Is it worth using a real estate agent?
Photo:
123rf.com
You might pay a real estate agent $30,000 or more to sell your home. But is it worth it?
Analysis by property data firm Cotality suggests it might be.
Each year, a small number of people opt to sell their homes privately - from a low of 3.1 percent in 2021 to 8 percent in 2016. Last year, it was 7.6 percent.
But Cotality head of research Nick Goodall said agents seemed to sell properties more quickly and effectively.
"The sales success rate is higher for agent sales - by an average of 11.5 percent over the 10 year period."
Roughly 76 percent of agent-listed properties in the past 10 years were successfully sold, compared to 65.1 percent of privately listed properties.
Last year 65 percent of agent listed properties sold, compared to 52.8 percent for private sales.
Goodall said real estate salespeople would often have an understanding of which buyers might be in the market for a particular property and could target them more effectively than a private seller might.
"The typical days on market for agent sales is also most often shorter. In 2021 - the market peak - the median days on market for agent sales was 24, while it was 40 for private sales. Interestingly last year was the one year to buck that trend, with agent sales taking a median of 75 days, compared to 71 days for private."
He said the median sales price for properties sold by agents was higher, too, but that could reflect a different mix of properties being sold.
"Vendors may be more likely to sell their property privately when it's a lower value property, whereas owners of more expensive property might be more likely to use an agent."
He said last year's higher rate of private sales could reflect vendors being aware that prices were not strong and looking to save money where they could.
"Nonetheless, for the record, the median sales price of properties sold by agents this year is $740,000, compared to $662,500 for private sales. Last year the respective figures were $735,000 for agents and $704,000 for private."
Goodall said the data was not definitive enough to say whether agents were delivering enough extra value to pay their commission. At Barfoot & Thompson, for example, a $750,000 sale would incur $23,978 in commission. A $1 million sale would mean just under $30,000.
"The figure for this year is almost $100,000 so I'd say that would justify it if it was like-for-like properties. But the year before was closer so you might be sort of borderline there."
Goodall said people selling privately would also need to account for the time they would need to spend on the process.
"Having to take time off work or the opportunity cost or what else you could be doing if you have to spend all that time preparing to sell a property on your own, you know that might bring the calculation a little bit closer as well."
Real estate agent Brooke Gibson said she could understand why people would sell privately. She did it herself before she entered the industry.
But she said she could see that agents would add value for most people, particularly when it came to negotiating.
"You could actually easily kill the deal because you know, if someone comes up to you and you're opening up your house to them and they go 'how much do you want?' and you say $1 million and he thinks it's worth $700,000 for example, he's going to be like 'nah not interested."
Wellington salesperson Mike Robbers agreed. He said agents would also often present properties a bit better than private sellers would, with professional photography and home staging.
"Private sellers often start out with a very high price in mind, then reduce it over time when there's no interest, but by then the listing has gone 'cold'. Agents tend to use their market knowledge to get the pricing strategy right from the outset, so the listing doesn't sit as long on the market."
He said some buyers also expected to pay less for a private sale because the seller did not have to cover commission.
Real Estate Authority chief executive Belinda Moffat said whether it was better to sell privately or through an agency would depend on the seller's specific circumstances, the property itself and the seller's knowledge and experience.
"Licensed real estate professionals are trained and experienced in working on behalf of homeowners to help them navigate property transactions with confidence and are legally required to seek the best outcome for their client."
She said all real estate salespeople were required to follow the standards in the Code of Professional Conduct and Client Care and meet their obligations under the Real Estate Agents Act 2008.
"If a person works with a licensed real estate professional, and an issue arises with their professional conduct, the person has the option to make a formal complaint to REA and/or to raise the issue with their agency."
Agents should provide a current market appraisal (CMA) of what a property might sell for before they signed an agency agreement.
"(CMA) of what they think the property might sell for before the seller signs an agency agreement. The CMA must be informed by comparable recent sales in the area and can be helpful in understanding what the property may be worth. They will also prepare a proposed marketing plan which the seller can discuss, amend and agree to.
"They also understand and can advise on the important legal disclosure obligations a seller has when selling a property, including in relation to defects and unconsented alterations. If a seller knowingly fails to disclose relevant information to buyers, they could be in breach of the terms of their agreement with any buyer, meaning the sale could fall over or the buyer could seek compensation and take court action."
She said vendors might be able to negotiate commission.
People choosing to sell privately should research the process so they understood what was require, she said.
Moffat said confidence in the industry had lifted from 70 percent in 2021 to 82 percent last year.
Goodall said there was demand for property but there remained high numbers of listings.
"I think if you're willing to be very, very flexible on that price then it's probably not that difficult to get a sale, but it's all about you know, your expectation, what you want to do, if you're buying in the same market, if you're moving elsewhere..."
He said some people were still hung up on the prices being paid at the peak of the market and were finding it hard to adjust their expectations.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Online casino bill: Greens vote with coalition govt to pass first reading
The bill introduces 15 licences for online casinos, which would require companies to provide a harm prevention strategy. File photo. Photo: 123RF The Greens have broken with their opposition party colleagues to vote in support of the coalition's online casino bill. The law change, which aims to protect online gamblers, has passed its first reading 83 to 39 in a conscience vote at Parliament, with the Green' support. The bill was introduced by Internal Affairs Minister Brooke van Velden and would introduce 15 licences for online casinos, which would require companies to provide a harm prevention strategy and data showing past compliance. Online casinos would need an age verification system to ban under-18s, contribute 1.24 percent of profits to a levy, and abide by advertising restrictions. Companies breaking the rules would face fines of up to $5m. The minister has said New Zealand-based online casinos would get no preferential treatment in obtaining licences. Van Velden in a statement said the bill would seek to protect New Zealanders who gambled online, and the bill would impose regulations on the currently unregulated market. "The most important part of this bill is protecting New Zealanders who enjoy gambling online by introducing robust safety measures for licensed operators. The bill will now proceed to select committee, and I would encourage interested New Zealanders to have their say when public submissions open," van Velden said. In the first reading vote in Parliament on Tuesday, all MPs voted along party lines, with the coalition parties all in support. Labour and Te Pāti Māori voted against the bill, but all 14 Green MPs voted in support. The Greens' internal affairs spokesperson Benjamin Doyle told RNZ the party wanted to bring the issue to select committee with the aim of convincing the coalition parties to make significant changes. "We always want to support movements towards harm reduction. So with online gambling, it's totally unregulated at the moment, and we see this as a very small step in the right direction to enact harm reduction techniques," they said. "It's definitely not far enough, but we believe that going to select committee to hear from experts, community, people with lived experience of online gambling harm, and advocacy groups may be able to help us to inform changes and amendments and improvements to this legislation that will actually enact harm reduction." However, the Problem Gambling Foundation has raised concerns about the approach. Advocacy and public health director Andree Froude said she feared usage of online gambling would increase, rather than decrease. Froude called for changes including making requiring online gamblers to say how much money and time they would spend gambling before starting a session, and a ban on online gambling using credit cards which could leave them deep in debt. The funding from the levy would go into the problem gambling levy pot of funding. The independent Gambling Commission in a report this year highlighted the Ministry of Health had been unable to find evidence showing that $81m fund actually reduced harm. Doyle said the Greens wanted to ensure 100 percent of the funding recouped from the moves would go back to harm reduction. "There needs to be extremely high levels of transparency around where that funding is going, that revenue is going, and my ideal would be that 100 percent of the revenue goes towards community harm reduction... it shouldn't be going towards the back pockets." They also wanted a ban on advertising for online gambling, and possibly a reduction in the number of licences. The party had not yet approached the coalition parties to see what kind of support they could get for the changes, they said - and called for more consultation with Māori. "The value mai i te kākano 'from the very seed' is the best approach when engaging with Māori. We should be engaging right from the beginning of drafting this piece of legislation." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Labour and Te Pāti Māori miss deadline for financial statements
Labour and Te Pāti Māori's statements were due at the end of the financial year on 30 June. File photo. Photo: RNZ / REECE BAKER Labour and Te Pāti Māori have both been late in filing audited financial statements to the Electoral Commission. It is another strike for Te Pāti Māori, although the Electoral Commission says the party has assured them this year's and last year's statements will be filed together soon. Labour has filed its financial statements - but not an audit. Their statements were due at the end of the financial year on 30 June. All other parties with that due date - including ACT and National - have filed their financial statements. Electoral Commission manager of legal, regulation and policy Kristina Temel said the commission was continuing to follow up with both parties. "Labour has not filed an audit report for its financial statements. The party contacted us before 30 June to advise that its audit report is taking longer than expected and at this stage we are satisfied with the reasons they and their auditor have given," Temel said. Labour general secretary Rob Salmond said the party was "continuing to work with our audit partners as we transition to a new set of accounting practices" and was "in the late stages of this process". Temel said Te Pāti Māori had not yet filed an audit report, or financial statements "but has told the commission they are being prepared and will be filed soon". "They have also informed us that the outstanding audit report for last year's financial statements will be filed at the same time." As incorporated societies, Labour and Te Pāti Māori are the only parties required to have their financial statements audited under changes to the Electoral Act passed in 2022. Several other parties - including the Greens and NZ First - have a reporting date at the end of September. Police previously issued a formal warning to Te Pāti Māori over the failure to file a complete and audited 2023 financial statement on time. The commission said no decisions had yet been made on whether to refer any of Te Pāti Māori's leadership to police over this year's statements but noted that "under section 210J of the Electoral Act, it is an offence for a party secretary to file a financial statement late or fail to file a financial statement without reasonable excuse". Te Pāti Māori president John Tamihere declined to comment. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Work: What's in the Employment Relations Amendment Bill
Workers earning over $180k won't be able to pursue an 'unjustified dismissal' under the new legislation. Photo: 123RF Law commentator Charles McGuinness, of McGuinness Employment Law based in Wellington joins Kathryn to discuss what's in the Employment Relations Amendment Bill that's been introduced to Parliament. Charles McGuinness is an employment lawyer in Wellington