So from this point, it definitely is a factor in making house prices unaffordable & adding to debt in this country.

So, from this point I totally agree. Vendor bidding and the like are definitely a factor in the whole over-valuation of property & acumulation of debt.

So, from this point I totally agree. Vendor bidding and the like are definitely a factor in this whole over-valuation of property & acumulation of debt.
This is very

If you are at an auction as an interested party and someone else (yes- stupidly – agreed) bids after a vendor’s bid, then if you really want the property you have to bid above that- so it’s a trap.

In an era where we are in 3 times more debt than at any other point in history- any sort of practice that pushes house prices higher (we all agree they are way too overvalued) must be frowned upon.

I hardly think taking the matter to your MP is plausible- the government has made it legal- ie: its perfectly fine! (oh yeah but they are part of the Inflation Industry as well, aren’t they?- higher prices = higher stamp duty – and doesn’t John Brumby love putting his grubby hands out for more & more).

“Vendors have an expectation of the price but they don’t set it!!! The buyers do!!!” – if you really believe that you are living in fantasy land- Agents/Vendors set the benchmark, they tell you what they want for it- if the auction system was a truly fair process, then I would agree, but its not- its slurried- the auctioneer sets the agenda, and therefore the ball-park figure.

Please don’t use the “reserve price” as some sort of regulatory fairness- who sets the reserve?- ahhh… the same guy running the auction!

It seems to me that the majority or contributors on this site are less worried about the debt levels and economy of Australia and more concerned about when hosing prices are going to become low enough that they can get into the market to purchase a property, most of them hoping for a fall in price inline with Steve’s predictions.

You can stand around as long as you like for a property to fall to 40% of it’s peak “value” if you believe that is all it is worth, that is fair enough. Doesn’t mean that it will happen, and as long as there’s the willingness of another buyer to go that 1% higher or seller unwilling to go that 1% lower you won’t have anything to show for it regardless of vendor bids.

I am only looking at things as they are, if you feel that vendor bids are unethical or that bank lending standards need further regulation your local MP would be the best point of call. I would be interested to see how people would feel if the shoe was on the other foot and they were trying to sell a property whether they would still be so opposed??

I believe Steve recently did try to sell a property unsuccessfully, perhaps he would like to comment?

Banks & Real Estate Agents are part of the Inflation Industry- they each compliment the other in forcing people to pay more than they should be. Property prices rise forced up partially by, in the past by dummy bidding, & now legitimately through vendor bids. The Banks then have been happy to approve loans (and therefore debt!) to people buying in these circumstances, thereby fulfilling the cycle of acceptance.

Some of you seem to subscribe to the view that just because such practices have occurred over the years, that somehow it shouldn’t be challenged, and that it is ok.

Of course as the market declines, such practices are going to be less likely to work, given there are less people able to afford prices, but unfortunately the die has already been set- its too late- the acceptance of these practices during the ‘good times’ have forced prices up to their unsustainable levels we have right now.

The vendor bid is the best of both worlds I think because there is transparency , if it is removed you just go back to the bad old days of dummy bidders and you may well be getting hacked even more without even knowing it.

I think you have to have a reality check and just hang in there. Either you will get what you want at the price you want eventually or you have to realise your view of house prices is the one that is incorrect and bite the bullet and pony up the difference!!

Vendors have an expectation of the price but they don’t set it!!! The buyers do!!!

arrgh duh… you can over-intellectualize all you want about debt drivers, but at the end of the day, people paying more for House-Prices than what they are genuinely worth is relevant to the debate. If an auctioneer/vendor is allowed to simply ignore what the market believes the property is worth/willing to pay and simply say- ‘well, that isn’t enough- you are simply going to have to bid or negotiate at above this amount’ – then that is artificially inflating that particular property’s price & therefore the market in general.

Australia is obsessed with auctions, so if you want to buy a property they are a little hard to avoid!

“Any manipulations are only a minor factor in the pricing of property” … auction stops at $450,000. Auctioneer says “no, we believe the property is worth more than that- we’ll make a vendor’s bid of $50,000″, someone maybe bids because they are desparate to secure a home, but its still not enough so Auctioneer announces another $50,000 Vendors bid…. And you call this behaviour a “minor factor” – I’m sure those bidding wouldn’t describe having to pay $100,000 more than should necessary (what the market thought it was worth) as “minor”

Yeah yeah I do watch it lol