Doctoring clearance auction stats in Melbourne??

[jazzlobber]

i'm wondering if anybody in melbourne has been to auctions that have been passed in but the listing in missing from auction results?

i'm not saying i have definate proof, but these 2 are examples in the last 2 weekends?

http://www.realestate.com.au/cgi-bi...4952&c=8525662&p=10&s=vic&t=res&tm=1193738283
auction 27th oct, not listed.

http://www.realestate.com.au/cgi-bi...3089&c=8525662&p=10&s=vic&t=res&tm=1193738283
this was auction 20th october 550+ passed in went private sale;

conversely i have also seen correct reporting of Passed In properties but there is definate anecdotal evidence of agents holding back doctoring the numbers.

i wouldn't put it past the industry, anybody else seen this over last few weekends?

The auction clearance rates have been very consistent around the low to mid 80's for the last few months but i'm wondering if this is on the wane?

 

[Katlin]

agree wholeheartedly! i attended one auction in Melton on Saturday, and was following another, BOTH passed in and didnt make the listings...

 

[Twitch]

Unfortunately the reporting of auction results by agents is purely voluntary. I'm also frustrated by the rising number of undisclosed results, in some suburbs it's getting ridiculous with more undisclosed than not.

 

[JamesGG]

Hiya,

You could well be right. The other thing to keep in mind, though, is that a property sold within two, maybe three (?) weeks of auction is usually still considered to be cleared as a result. The stats don't relate specifically to what actually sells on auction day.

So, it may take a little time before it gets included, or left out.

Cheers

James.

 

[fernfurn]

I read an article from a RE the other day stating that 70% of customers sell by private sale (which I find hard to believe) and to my opinion) is not the best way to sell now nor would get you the best price, and I wondered if they were preparing the way for a downturn whereby they didnt want big amounts of passed in properties and could talk people into private sales where its not so obvious in results that properties are taking longer to sell. I also wondered if, even if the property sold some time after the auction, they were still reporting it as sold at auction.

 

[jazzlobber]

Hiya,

You could well be right. The other thing to keep in mind, though, is that a property sold within two, maybe three (?) weeks of auction is usually still considered to be cleared as a result. The stats don't relate specifically to what actually sells on auction day.

So, it may take a little time before it gets included, or left out.

Cheers

James.

James i'm sure the stats are supposed to relate to that week of sales, for example on saturday just gone, there was supposed to be 1200 or more auctions, get the paper on the following sunday morning and it bangs on about another strong weekend of sales when 1200 properties went under the hammer clearance rate 82% etc - i wonder what the actual number of reported results was .... for example

Say they had 66% reported or 800 reports from RE agents, and 82% sold at auction for example, it would mean of the 800, 656 sold and 144 were passed in, but in reality it could be possible that of the 1200, 400 were not reported because they were passed in, meaning 656 sold and 544 passed in, which would not give the 82% sold indicator. These are just example number and i could be a good bit off but you get the idea.

The figures reported also include many private sales, but it should only be related to the auction results as a private sale could happen anytime right?

maybe i'll wait until i get last weekend report from home price guide and take a detailed look,

but anyway its very interesting to see other reporting missing PI results from auctions they've been attending too.

 

[jazzlobber]

I read an article from a RE the other day stating that 70% of customers sell by private sale (which I find hard to believe) and to my opinion) is not the best way to sell now nor would get you the best price, and I wondered if they were preparing the way for a downturn whereby they didnt want big amounts of passed in properties and could talk people into private sales where its not so obvious in results that properties are taking longer to sell. I also wondered if, even if the property sold some time after the auction, they were still reporting it as sold at auction.

yeah regarding your last point, i noticed this last weekend, a property in burwood 17 keogh street was passed in on a vendor bid of 620K, but in the paper the next day it was listed as sold for 650K, now i think it should have said Sold After or SA 650K, which gives a different impression, it now goes into the sold rather than PI category

 

[Dis]

I think the results are always a bit "doctored", as you put it. However, they are doctored now just as much as they were doctored a year ago. So if they say that clearance is 82% relative to 60% a year ago, the take home message is that the market is stronger.

At the end of the day, if REAs want to define clearance as "sold at auction or shortly after auction" thats upto them. If they want to quote clearance rates based on reported sales rather than all sales, that upto them. As long as I know their definitions and from where they get their stats, I can make my own judgements.

Its part of educating yourself as an investor, I guess. All the stats can be very missleading unless you know how to interpret them. REAs are more than happy for people to make their incorrect assumptions about stats if it means a sale.

 

[evand]

I thought that reporting of auction results was voluntary. Either by the agents themselves or the state REI.

Thats why 'clearance rates' are inaccurate and can be manipulated.

Anyone else have an opinion on this?

 

[jazzlobber]

I think the results are always a bit "doctored", as you put it. However, they are doctored now just as much as they were doctored a year ago. So if they say that clearance is 82% relative to 60% a year ago, the take home message is that the market is stronger.

At the end of the day, if REAs want to define clearance as "sold at auction or shortly after auction" thats upto them. If they want to quote clearance rates based on reported sales rather than all sales, that upto them. As long as I know their definitions and from where they get their stats, I can make my own judgements.

Its part of educating yourself as an investor, I guess. All the stats can be very missleading unless you know how to interpret them. REAs are more than happy for people to make their incorrect assumptions about stats if it means a sale.

i would agree, but in a flatter or consistent market at clearance rates around the 50-60% its maybe not as important to not come to the party, but in a strong market thats on the move downwards, its perhaps alot easier to see them not reporting negativity in order to keep it going as long as possible.

i not saying the melbourne market is about to nose dive, as i think the fundamentals are still right for good growth over the next year or two