Sales rate of 20% at Barfoot & Thompson's main Manukau auction last week, 48% on the North Shore

Sales rate of 20% at Barfoot & Thompson's main Manukau auction last week, 48% on the North Shore

Barfoot & Thompson achieved an overall sales rate of 39% at last week's auctions.

The agency marketed 145 properties for sale by auction and sold 57 of them, with most of the remaining 88 being passed in for sale by negotiation.

The biggest auction of the week was at Manukau where 40 properties were scheduled for auction and sales were achieved on eight, giving a clearance rate of 20%.

The next biggest was on the North Shore where the clearance rate was just under 50%, while the sales clearance rates at the auctions held at Barfoot's city offices on Shortland Street ranged from 38% to 100% (see table below).

Details of the individual properties offered and the prices achieved on those that sold are available on our Residential Auction Results page. 

Barfoot & Thompson Auction Results 12-18 February 2018
Date Venue Sold  Not Sold Total  % Sold
12-18 February On site 4 2 6 67%
13 February Manukau 8 32 40 20%
13 February Shortland St, CBD. 5 5 10 50%
14 February Shortland St (Mortgagee/High Court) 2 0 2 100%
14 February Shortland St, CBD. 10 15 25 40%
14 February Pukekohe 1 4 5 20%
15 February Shortland St, CBD. 6 5 11 55%
15 February North Shore 15 16 31 48%
15 February Kerikeri 1 1 2 50%
16 February Shortland St, CBD 5 8 13 38%
Total All venues 57 88 145 39%

You can receive all of our property articles automatically by subscribing to our free email Property Newsletter. This will deliver all of our property-related articles, including auction results and interest rate updates, directly to your in-box 3-5 times a week. We don't share your details with third parties and you can unsubscribe at any time. To subscribe just click on this link, scroll down to "Property email newsletter" and enter your email address.

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.


Comment Filter

Highlight new comments in the last hr(s).

Not to worry Barfoots, the coming avalanche of (speculator originated) mortgagee auctions may soon provide the much needed support to your dismal clearance rate.

Look you may be right about the coming avalanche, but 40% is actually not bad.

Even in heated market times, 40% on the day is not bad.


Who are you to question the dogma of the cult of the impending avalanche.

Looking at the prices, they have generally stayed in line with current CV. However, it is a very low success rate and I suspect a tactic by agents to condition the vendors.

What has also changed is the amount of commentary suggesting that prices will decline. I suspect that the 88 properties that did not sell and being forced to look at lower prices.

the now has over 13000 properties listed in Auckland and over 6000 of those have prices listed against them.

I assume the unsuccessful auctions are just adding to that ever increasing pool


Not sure if we're comparing like for like, but REINZ Jan 2018 report stated that Auckland had 8,679 properties available for sale. If that is like for like, then that is a significant 51% increase. That would also mean that inventory for Auckland would be up significantly to about 31 weeks compared to 20 weeks at the end of January as shown in the chart link below.

That's not the impression I got.
The sample I checked yesterday were probably weighted at 70% selling below CV. Some at up to 20% below CV, in fact.


The end is nigh for property owners.

A 39% clearance rate when factored into Poothagoras's thereom (the brother of Pythagoras) results in an impending devaluation of 105%. Based on these numbers vendors should be paying between $30,000 to $50,000 to buyers in order to offload their Auckland properties.

The Fed Reserve has confirmed these numbers with the Chair, Jerome Powell, having 3 eggs for breakfast rather than his usual 2 eggs yesterday morning.

I predict anyone who does not own a property, and has been crying on this site for the last 10 years about that, will have 3 Auckland properties and $100k in the bank by the end of March.

Looks like meats back on the menu boys!

Aren't sellers already paying that via agents commission....?

As the sale price is negative (or in industry terms a "reverse sale price") there should be a contribution made by the real estate agent to the vendor on sale. This business model is similar to that adopted by Lehman Brothers and should see real estate agents have stellar returns in the never to never range.

If you need to sell, best to meet the market now! No point holding on for another 3 months as Auckland prices regress

But as buyers are aware that houses will be given away in the short to immediate term sales are unlikley. Furthermore, sellers will need to liquidate assets in order to have the necesssary funds to pay reverse purchase prices to potential purchasers (maybe they should be called receivers or donees rather than purchasers?).

Let us know when you land on Planet Earth - we 've got some flowers ready for you ...

If you cannot beat them join them. I now live in the clouds with the other members of the cult of the impending avalanche. Give those flowers to someone else because "we gonna get high.. high... high..." on different flora.

Question is though, now that you've found love, what are you going to do with it?

100% at the High Court. Bellwether stat. One to watch.

Talking of which I just popped Mortgagee into Trademe and found this doozy -

If I'm reading these numbers right and the information is correct -

It was bought on the 22nd September 2015 for $1.2m, then 7 days later, 29th of September 2015 sold for $4.89m!!!! Apologies about the excessive use of exclamations there but holy sh@tballs!

What's the history there then?

..its 3ha+ and so possibly a sale from one associated (but not for tax purposes) entity to another to leave profits on a planned subdivision in the appropriate tax entity? just guessing.

Yes id agree, related party transaction for any reason other than tax... :-)

But marked as a S12 sale on .ie. Single title, freehold, Bona Fide open market transaction. Should be a S13 or one of the other classifications if it was a related party transaction.

. Double post

Wow thats quite a difference, still zoned open spaces,. Perhaps the $4 mil buyer thought or was sold that it would be residential. it is right on the boundary and would be not unexpected to see it zone residential a some stage. above..probably same 'person'...just ensuring when develops the profits go into the 'correct' entity. Normal tax planning.

That looks like mortgage fraud to me. If you're a foreigner here, set up two companies. Buy 1 property, with 1 company, then sell it for 3 times the price to another company. Then leave the country with a couple of million, and the bank carrying the can. There's quite a bit of this to come out of the woodwork yet I think.

How can that happen.. surely one of the first things the bank does is look at the dollar value of the mortgage being applied for and the CV and RVs of the property.. hmmm they want a mortgage for 8x the council CV.. seems legit, lets not look any closer.

I thought the trick was to mortgage it multiple times with different entities at the same time, go to 4 different banks and mortgage for 1.2m, end up with 4.8m, isn't that the go with that current mortgage fraud case?

I was told while back that is possible if you timed it right, you can ended up with multiple mortgages for the same property.. That was few years ago though

@Pragmatist You are correct, banks do check this as part of their 'property ramping' due diligence.

Yeah if you want your place to sell then try get an auction at the High Court.

If only 40% sold watch the creative wordsmiths masquerading as Real estate penning the adverts for the other 60%:-

Keen seller
meet the market
changed circumstances
the 4 'D's ........... death , divorce ,debt and departure

“Nest or Invest”

For your Info:
"In 2018, we see the recent slowdown in credit growth steadying and house price inflation consolidating around current levels from recent cyclical lows in late 2017, as some headwinds of the last 18 months abate. Thereafter, we expect relatively measured house price and credit growth," he added.

Mayes noted that while the Real Estate Institute's house price index - which adjusts for market composition changes - ended 2017 higher at just under 4 percent, volumes were down for much of the year while housing stock on the market was higher. He also said that growth in investor and interest loans remain down by around 25 percent and 20 percent year on year.

"We see 2018 as continuing a theme of modest house price growth on similarly modest volumes," he said.

Pull up captain we are losing altitude.

Had an interesting discussion with a broker today, apparently banks have stepped right off doing any kind of bridging finance. Not that it impacts me but I wonder what that implies for their internal risk models.

Banks have always been reluctant to do bridging finance. They would rather lend you the money to buy a new house and keep the old one as a rental. That was my experience anyway, even in the good times. They would ask you to go to a third party for bridging finance enquiries.

As was suggested late last year – this is what a market adjustment looks like.
No real drama – for most still lots of capital gain in there – no seller wants to give it away in a hurry, and for most right now I would suggest there is no real hurry.
Interest rates though may play more a part this year than previous – and they can be somewhat unforgiving.

It's also what the beginnings of a market crash look like...

The up coming 5 year bright line test will make things much worse.
Remaining investors will stay away forcing prices down and forcing rents up.
FBB’s will be reluctant to buy in a flat market.
Watch the rent squeeze choke the life out of the market.
unintended consequences yet again .

So you're saying that landlords were only in it for the capital gain?

If I were a landlord, I'd be looking at the following scenario - I probably have an interest only loan about to expire, capital gains aren't looking so hot, there's regulations coming in about healthy homes which will be a significant burden, closing of the negative gearing loophole - I can't pass all of those costs onto tenants as they will just walk.

Now do I a) suck up and pay a tax on the profit I've made over the past couple of years or b) watch my investment fall in value, start paying P&I mortgage, have to pay to actually provide a house that is suitable, and also continue to make losses that I can no longer offset.

I'm no maths genius, but one situation looks a wee bit worse than the other.

Bigdaddy's outlook appears to be more of a short term speculator than that of a professional landlord.

Silly thing is if you made 20% per annum plus over the last few years for no effort paying tax doesnt seem that bad, guess its the symptom of this sector, pure greed.

Thats a comedic effort. The unintended consequences of house prices falling, as opposed to the unintended consequences of house prices increasing.

I think rents will drop when house are affordable for average buyer as more people can afford to buy and not rent. Why rent when you can buy your own home.

The up coming 5 year bright line test will make things much worse.
Remaining investors will stay away forcing prices down and forcing rents up.
FBB’s will be reluctant to buy in a flat market.
Watch the rent squeeze choke the life out of the market.
unintended consequences yet again .

I dont agree here (worse for anyone but the gamblers), but on the effect, yes I hope you are right.

Lets see why I think why.

a) If prices stagnate (if its that benign) as the gamblers / speculators leave that is good. Reducing buying demand makes houses more affordable for FHBers who primarily want a home and not a capital profit. Now if prices drop and look to keep dropping, yes FHBers will wait but that is then a balancing act v rents going up.

b) Forcing rents up? not really as again as FHBers buy there is less rental demand from them. So really this strikes me as NET neutral effect.

I dont follow your comment "Watch the rent squeeze choke the life out of the market." if that's choking out the gamblers, yes I very much hope so.

I dont see these as un-intended it should be pretty clear this is the effect that is being hoped for.

Rents aren't going to go up significantly(at least in the Old Auckland City region) until wages go up. Lots of people are struggling as it is, if landlords start ratcheting up rents there will just be a move to more occupants per house, couples will get in a boarder/homestay student in the spare room to supplement the rent instead of living alone, extended families will clump together in a one bigger house.