Latest news with #REA
Sydney Morning Herald
6 days ago
- Business
- Sydney Morning Herald
House sellers are being ripped off – and the ACCC is onto it
Real estate listings companies like the Murdoch-controlled property portal REA Group are making off like bandits with claims that advertising rates are rising by 10 per cent or more a year – an amount that house sellers ultimately bear. In response, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has begun sniffing around, using its investigative powers to gather information. Real estate agents and vendors ultimately pay for what has been described variously as profiteering, or price gouging. And it now appears they have become involved in a concerted effort to push back. Using a digital property classified advertising business can now be so expensive that people selling their house have needed to find temporary finance to pay this cost, which they ultimately repay when the home is sold. There are two large real estate advertising businesses in Australia – REA and Domain. The latter is 60 per cent owned by Nine Entertainment, which also owns this masthead, and is in the process of selling it to US digital real estate listings giant CoStar Group. But there is a yawning gap between the dominant REA and the much smaller Domain – so much so that the property industry sees REA as a monopoly dressed up in duopoly clothing. There is a yawning gap between the dominant REA and the much smaller Domain – so much so that the property industry sees REA as a monopoly dressed up in duopoly clothing. Real estate agents admit that the advertising prices charged by both groups are roughly similar, but the brunt of the pricing anger is directed at REA as the market leader. The two companies' respective market shares, levels of profitability and sharemarket values are poles apart. By way of illustration, REA – controlled by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp – boasts a market capitalisation of more than $32 billion, while Domain is valued at less than one-tenth of that.
The Age
6 days ago
- Business
- The Age
House sellers are being ripped off – and the ACCC is onto it
Real estate listings companies like the Murdoch-controlled property portal REA Group are making off like bandits with claims that advertising rates are rising by 10 per cent or more a year – an amount that house sellers ultimately bear. In response, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has begun sniffing around, using its investigative powers to gather information. Real estate agents and vendors ultimately pay for what has been described variously as profiteering, or price gouging. And it now appears they have become involved in a concerted effort to push back. Using a digital property classified advertising business can now be so expensive that people selling their house have needed to find temporary finance to pay this cost, which they ultimately repay when the home is sold. There are two large real estate advertising businesses in Australia – REA and Domain. The latter is 60 per cent owned by Nine Entertainment, which also owns this masthead, and is in the process of selling it to US digital real estate listings giant CoStar Group. But there is a yawning gap between the dominant REA and the much smaller Domain – so much so that the property industry sees REA as a monopoly dressed up in duopoly clothing. There is a yawning gap between the dominant REA and the much smaller Domain – so much so that the property industry sees REA as a monopoly dressed up in duopoly clothing. Real estate agents admit that the advertising prices charged by both groups are roughly similar, but the brunt of the pricing anger is directed at REA as the market leader. The two companies' respective market shares, levels of profitability and sharemarket values are poles apart. By way of illustration, REA – controlled by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp – boasts a market capitalisation of more than $32 billion, while Domain is valued at less than one-tenth of that.
The Age
7 days ago
- Business
- The Age
House sellers are being ripped off, and the ACCC is onto it
Real estate listings companies like the Murdoch-controlled property portal REA Group are making off like bandits with claims that advertising rates are rising by 10 per cent or more a year – an amount that house sellers ultimately bear. In response, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has begun sniffing around, using its investigative powers to gather information. Real estate agents and vendors ultimately pay for what has been described variously as profiteering, or price gouging. And it now appears they have become involved in a concerted effort to push back. Using a digital property classified advertising business can now be so expensive that people selling their house have needed to find temporary finance to pay this cost, which they ultimately repay when the home is sold. There are two large real estate advertising businesses in Australia – REA and Domain. The latter is 60 per cent owned by Nine Entertainment, which also owns this masthead, and is in the process of selling it to US digital real estate listings giant CoStar Group. But there is a yawning gap between the dominant REA and the much smaller Domain – so much so that the property industry sees REA as a monopoly dressed up in duopoly clothing. There is a yawning gap between the dominant REA and the much smaller Domain – so much so that the property industry sees REA as a monopoly dressed up in duopoly clothing. Real estate agents admit that the advertising prices charged by both groups are roughly similar, but the brunt of the pricing anger is directed at REA as the market leader. The two companies' respective market shares, levels of profitability and sharemarket values are poles apart. By way of illustration, REA – controlled by Rupert Murdoch's News Ltd – boasts a market capitalisation of more than $32 billion, while Domain is valued at less than one-tenth of that.
Sydney Morning Herald
7 days ago
- Business
- Sydney Morning Herald
House sellers are being ripped off, and the ACCC is onto it
Real estate listings companies like the Murdoch-controlled property portal REA Group are making off like bandits with claims that advertising rates are rising by 10 per cent or more a year – an amount that house sellers ultimately bear. In response, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has begun sniffing around, using its investigative powers to gather information. Real estate agents and vendors ultimately pay for what has been described variously as profiteering, or price gouging. And it now appears they have become involved in a concerted effort to push back. Using a digital property classified advertising business can now be so expensive that people selling their house have needed to find temporary finance to pay this cost, which they ultimately repay when the home is sold. There are two large real estate advertising businesses in Australia – REA and Domain. The latter is 60 per cent owned by Nine Entertainment, which also owns this masthead, and is in the process of selling it to US digital real estate listings giant CoStar Group. But there is a yawning gap between the dominant REA and the much smaller Domain – so much so that the property industry sees REA as a monopoly dressed up in duopoly clothing. There is a yawning gap between the dominant REA and the much smaller Domain – so much so that the property industry sees REA as a monopoly dressed up in duopoly clothing. Real estate agents admit that the advertising prices charged by both groups are roughly similar, but the brunt of the pricing anger is directed at REA as the market leader. The two companies' respective market shares, levels of profitability and sharemarket values are poles apart. By way of illustration, REA – controlled by Rupert Murdoch's News Ltd – boasts a market capitalisation of more than $32 billion, while Domain is valued at less than one-tenth of that.
Yahoo
25-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
REA Group Limited's (ASX:REA) Stock Has Fared Decently: Is the Market Following Strong Financials?
Most readers would already know that REA Group's (ASX:REA) stock increased by 8.0% over the past three months. Since the market usually pay for a company's long-term financial health, we decided to study the company's fundamentals to see if they could be influencing the market. In this article, we decided to focus on REA Group's ROE. Return on Equity or ROE is a test of how effectively a company is growing its value and managing investors' money. In simpler terms, it measures the profitability of a company in relation to shareholder's equity. We've found 21 US stocks that are forecast to pay a dividend yield of over 6% next year. See the full list for free. ROE can be calculated by using the formula: Return on Equity = Net Profit (from continuing operations) ÷ Shareholders' Equity So, based on the above formula, the ROE for REA Group is: 32% = AU$608m ÷ AU$1.9b (Based on the trailing twelve months to December 2024). The 'return' is the income the business earned over the last year. One way to conceptualize this is that for each A$1 of shareholders' capital it has, the company made A$0.32 in profit. Check out our latest analysis for REA Group We have already established that ROE serves as an efficient profit-generating gauge for a company's future earnings. Based on how much of its profits the company chooses to reinvest or "retain", we are then able to evaluate a company's future ability to generate profits. Assuming all else is equal, companies that have both a higher return on equity and higher profit retention are usually the ones that have a higher growth rate when compared to companies that don't have the same features. Firstly, we acknowledge that REA Group has a significantly high ROE. Additionally, the company's ROE is higher compared to the industry average of 8.6% which is quite remarkable. This likely paved the way for the modest 17% net income growth seen by REA Group over the past five years. As a next step, we compared REA Group's net income growth with the industry and found that the company has a similar growth figure when compared with the industry average growth rate of 18% in the same period. The basis for attaching value to a company is, to a great extent, tied to its earnings growth. What investors need to determine next is if the expected earnings growth, or the lack of it, is already built into the share price. By doing so, they will have an idea if the stock is headed into clear blue waters or if swampy waters await. One good indicator of expected earnings growth is the P/E ratio which determines the price the market is willing to pay for a stock based on its earnings prospects. So, you may want to check if REA Group is trading on a high P/E or a low P/E, relative to its industry. The high three-year median payout ratio of 59% (or a retention ratio of 41%) for REA Group suggests that the company's growth wasn't really hampered despite it returning most of its income to its shareholders. Besides, REA Group has been paying dividends for at least ten years or more. This shows that the company is committed to sharing profits with its shareholders. Based on the latest analysts' estimates, we found that the company's future payout ratio over the next three years is expected to hold steady at 57%. Accordingly, forecasts suggest that REA Group's future ROE will be 32% which is again, similar to the current ROE. On the whole, we feel that REA Group's performance has been quite good. Especially the high ROE, Which has contributed to the impressive growth seen in earnings. Despite the company reinvesting only a small portion of its profits, it still has managed to grow its earnings so that is appreciable. With that said, the latest industry analyst forecasts reveal that the company's earnings growth is expected to slow down. To know more about the company's future earnings growth forecasts take a look at this free report on analyst forecasts for the company to find out more. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
