9 Comments

  1. Gary Stevens
    September 9, 2019 @ 12:02 pm

    Hi Neil, you are so honest, brave and appreciated!
    I will be selling my former family home later this month, and would greatly appreciate if possible, contact details of an honest and decent agent in Heidelberg Melbourne or surrounding areas. Also in early October, I intend selling my holiday house in Rosebud Victoria and would appreciate a contact if possible.
    Very kind regards,
    Gary Stevens

    Reply

  2. Anon
    September 9, 2019 @ 12:34 pm

    You’re being nearly as fast and loose with statistics as they are… the difference between 41% and 85% is *not* 105% – if you choose to use relative percentages you must be extremely clear that a) it is relative, and b) what it is relative to (because in this example, standard relative percentage difference is 51.7% because you find it by subtracting claimed from truth and then dividing by truth. This is how error reporting is always done – swapping it around seems intended to deceive.)

    Here, I’d go for absolute differences anyway, since you’re reporting *about* percentages. Your 5 reported cities have errors of 19%, 16%, 22%, 14% and 44%, for an average of 23%. Not 47%.

    (And yes, it’s important. Because when I saw you claim an error of 47% on average, my mind immediately went to “Oh, so auctions must clear around a third of the time, then”, because true values even close to 50% make it really hard to overstate by 47% on average…)

    Reply

  3. Cynthis
    September 9, 2019 @ 4:41 pm

    All I can say is thank goodness for this info – thank you Neil Jenman.

    Reply

  4. Brian Taylor
    September 9, 2019 @ 5:39 pm

    It’s astonishing they can get away with this. Legislation will probably catch up eventually, as in other areas, but a lot of damage will be done first.

    Reply

  5. Peter Woods
    September 9, 2019 @ 9:08 pm

    Dear Neil,
    We have been following your excellent work for years. In all that time, we have only needed to sell one house but we used one of your agents and were delighted with her honesty and professionalism. Take heart and keep up your great mission.
    Regards,
    Peter

    Reply

  6. Paul Harris
    September 10, 2019 @ 9:27 am

    I actually got more confused when I clicked on “Help me understand these results” at https://www.domain.com.au/auction-results.

    It lacks clarity – maybe to discourage people from understanding how the 82% is calculated, when it really should be reported as 69% as Neil says. But they have included enough correct figures so that if legally challenged they can say, ‘we didn’t lie, we told you there were 444 auctions (we just didn’t use that in the calculation, ha ha)’.

    I couldn’t find any evidence of private treaty sales being included in auction results in domain’s description.

    Here is how domain tried to ‘help me understand’:

    1. Total auction is 444 (Sydney)
    2. Confirmed results is 316, which they define as “The number of auction results collected by Domain out of the total auctions.” I think this means “what the agents actually told us”. But it is very wishy washy – what ‘result’ was confirmed: sold/not sold?
    3. They have a formula, but it doesn’t map one-to-one to their figures. This makes it a real struggle to see how clearance rates is calculated. For example the formula uses ‘Total auctions’. But they are actually using ‘Confirmed results’ instead of ‘Total auctions’ which gives them a higher clearance rate.
    4. They have figure ‘passed in’ but this isn’t mentioned in the formula, so why is it there?

    Confusing!

    Reply

  7. Neil Johnson
    September 10, 2019 @ 12:04 pm

    Hi Neil and the team,
    A trick we were exposed to as relatively new buyers helping our daughter….an auction was held for a unit that needed quite a bit of renovating and we had done some work in the pre auction days to determine costs.
    The ‘auction’ day would have cost the seller whatever, say $500 and the ‘auctioneer’ was only trying to get a price and as we were the only potential buyers, they tried their hardest to extract a price that we would commit to.
    needless to say $2.00 didn’t purchase….but not from the want of trying
    This agent has since disappeared or changed agency!

    Reply

  8. James Spencer
    September 12, 2019 @ 8:58 pm

    Neil,
    Could you please publish the private treaty clearance rate as a basis for comparison. Thanks

    Reply

  9. Alex
    October 8, 2019 @ 11:44 am

    Quote from Anon, in the comments above: “Here, I’d go for absolute differences anyway, since you’re reporting *about* percentages. Your 5 reported cities have errors of 19%, 16%, 22%, 14% and 44%, for an average of 23%. Not 47%.”
    Mr/Ms Anon, since you are into nit-picking territory (even though it doesn’t change the validity of the point made in the article), your example is misleading, too, since you took a simple average of the percentage numbers for the 5 markets, which are very different size. Imagine of comparing 2 markets, one with 1000 properties with a clearance rate of 10% and another with 100 properties with a clearance rate of 90%. Would you say the aggregate clearance rate is (10+90)/2=50%, when the true rate is really (100+90)/(1000+100)=17.3%?
    Who’s playing fast and loose with the figures, now? 😉

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *