thanwhat a genuine buyer has offered
as a way of nudging them up.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
And the reason we're talking about it today is
there's an agent on the centralcoast not in Sydney who did a
TikTok video on this and waspicked up by the mainstream
media who, to my surprise, weresurprised that that was a tactic
real estate agents adopt.
Speaker 3 (03:59):
Yeah right.
Would it not be considered evensimilar to dummy bidding, like
in that sphere of misleadingtactics, to just encourage.
Completely dummy bidding.
Yeah, well, that's why I'msurprised that the media is
surprised that this is a thingNow, dummy bidding is
technically having a fictitiousbidder there on the day of the
auction for which there's a$22,000 fine.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
Yep, a dummy bidder stroke a fictitious bidder
during a negotiation is becomingmore common, unfortunately, and
buyers need to be aware of it.
So we started getting onto this.
Late last year when one of myfriends was looking to purchase
in the area, there was aproperty with an auction guide,
(04:43):
I think, of 3.25 down inbelmaine.
She said to the agent I'minterested in this.
And the agent said look, we dohave a buyer interested in it,
so if you um want to buy thehome, you're going to have to go
to 375 to get it right andshe's gone.
Well, if you've got.
If you've got 375, count me out.
I I ain't paying 375 for theproperty.
(05:04):
Um, go ahead and sell it tosomeone else sold two days later
for 3.45 yeah, 10 below yeahyeah well, um, but just you know
clearly there was never anotherbidder close to 375.
He had the sale and he went flyfishing trying to get a high
price from someone who mighthave been emotionally engaged in
the property.
Around the same time.
(05:31):
Over in Leichhardt, funnyenough, with the same firm, we
heard the story where someonewho'd purchased the property for
well above what the marketprice for the property was when
he bought it moved in and theneighbour who knew there was no
interest other than him on theproperty, said hey, you paid a
pretty big price for thisproperty.
Why did you go so hard on it?
He said oh, there was heaps ofcompetition, the agent said, and
(05:52):
it was like a free-for-all.
It was very competitive so wedid our very best to get it
before the other buyers did.
Before the auction yeah.
And the neighbour, to theircredit, didn't sort of let the
kid out of the bag but explainedthe situation to us that they
had spoken to the previousvendor and the new owner.
The new owner thought they werein a hyper-competitive
(06:13):
situation against multiplebidders and the previous vendor
said I'm delighted with theprice I got because there was no
one else Classic fictitiousbuyer scenario.
This agent is obviouslycompeting against such tactics
in his marketplace in terrigaland he's gone public with it
look, it's a.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
It's a good thing.
I think that the people arespeaking up about this.
We, you know, we have spokenbefore about some of the dodgy
tactics that do go on for ourlisteners.
Then what?
What safeguards are there inplace?
I know we always talk about doyour research, try and get a you
know, a sense of what themarket's actually doing, look
for comparables, et cetera.
But what safeguards do buyershave when they're dealing with
an agency to know that they'renot getting played?
Speaker 1 (06:52):
Look, not many, but there's a few things in place
here.
So a couple of years ago we hada salesperson who had a really
strong offer on a property wewere selling and the purchaser
was a barrister and beforeexchanged and we've had this
more than once, you'll rememberdown at Balmain, this happened
(07:13):
to me.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
But that was after exchange, that I think that
buyer asked you to show proof ofthe other buyer, Correct, but
in this case with the barrister.
The barrister put oursalesperson on the record and
said can you write to me andconfirm that you have another
purchaser who's made an offer onthis property?
Yep, and he wasn't going to doanything with that information
other than hold on to it.
And and he wasn't going to doanything with that information
(07:37):
other than hold on to it.
And the salesperson said well,what do I do?
And I said well, there'sanother buyer, so put in writing
, there's another buyer whom hasmade an offer.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (07:50):
And that's what buyers should do if they feel
like they're negotiating againsta fictitious buyer and the
article that you referenced thatwe're putting out in August
says exactly that you shouldmake the agent at the get-go
confirm that there is anothergenuine buyer who's made an
offer on this property.
Now the agent doesn'tnecessarily have to tell you
what that other buyer hasoffered.
Some agents do.
Some agents don't disclose whatthe other offer is.
But you should not have aconversation with the agent
(08:13):
looking for comfort, becauseconversations blow off into the
wind.
Yeah, written communication ison the record for all time.
And if you're like that poorperson over in leichhardt who
thought you're in a hypercompetitive situation, that's
why you went to that price andthen you realize that you'd been
blatantly lied to, that you'rein a hyper competitive situation
.
I need your best price todaybecause it's selling and you
(08:37):
realise you'd overpaid bydeceptive and misleading conduct
.
You've got an ability forretribution.
You can't take a conversationinto the courtroom three months
later or six months later andsay this agent misled me into
paying the price I did by unfairmeans.
But if they put it in writingthat they have another offer and
they don't, here's some chance.
Speaker 3 (08:59):
So in reality, what uh?
You know what?
What would happen in thatscenario?
Do you think I would assumethat there's unless something
comes to light early in theprocess pre-settlement?
I'm not sure.
Would it be grounds for uhcontract void if it was found
that that had occurred?
Speaker 1 (09:14):
I know not contract void you, you.
It's happened in melbourne yepit's a historical issue, but, um
again, a barrister type person,uh overpaid wildly for a
property, being told thatthey're in a hyper competitive
situation.
I think he was given even priceguidance of where he needed to
get above, which was again afictitious line.
Yep, and I don't know how, or Idon't quite remember how he
(09:37):
found out, but he sued the agentsuccessfully and won.
Before uh writing the articleand speaking with you today, I
just rang the lawyer and saidhave I got this right that the
tactic we're discussing here isdeceptive and misleading conduct
?
Speaker 3 (09:51):
and he said yes, it is under the ACCC act yeah, okay
, so if nothing else, the buyercould potentially get some
recourse through consumer law orthe ACCC Act.
Yeah, okay, so if nothing else,the buyer could potentially get
some recourse through consumerlaw or the ACCC to get some
recompense.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
But you know, sadly they will still have paid the
price.
The consumer has means.
Speaker 3 (10:05):
Yeah, okay, it is one of those challenging scenarios
because I think in many waysreal estate is a simple but also
a very complex process, right,for a lot of people.
They've never engaged inpurchasing a home before.
It's very high stakesfinancially.
It's often very high stakesemotionally.
It involves contracts andthings that you know people
don't have a lot of exposure to,and you do put a lot of trust
(10:27):
in your agent or the agentsyou're dealing with to give you
good advice and to give you theright advice to hopefully help
you get your home.
But, as you kind of point out,and as this agent in the Central
Coast has, there are some lessscrupulous operators that we
have talked about before who cantake advantage of people who
are very new to the game orperhaps less experienced than
(10:47):
others.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
Yeah, look, I would just correct there that as a
purchaser, you should put notrust in the selling agent.
That's not to say the sellingagent can't be trusted, but the
selling agent is usually beingpaid a substantial sum to act on
the vendor's behalf.
The agent's fiduciary duty isto act on the vendor's behalf
(11:11):
and, to put things in the bestpossible light, on behalf of the
vendor.
As the article says, creating afictitious buyer does not fall
under fiduciary duty yeah thatfalls under deceptive and
misleading conduct.
But I would say to allpurchasers you can like the
vendor's agent.
As a purchaser, you can takeeverything they tell you at face
(11:32):
value and then check and testthat what you've been told is
correct and put the agent on therecord in writing for the
things that you wish to question.
But you must never put yourblind faith in the vendor's
agent because you will getwashed downstream.
That doesn't apply to certainagencies.
(11:53):
That applies to our own agency.
That that equates across thespectrum.
As a purchaser, you must knowthe vendor's agent is not
working for you look, absolutely, I I should clarify.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
I was making the point.
Uh, I think that buyers have toput trust that the seller's
agent, at the very least, isbeing honest and not deceptive.
Uh, it was more the point ofcourse their responsibilities to
the seller and we have talkedabout that Look really
interesting topic.
We've talked about the Fantabuyer before and the fictitious
buyer.
It's something for potentialbuyers to look out for.
(12:25):
It will be interesting to see,with all of the activity around
real estate at the moment andthe increased pressure from
regulators and it's in the mediaa lot more.
It'll be very interesting tosee in the coming months whether
you know the, the fair tradingand the ACCC begin to to put a
bit more pressure on agencies tojustify things.
Uh, if anything, you know itmay increase the, uh, the
(12:46):
administrative load or the, thelegislative record keeping for
agencies to make sure thatthere's some verifiable or
provable who knows right.
But I I would like to hope thatmore stories like this will
actually change the industry forthe better and make the whole
process a little bit moreseamless and trustworthy than it
currently is in some spaceswell, what was interesting?
Speaker 1 (13:05):
there was a nearly 100 comments on this agent's
social media post from consumers, and the overwhelming majority
of them said something like thishappened to me.
I told the agent, forget it,I'm out, and then two days later
, the agent was chasing me, ofcourse yeah so there's clearly
rampant situations where agentshave got nothing.
(13:27):
They've under quoted below whatthe vendor wants to trigger
activity.
They've only stimulatedinterest from one buyer.
Now they've got to get theprice back up to what they told
the vendor.
So how do you do that?
You create the fictitious buyerbecause you know if you get to
auction day with that one buyerit's just your one buyer, the
(13:47):
vendor and the real estate agentstanding there and there's no
competitive pressure in thesituation, handing all four aces
back to the buyer.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
Yeah, it's certainly harder to come up with a
fictitious bid when you'restanding at auction with them in
front of you right, look,interesting topic, and we'll
certainly follow anydevelopments as they do come
through.
Moving on then, peter, I wantedto touch on briefly.
We're very close now to thenext meeting of the RBA where
they will make, or shouldhopefully make, an interest rate
(14:17):
decision that's favorable formost people.
Is the, you know, still the,the expectation.
I think, given that we havetalked about what's been
happening in the marketimprovement in conditions, the
inflation's going well I thoughtwe should just very briefly
talk about what the the currentchatter is around the RBA's
potential movements next weekand whether or not you still
think we're on track for the cutyou predicted last time we
(14:40):
spoke, and whether anything'schanged that may alter your I
guess your drive for howaggressive they might be Look.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
I did see one piece of information that some people
in the money markets are againspeculating that the cut could
be larger than 0.25%.
I don't have all of the data orthe information that the RBA
has.
Obviously I think they shouldbe cutting by more than 0.25%
(15:08):
and I think they made a majorerror not cutting in July.
And the people that I speak todon't read graphs on the whole,
they just operate in the realeconomy and I'm not just talking
about people necessarily in theinner west or necessarily just
in Sydney, but you know, whenyou're a real estate agent you
speak to 100 people a day rightacross the country for different
(15:30):
reasons, and the currentinterest rate setting is highly
restrictive.
It's doing damage to theeconomy and only the RBA really
know why they didn't move inJuly.
But the data that's come outsince certainly has made a rate
cut in August, essentially alock, and will they go any
(15:53):
heavier?
As far as the real estate marketgoes, vendors and purchasers
are looking for different thingsat the moment, which they're
slightly connected, but they'redifferent.
Vendors are looking for higherprices from these rate cuts.
There's a lot of stock that'sbeing held back in anticipation
of the rate cut, with thevendors hoping that pushes
(16:14):
prices up and improves themarket.
Stock this winter is lower yearon year than last winter and I
think a big reason for that isthe lack of rate cut in July saw
some people knowing that if itwasn't happening in July it was
almost certainly happening inAugust.
I think the delay in the ratecuts saw a lot of people say
(16:35):
we'll just hold back our listinguntil they cut in August and go
then.
So buyers are looking for anuplift in stock levels because
stock is so low and vendors arelooking for an uplift in prices
as a result of the rate cuts.
So I think there will be, asthere is most springs, but this
year there will be a surge oflistings and I say that because
(16:56):
there's such a lack of stockover the winter period so a
couple of points to I want totouch on there.
Speaker 3 (17:02):
We spoke last week briefly about the rate cuts and
where you know where you feltthe rba was kind of sitting and
what the the money markets weresaying.
I raised the point to you thatI thought you know, do you think
they would consider a 50 basispoint or 0.5% cut?
And from memory you're a littlebit sort of hesitant, thinking
maybe they wouldn't go soaggressive their language wasn't
quite there and that maybe thatwasn't the support wasn't there
(17:25):
necessarily, despite the data.
You know we commented on thefact that the data was quite
compelling.
Has much changed in the weekthat you now think they will go
more aggressive, or is it reallyjust a continuation of the same
, with the data kind of holdingfirm that really we are
struggling, the rates are stillat a restrictive level and we
(17:45):
have a little bit more to go toreally get people back on track?
Speaker 1 (17:48):
Look, I think they'll go with 0.25.
Contract look I, I thinkthey'll go with 0.25.
Um the rba are at a point wherethere's enough conflicting data
out there.
They can reach for any data thatjustifies any decision they
make next week yeah so theycould probably reach for data
that justifies a hold, even evenall their hidden data they have
(18:10):
.
Yeah, that's right, and theyused for a long time the data
dependent line about inflation,yep, and then in July they
swiveled away from that.
So there is no doubt there's acase for a larger and the reason
I say a larger than 0.25% cutis we're not on a 0.25% cycle
(18:35):
because there was a 0.15%reduction during.
COVID yeah, so there is a casethat it'll be somewhere If
they're going to go larger than0.25, it's not necessarily.
0.5 is what I'm suggesting.
You know, if I had to placemoney on it, I would say a 0.25%
cut.
Speaker 3 (18:55):
Okay, I mean, it's the weird perfectionist in me
would love to see a 0.35,because that would bring it down
to a neat 3.5 cash rate.
But I'm not sure the RBA makestheir fiduciary decisions based
on my kind of obsessive,compulsive needs.
But we'll certainly see.
I hope they go for a bigger cut, I think you know.
We have talked about the idea,though, that inflation is good
(19:17):
but unemployment's sort of alittle bit up.
We we're at this weird period,uh, and as you have talked about
, with stock holding for thisspring, you know rate cut cycle
and then into we could see aboom across the property market
and then, you know, flow on thiswhole series again, right, I
mean not to the same level.
Speaker 1 (19:34):
I think if we're going to see any sorts of boom
in the property market betweennow and Christmas, it will be
isolated to sectors.
Speaker 3 (19:42):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (19:43):
So there's no chance, for example, that the
one-bedroom high strata levymarket is going to boom in this
environment.
Speaker 3 (19:52):
So the rate cuts themselves, are you suggesting
that at their current level, anyshift is really not sufficient
enough to increase the borrowingcapacity for those you know
single income first home buyers,to make a big difference in
that space, or could you not?
I?
Speaker 1 (20:05):
mean supply and demand supply and demand.
Speaker 3 (20:07):
But could you I guess there is much more of those,
but you could also argue withthe government, the federal
government's kind of incentivesaround you, you know,
encouraging first home buyersand this high density focus they
have.
Could we not see some of thosecombined at this perfect storm
of, you know, governmentincentives plus lower interest
rates, plus, you know, just afrenzy to get back or into the
(20:27):
market for the first time, wecould actually see a bit of a
broad boom in some respects.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
No, I'm a little bit different to a lot of commentary
on that, and the reason beingis that the cash rate, what is
it at the moment?
3.85.
3.85.
That's the cash rate BeforeCOVID.
So December 2019, the cash ratewas 1.25, something like that.
Somewhere there yeah yeah,property market market was doing
(20:55):
okay, but it was by no meansbooming.
So point 3.85 down to 3.5 cashrate, which is a mortgage rate
of five and a half, that's.
That's not enough to set pricesracing.
You would need a series of cuts.
So you've got to remember.
The RBA openly acknowledgedthat the current rate setting is
(21:15):
restrictive.
We are strangling the economy.
Speaker 2 (21:17):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (21:17):
And then when you go and talk to people, how's things
in your restaurant?
How's things in yourhairdressing business?
How are things going with yourprinting business, whatever it
might be, how's your tilingbusiness?
How's your plumbing business?
Even the handyman said to methe other day.
He said, mate, you know gettingpayment and people approving
jobs, he said it's very, verytight out there.
(21:40):
This is a guy doing $250, $550handyman jobs.
Yeah, so they've openly got the.
They're strangling the economy.
They know what they're doing.
Speaker 3 (21:50):
I accept all that.
I have to wonder, though andmaybe I'm alone in this thought
process but surely some of thisis relative to the timing for
people trying to enter right.
So if you are someone who issaving for a purchase in 2018,
2019, when the cash rate is 1.25, whatever it is, and you don't
quite make it in the market andit balloons up to 4 and a
(22:11):
whatever percent, that'sincredibly crippling, incredibly
crippling.
But if you are someone who'ssaving in the last few years
where the cash rate has beenhigh and aggressive and all of a
sudden it comes down a fewpercent, relatively speaking,
that's a huge load of pressureoff for those people and I
wonder, like it is obviouslyrelative to, you know, when we
had 0.1 percent and things werecrazy, uh, that's, that's a like
(22:34):
system-wide boom, right, butrelatively speaking, some of
these cuts for some people, Ijust can't imagine.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
They're not going to be in combination with the
government incentives, they'renot going to be boosters Without
boring our listeners with thesame two points that every
podcast comes back to openborders and a lack of new
dwellings.
People say all the time how'sthis all going to play out?
Property prices are going to goup.
It's like no, no rents aregoing to go up.
(23:02):
Yeah, which they are.
That's which they are, yeah.
So all the points that you'reedging at there are playing out
in the rental market, not thesale market.
Speaker 2 (23:11):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
Because the rental market is less permanent than
buying a property.
And you talk flippantly aboutsaving.
Speaker 3 (23:18):
Yeah, which is hard.
Speaker 1 (23:20):
How does a tenant save at the moment?
Well, mate.
Speaker 3 (23:23):
My wife and I went through this for years and years
and years and years and yearsbefore we finally got into
property.
How do you save?
Speaker 1 (23:29):
with jobs and this is what's been created, right, of
course, is the next wave ofhomebuyer that you're talking
about coming through becausethere's a need.
They can't come through becausethe money they were saving that
was going into a deposit isgoing into the weekly rent.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (23:42):
So there's systemic issues there, and this is what I
said about the Laborgovernment's victory in May.
On the path they're on, theyare going to crunch the people
that put their faith in them.
Speaker 3 (23:53):
Yeah, not just the young ones.
I feel like every governmentdoes this.
Yeah, them, yeah, not just theyoung ones.
I feel like every governmentdoes this.
Yeah, well, yeah, theyultimately make decisions that
crush their own voter base,right, that's right.
They take them for granted.
Yeah, of course, yeah.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
And then you know another topic which we weren't
going to talk about today, butthe government have come out and
said that we're upping theamount of international students
coming into the country by25,000 a year.
That's nationwide, not Sydney.
A lot of them will end up inSydney.
What do you think that'll do torents?
Speaker 3 (24:18):
To be fair, not to defend the government here, but
they did cut internationalnumbers in.
Anyway, that's neither here northere.
I mean, it is one of thosethings.
Right, the government is usingany lever they can to
artificially boost productivityand make the GDP look good,
correct?
I saw Chris Binns recently.
I don't follow too closely, butpersonally socials.
You know, the first of likeseven 3d printed houses were
(24:39):
ready.
It only took, however long he'sbeen premier for that, I just
anyway.
We're not going to spend timeon that.
It's madness, the we are so farbehind in so many sectors that
everything we talk about now Ihave no doubt that our
contemporaries in 25 years willbe doing a podcast about the
same issues.
Peter should, should they be solucky.
That's it.
As we wrap up today, then, asis customary, I would love you
(25:01):
to run our listeners through SQMresearchers, market numbers.
What's the market wrap lookinglike in terms of data as opposed
to just subjective observationson the ground?
Speaker 1 (25:11):
Look it's creeping up Auction clearance rate for the
week, 55.4% up from 53.5% lastweek, so 2% jump and I think up
from 50% the week before maybeso pretty solid rise yeah it's
climbing Interesting.
I wasn't expecting this onlower volume.
Speaker 3 (25:28):
Yeah, so I think last week was 800.
And the week before that wasabout 730 odd.
Speaker 1 (25:33):
No 755.
Speaker 3 (25:34):
Yeah, okay, so it averages out about $7.75
somewhere, not too bad yeah.
Speaker 1 (25:40):
So look pretty decent week Low stock levels.
Vendors who are serious aboutselling can sell, because
there's people there that wantto buy their property.
I guess the only other one,which is kind of interesting, of
the sales that occurred $178were prior to auction, 240 under
the hammer yeah right, sothey've been pretty even like in
(26:04):
recent memory, they've beenpretty much neck and neck what's
sold prior and hasn't uh,whereas we're starting to see a
few more creep.
Speaker 3 (26:11):
I mean, how many though uh withdrawn this week,
because I think last week wasabout 20 or 30 odd.
It wasn't substantial, but it'sagain been relatively
consistent.
Speaker 1 (26:20):
Well, the new word for withdrawn is rescheduled.
Speaker 3 (26:24):
Sorry, yeah, I shouldn't be so negative.
Sorry, how many were, you know,relaunched?
Speaker 1 (26:30):
So 104 were rescheduled and only six were
withdrawn and 24 sold.
Speaker 3 (26:36):
after the auction Okay, so I mean, mean really
that's.
It still shows that the wrongproperties going to auction are
being rescheduled, as you liketo call it, or as the market
likes to call it.
But interesting to see theauction number creeping ahead of
the sold prior, which to mereinforces what you say there's
a little bit more buyer activityand confidence there to bid on
(26:57):
the properties that are worth it.
Speaker 1 (26:59):
Yeah, indeed, that's a pretty decent outcome actually
.
Speaker 3 (27:02):
Yeah, really good Great topics today, peter.
I love when we talk aboutthings that are a little bit
juicy.
To be honest, I do like puttingthe heat on people doing the
wrong things out there.
So, as always, thank you forcoming in and thanks for talking
with our listeners.
Good on you, thanks Kieran,thanks Peter, and thanks to
everyone for listening toCurrent Market Insights.
We look forward to speakingwith you next time.
Speaker 2 (27:21):
Thanks for joining us on the Current Market Insights
podcast brought to you by HarrisPartners Real Estate, the
podcast providing real estateinsights you won't find anywhere
else.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Herd with Colin Cowherd
The Herd with Colin Cowherd is a thought-provoking, opinionated, and topic-driven journey through the top sports stories of the day.