Barfoot & Thompson achieved sales on 37% of the properties at their latest auctions, with almost half of them selling for more than their rating valuations

Barfoot & Thompson achieved sales on just over a third of the properties at the agency's latest auctions.

Barfoots marketed 97 residential properties for sale by auction last week and achieved sales on 36 of them, giving an overall clearance rate of 37%.

At the major auctions the highlight was the Shortland St auction on 12 September where 23 properties from a mix of suburbs including Glendowie, Panmure, Remuera, Te Atatu and New Lynn were offered and sales were achieved on 10 of them, giving a sales clearance rate of 43%.

At the Manukau auction the sales rate was 31% and on the North Shore it was 27%.

Interest.co.nz has started publishing the latest council Rating Valuations for properties sold at auction, where they are available.

This enables our readers to see at a glance how selling price compared to the Rating Valuation of a particular property.

Of the 36 properties that sold at Barfoot's auctions last week, 17 sold for more than their rating valuation, nine sold for less than their rating valuation, two sold for the same as their rating valuation and the prices were not disclosed on eight of the properties that sold.

Although the Rating Valuations in Auckland were published in July last year so are a bit out of date, they do provide a fixed point against which to measure the latest prices.

Readers should be cautious about about making assumptions about market trends based on these figures, because auction sales represent a small portion of the market and the sales figures do not take into account how much the properties that are passed in ultimately sell for.

However we hope our readers find this new feature a useful addition to the property-based data and information we provide.

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

Barfoot & Thompson Auction Results 10-16 September 2018
Date  Venue Sold Not sold Total % Sold
15 September B&T Blockhouse Bay 0 1 1 0
15 September On site 4 4 8 50%
11 September Manukau 4 9 13 31%
11 September B&T Shortland St, CBD. 1 5 6 17%
12 September B&T mortgagee/court 2 0 2 100%
12 September B&T Shortland St, CBD. 10 13 23 43%
12 September  Warkworth 0 2 2 0
12 September Pukekohe 1 2 3 33%
13 September North Shore 6 16 22 27%
13 September B&T Shortland St, CBD. 4 3 7 57%
14 September B&T Shortland St, CBD. 4 6 10 40%
Total All venues 36 61 97 37%

 

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 or click on the "Register" link below a 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.

55 Comments

Appreciate the effort to provide the extra detail Greg.

I wouldn't read too much into the mortgagee sales figures. Contrary to popular belief, the banks generally try quite strenuously to avoid a mortgagee sale if they can. However often the mortgagor does not take their situation seriously uintil the bank moves to list the property for auction. With that hanging over their head, serious talks about financial resturcturing ensue and a property is often pulled at the last minute when a deal is struck. So when properties aren't sold at mortgagee auction it often has nothing to do with the appetite from potential buyers, and everything to do with the bank and property owner coming to a new arrangement.

Sorry Greg, I had misread numbers before you posted and adjusted my comment. But in essence what you are referring to with mortgagee auctions is an 'extend and pretend' scenario to prevent the bank having to force a sale?

That would make sense for the mortgagee auctions that are withdrawn before the auction, but surely if it gets put up for auction on the day, then the auction result is what the auction result is? Or are you suggesting that bank goes through the mortagee auction process and sets a high reserve just to scare the delinquent owner into action?

No, what I'm saying is that negotiations between the bank and the borrower (and their lawyers) often go to the wire, with the property being withdrawn from sale at the last moment when a deal is struck. Reserves are usually competitive, which is why invetsors are often keen on mortgagee sales.

Okay.

But then I do have to question the inclusion of properties that are withdrawn or sold prior the auction in the Auctions results data. If there was no Auction.. how can it be counted as an auction result?

There a legal requirements on a mortgagee to set a reasonable reserve price (and no, $1 won't cut it).

I would assume "reasonable" means it will cover the remaining mortgage, fees, etc... after that the bank have no "reason" to care legally.

You would assume wrong.

Greg, trying to reason with a doom and gloomer is an exercise in futility.

OK, I will put it here first: The bay areas of Auckland and Grammar zone will continue to sell 20-30% above latest RV.

Bricks and Slaughter - A cautionary Australian tale about the risks of interest only 'debt stacking.'

Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smPR0s2W-Ck
Part 2 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbFvwYVfwq0

Right. And I remember being ridiculed here for pointing out that 25% of Aussie h'holds have $1,000 in cash savings; approx 50% have <$10,000; and 70% have less than <$30,000. Don't expect that to change as data shows that the savings rate in Aussie has been falling dramatically and many families are living month to month, regardless of where they sit on SEC (socio-economic classification).

In my previous life we used to refer to this as being 'all mouth and no trousers!'

All hat and no cattle...

The RBNZ's breakdowns on mortgage lending, particularly the percentage of interest only as a proportion of the market will be the thing to watch in the next 12 months and whether the Aussie banks tighten up here too. Remembering that along with the foreign buyer the interest only borrower (as they are now seeing in Australia) is essentially another marginal buyer - able to service 700k of debt for the same cost at 547k of repayment loan at 5% over 30 years. Or an inflated price offer 22% over the owner occupier.

Things do appear to be getting interesting this Spring.

Excellent!

Good point – hadn’t really thought of the all-out, guns blazing interest only buyer at the margin.

But yes, there’s yet another potential distortion at play – the “do whatever it takes” speculator aided and abetted by the “incentives / commissions are all that really matter” banks.

And it would seem that, if not already, they soon will pretty much be out of the picture as well.

Exactly Custard

The Aussie buggers have been lending like Northern Rock and RBS were before the GFC, except they carried on for the last ten years, whilst the rest of the Western World restricted interest only debt and in many places like the UK multiples were capped at 4.5 times household income (even with our much lower borrowing rates around 2%). Now they may have not leant 125% mortgages, but essentially 7-9 times interest only debt to First Home Buyers or the equivalent amount to an investor is pretty much the same thing. Has anyone ever had a down-valuation by their bank when looking to buy a property? Probably not. Why? because they didn't care about the value of the asset at all, in fact if you could make the payments they'd lend you $1,000,000 to buy a shed on 30 year interest only - It reminds me of the ANZ advert for the home loan coach that helps the young couple hang themselves at an Auction.

Will we start to see down-valuations where the lenders don't feel comfortable? Highly likely.

I ridicule you simply for the apparent insistence on "cash" savings. Gone are the days where it would take a week or two to convert non-cash investments into liquid cash. These days it can take as little as 48 hrs.

There are things like revolving credit mortgages, where you technically have no savings, but you can draw up to your credit limit at a will, and in the meantime you are reducing the interest you are paying on your mortgage. I'd say anyone that has a mortgage and more than $10k in cash savings that is not in some sort offset account is in fact rather daft.

You miss the point quite expertly

No, i just think your point is a distraction. There are two separate issues, realisable assets/credit lines to get through a temporary rough patch.. which do not need to be cash, just reasonably liquid.

And normal cash flow compared to debt servicing and cost of living.

Pragmatist... I dont think it is as straightforward as you portray..
Often the rough patch comes at a bad time... and selling non cash assets might not be as easy as u think, nor might one be able to sell those assets at the price one might expect.
From my experience one of the first things to go during a crisis/downturn is liquidity... When confidence wanes and fear comes into mkts .... liquidity dries up... as do lines of credit.

I'd think is would be prudent to have cash- like assets , that might give one a period of grace while they try to work thru things... during a rough patch
( I consider shortterm deposits as a cash like asset )

It is Mrs The Point not Miss The Point.

Hi Miss/Mrs The Point,

While contributors here generally know that your official moniker is "Mrs The Point", a number of individuals refer to you as "Miss The Point" believing that it even better reflects the "quality" of your posts on interest.co.nz.

Either way, the clear inference is that you don't often get the point.

TTP

Savings are secondary, income is the primary driver.

When things go bad debts get called in. If you still have an income, then you are fine. If you have no income but have savings, you are fine. After that - good luck.

One of the common stats I try and find is the weeks people are able to last after losing their job. That generally gives the best idea on peoples ability to survive adversity.

Usually it is not good reading though. Last I found something reliable UK was at 85% wouldn't last a week, NZ was about 75%.

When things go bad debts get called in. If you still have an income, then you are fine.

Not if the savings rate is close to zero and you're living beyond your means. That is the whole point. The argument that "households are not living beyond their means because house prices have gone up" is a furphy. The economy is primarily driven by consumer spending, which is strongly linked to "disposable income."

I think you agree with me.

If you are already living beyond your means, then of course you are screwed - regardless of any crisis.

My point is people are living Pay to Pay. The savings rate is irrelevant, they will survive (they won't improve their situation). Until that pay stops, then ...

The savings rate is relevant because it's a broad indicator of the extent to which h'holds are living month to month. And the Australia context is quite relevant because the savings rate has been deteriorating since 2012. We can infer that people are living beyond the means of their regular income and drawing on savings for consumption.

"For Sydney and Melbourne it is a needed correction", both over-valued by around 40%

Key point there, and Auckland is in similar boat and has also been correcting for last 2 years and will be flat for another 3-5 years.

But what about AU secondary cities? Some big gains over last year....

Most of this 60 min story is filled with emotive bullshit to put it bluntly - Spray painting scary words and interviewing real estate agents as if they have any understanding of anything other than sales/marketing. Anyone can/could see Sydney/Melbourne/Auckland price growth was out of wack, and 2-3% yields are where you hit hard limits for any further price growth - So what. 5 years of flat prices, down 5-10% perhaps in some areas, more if you consider real terms - But remove the emotive rubbish and what we have seen last 2 years is about the extend of it and no the world is not going to end.

"ADELAIDE TOP 10 GROWTH SUBURBS OF THE PAST 12 MONTHS

(Source: CoreLogic)

1. Glenelg South

Median house price: $1.35 million

12 month change: 42.1 per cent

2. Royston Park

Median house price: $1.225 million

12 month change: 38.4 per cent

3. Hazelwood Park

Median house price: $1.179 million

12 month change: 36.7 per cent

4. Kensington Gardens

Median house price: $1.15 million

12 month change: 30.7 per cent

5. Kensington Park

Median house price: $1.1605 million

12 month change: 30.4 per cent

6. Woodville

Median house price: $715,000

12 month change: 30 per cent

7. Gilberton

Median house price: $1.2175 million

12 month change: 29.2 per cent

8. Trinity Gardens

Median house price: $960,000

12 month change: 28.5 per cent

9. Stonyfell

Median house price: $1.085 million

12 month change: 25.4 per cent

10. Dulwich

Median house price: $1.339 million

12 month change: 24.6 per cent

Originally published as Adelaide to lead nation in house price growth"

Okay Simon

So you're picking a dataset of 12 house sales in Glenelg South and 9 in Royston Park over a 12 month period to base your comment on. I can't be bothered to look at the rest but assume similarly rubbish volumes. Don't get fooled by the real estate crap that you were so punishing of in your post.

Do you not think that a larger data set like the 2000 odd Harcourts sales of yesterday with a reduced national median of -4.5% would be a better way of portraying median price changes, this all sounds a bit too Simple Simon.

Simon

The median price in my road has gone up by 100% since the last house sold in 2011. Sure it is 75% bigger than any other house on the road but hey the medians gone up massively.

https://homesales.com.au/location/dulwich-sa/

This says house prices in Dulwich have only gone up by 3.85% over three years. Those bloody estate agents and their friends in the press.

Hi Chairman Moa,

Agree with you that the Bay areas will continue to thrive - as will suburbs which are within a quick drive (10-15 mins) of the CBD. They are well-placed for the future.

Freemans Bay (and Ponsonby) are obvious examples and, notably, there are very few listings there at present - despite the Spring resurgence in market activity.

In Auckland, it's increasingly about convenience and avoiding traffic snarl-ups these days.

TTP

In Auckland, it's increasingly about convenience and avoiding traffic snarl-ups these days.

OK, how do you define "convenience"? Proximity to the CBD?

Hi J.C.,

You may define "convenience" any way you wish.

But if I worked (5 days a week) in the Auckland CBD, I doubt I'd find it too convenient living in Pokeno or Te Kauwhata - even if I had the latest Segway to ride on......

In a Hillman Hunter, of course, the journey would be less arduous.

TTP

I get your point. What proportion of Aucklanders work in the CBD? If you worked in Manukau, Pokeno is quite possibly more convenient than Freemans Bay.

TTP, you'd be pleased to see one of those auctions up there having a 100% sale rate.

Hi Rick,

Nobody here seems more focused on auction clearance rates than you - despite them being a rather imperfect indicator of the market-as-a-whole (as indicated by Greg Ninness, including above).

My own view has been, for some time now, that auctions "are not where the action is these days". Nonetheless, I have acknowledged that auction clearance rates for Auckland have risen over the last 3-4 months or so.

TTP

That's factually incorrect, TTP, I've not often commented on auction clearance rates.

I'm merely teasing you here as you've had a habit of pointing out a "trending higher clearance rates" on auctions in the last few months, despite these being almost uniformly on pretty low volumes of sales. Very low volumes, historically.

Most will recall I've highlighted that we're not seeing enough to call the market either way, and it seems to be carrying on much as it has over the last two years.

That be true. A couple of 50% auction clearance rates and tothepoint was beside himself, early spring, market on the up, blah, blah. A few weeks n the 30's an he is still spouting "trending higher clearance rates." I foresee a humble pie ice berg on the horizon for poor tothepoint around Christmas time.

Mortgage clearance rates are noticeably lower in recent weeks

seems like the couple of weeks that made the 40%s were only cruel exceptions to boost TTP into a false sense of exuberance

back to reality old fella!!!!

Hi thegic (and other DGM),

You should note that a far higher proportion of Auckland auctions have achieved clearance rates greater than 35% since May 2018 - than in the earlier part of 2018.

In fact, clearance rates above 50% (or even 40%) were virtually unheard of in the early months of 2018. Since May, however, there've been numerous auctions that have achieved those levels.

Further, I believe I was the first person here to suggest that the property market "could be in for an early Spring this year"........

As it turns out, that's exactly what has transpired - as now acknowledged by a range of analysts and commentators.

If you don't like it, tough.

TTP

Having the RV's against the sales is really useful - I have often looked up the the RV on sales. One trival, nerdish element for those of us who live in that world - the difference between RV and auction sale price may be chattels - that is often 10-20k which is trival on most sales; but makes a technical difference for those that are close to RV.

Looking over the results in a bit more detail it's quite interesting to see that despite the very low clearance rate still a large number of the results were for plus $1,000,000 and there were quite a few big sales recorded as well compared to last week.

I guess that if you were rushing for an exit before the foreign buyer ban comes into force then you would still want to list by Auction. FB Ban comes into effect 5 weeks today!

The NZD jumped this morning on the GDP news delivered by Jacinda. So go out and buy one now before it heats up again!

So I see Fletchers spin machine is in 4WD this morning having built 5 flatpack houses in just 5 days .

Now we just need to deal with the elephant in the room which is to allow the importation of flatpack houses from Germany and elsewhere in Europe .

Right now you simply cant do it , Fletchers will have got an effective monopoly and the first sign of competition will see them scuttle into the Beehive to seek tariff protection

$10,000,000 dollars raised by a few pragmatic businessman would be enough seed capital to get a reasonable number of flat packs in from Europe. Remembering that the banks will hate you undercutting their debt offerings so you will need to find a banking partner who will guarantee buyers lending against the product.

You then approach land owners and present JV opportunities, ideally consented land with space for a half a dozen units at a time. Historically the rule of thumb for building would be 1/3 for land, 1/3 for construction and 1/3 profit, which covered the risk of downturn in the market or overrun on cost. The issue in NZ is that the land values that people think they can get, are generally a far higher percentage than 1/3, sometimes its closer to 45% of end value which is far too high and makes developing them for profit untenable, hence the GJ Gardners end up doing contract builds for end users that normally strip out any margin for the owner anyway, particularly when they have to finance the land and the construction finance... However if the land is offered as a JV by the land owner rather than being purchased and the developer then funds the build themselves, then the profit... which may not be 1/3 but should still be reasonable with much cheaper labour costs and faster production can then be split with the landowner, (who already has their initial 1/3 guaranteed from the sale price). That way both developer and land owner share the risk and the reward but without the bank taking 6-8% off the top during construction.

I reckon it could be really good fun, anyone else bored of posting comments here and fancy having a go at disrupting the market and helping to provide the solution?

$10,000,000 dollars raised by a few pragmatic businessman would be enough seed capital to get a reasonable number of flat packs in from Europe. Remembering that the banks will hate you undercutting their debt offerings so you will need to find a banking partner who will guarantee buyers lending against the product.

There is no reason why the govt couldn't deliver if the private sector can't. In fact, the govt is less constrained to do so compared to private individuals

Flat pack Europe makes Remuera look like a third world shanty town

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=european+flat+pack+houses&tbm=isch&tbo...

What about approval for these flat packs Nic? They would never make it through Council.

I don't see why not, they are generally built to a higher standard than 95% of what gets through regulations here already and most of them are far more economical to run. We're so far behind on the adoption of modern building technology it's laughable all because a couple of suppliers control the market. If you get the whole lot from one place you circumvent the need to engage with anyone other than the guys that do the groundwork and services preparation for the site. It's not something you source from China, it has to be Germany, Sweden, Denmark, , they know how to build for a climate that is far worse than ours.

Actually it really doesn't make sense to import a flack pack house from the opposite side of the world. What would make sense is to gear up and start making the same thing here. Create jobs and its not like we don't already grow the building materials needed. The problem is still the monopoly in the market and the lack of vision and willpower from any government to implement change.

Need to import a few hundred decent European ones to give the market a taste of what a quality flat pack is and stimulate demand (and scare the bejesus out of Fletchers et al).. Then once there is an established market for flat pack we can look at the business case for NZ production. Otherwise it seems like a risky proposition to expect someone to front the capital to establish a flat pack operation with no certainty of there being acceptance by NZ buyers, particularly in light of the failure of the existing pre-fab companies.

The other challenge we have is that with minimum wages at $20 per hour (pretty soon) our labour costs are around 30% higher than minimum wage in UK which at current exchange rate is around $15 per hour. Much of Europe are even cheaper. Kind of explains why a number of our businesses struggle to export anything other than primary product.

On the other hand, wages in Australia are often higher for similar jobs - e.g. construction.

And the building cost per sqm in Australia is lower than NZ.. you can build a new 3br house in Aust for under 200K. The mind boggles!