Current Market Insights
The Current Market Insights Podcast is brought to you by Harris Partners Real Estate.
Understanding the property market can be a challenging thing, with highs and lows, twists and turns. The media and agents tend to spread the news they want you to hear, with the advice they want you to follow.
Current Market Insights is an unbiased look into what is happening, what tips you can use to buy, sell, or rent, and that you wont find anywhere else.
Current Market Insights
Episode 86: Rate Cuts, Wage Data, and the Next Phase of Australia’s Property Cycle
The RBA has delivered a 0.25% interest rate cut, opting for a cautious step down while acknowledging growing international risks. In this episode, Ciaran O'Brien and Peter O'Malley break down what this move signals for property buyers, investors, and the broader economy.
We examine the deteriorating labour market, wage growth dynamics, and why a global economic downturn could reshape the Australian property landscape. From Scott Pape’s warning to Westpac’s workforce cuts, we connect the dots on how this cycle might play out.
Sydney’s auction clearance rates remain stuck below 50%, the housing shortage worsens, and winter conditions start to chill market activity.
As always if there is a specific topic you would like for us to cover, please reach out and let us know!
All down, all silent, going, going, going, go on son Congratulations.
Speaker 2:Welcome to the Current Market Insights podcast brought to you by Harris Partners Real Estate. Each episode we chat with real estate author and industry leader, peter O'Malley, to discuss the current property market conditions and provide insights to assist you on your property journey.
Speaker 3:Hello and welcome to another edition of Current Market Insights. I'm your host, kieran O'Brien, and with me, as always, is Mr Peter O'Malley. Peter hello, kieran. Good evening to you. Great to see you, pete. It has been a big week. We always talk about the importance of the RBA and the rate cuts and how many of our episodes in the past couple of years have revolved around that, and we are recording this after the latest RBA announcement, and I will not be alone in being thankful that the RBA has made a positive decision, I think. But let's get a bit of a recap from yourself as to what the decision was a couple of days ago from the RBA and what they had to say about the kind of rationale and the reasoning for making that call.
Speaker 1:Yeah, thanks, kieran. Look, obviously it was a 0.25% rate cut rather than a 0.5%. But I think the bigger news was not so much the rate cut because that was universally expected. I don't think any serious commentator thought that they were going to sit on hold on Tuesday. There was an outside chance at one stage that it might have been a half a percent rate cut, but I think the wage data slightly strong pressures in the labour market meant that the RBA felt it was safer to go at 0.25 percent on Tuesday. So when you read their statement, what it's pretty clear in spelling out is that it's unlikely to be the last rate cut, though that's good and I guess, first and foremost, the 0.25 does align with your comments last week and you had said at that point.
Speaker 3:you mentioned the wage data in our last episode and said you know the result is a little bit too strong and it's unlikely they'll go to 0.5. I think you're exactly right. Most of the banks that had priced in a cut already or had made actually, you know, fixed rate changes of you know, pre-empting this call, had done so with a 0.25 in mind. Given that the wage data is strong and given that the RBA are using positive language, do you think that we are likely, or do you get the impression that we're likely, to have a cut any time soon? I know they're using quite open language. Well, it's not going to be the last.
Speaker 1:So when you say they're using positive language, positive about a rate cut.
Speaker 3:Correct, yeah.
Speaker 1:So what we've got to keep in mind I think this is really lost out there is that when the RBA, or the Central Bank of the day, are putting rates up, it's because the economy's too strong for its own good, yeah. And when they're cutting interest rates they've deemed in their statement yesterday, or in extreme cases, they're trying to basically stimulate spending, as they did in COVID.
Speaker 1:they only had three rate cuts to play with in COVID because they came into it with interest rates at a historical low anyway, and then they went to a level that no one ever imagined that they would. So what came out of the statement when you talk about employment is the rba are very, very ready to act decisively if there is an event on financial markets. It's almost like when you read this, it's almost like they're they for it. Yeah, they really are.
Speaker 1:And what's interesting I don't know if you saw the article it looks like Westpac are trying to go with a mass redundancy. They're trying to purge 5% of their workforce in the name of technology and getting costs down. So last week we were told that wage data was going up. You know that the people were looking for pay rises. Yep, and then this week in the rba statement and in westpac statement, you see that there's real pressures on the labor market, and the way I sort of summed it up in preparing for our chat tonight is australians are pushing or asking or looking for a pay rise at a time that the labour market looks to be deteriorating beneath their feet.
Speaker 3:So you have said many times in the last six months especially, that it's been a pretty tough period for small business in particular, and that's reinforced by what you're saying.
Speaker 3:The labour market is looking to offload overheads and try, and you know yeah, but westpac's not a small business, no of course they're not, but they're also uh, I mean, they have the, the flip side, where they're beholden to the shareholder and that you know they've got to maintain a certain level of profitability, etc. But we're also entering a phase of, I guess, human existence which is rapidly advancing. We're in the AI age right now and the ability and the capability of the technology is just advancing so rapidly that they're not alone Completely separate industry. But recently Duolingo, the large language app, the, the large um language app, you know, probably the most popular language app in the world uh has gone down a pathway of getting rid of all its educators and and people in favor of ai teachers only. And their argument is you know, the tech's moving so fast, it's so capable, I you know, at a time where businesses are struggling at all levels and you know you can argue, the banks certainly aren't I'm not surprised that they're cutting.
Speaker 3:But your comment about people asking for wages definitely resonates, and everyone I talk to is always saying well, we need more money. I don't understand how wages are so strong because it feels like they're not. So when we're in a scenario like this, where wages are subjectively high but they feel weak against the cost of living. How do we balance that? Because it certainly never feels like I'm earning enough or anyone's earning enough. It always feels challenging.
Speaker 1:It's a great take you've just put forward there. The only thing I would add to it is AI is deflationary.
Speaker 3:Of course yeah, Because it gets rid of costs.
Speaker 1:It gets rid of people.
Speaker 3:You could argue it doesn't get rid of all costs. You know, I think I don't know if you read the article a few weeks back from OpenAI and Sam Altman, the CEO there, said that every time people say please and thank you to chat GPT, it's costing them, you know, billions of dollars a year in just extra computing power. So it's maybe not know it may end up being more expensive, but when you think about, I guess, labor cost in the true sense it's certainly coming down.
Speaker 1:Oh, it is, yeah, I think on a net, net, um, it is, and he's obviously talking on a mass scale. So the point we made that conditions you know anecdotally because we all live in bubbles, right, but anecdotally conditions felt really, really weak through that whole election period was actually captured in the RBA statement. They said, quote unquote while a central projection is for growth in household consumption to continue and to increase as real incomes rise, recent data suggests that the pickup will be a little slower than was expected three months ago. Yeah, there is a risk that any pickup in consumption is even slower than this, resulting in continued subdued growth in aggregate demand and a sharper deterioration in the labour market than currently expected. So in this statement here, the RBA have clearly said that what we're picking up and we've discussed this before is that the uh rba's data is is next level, like they would, every digital transaction would, would be somehow noted in in all of the data that they're capturing. Um, they're, they're picking up this weakness that we were talking about in the real economy.
Speaker 3:So are they? You've used the term stagflation. Are they using sort of soft language to suggest that that's kind of? You know we're hovering around that a little bit. You know we have got these strong wages. We have got rates now having to come down. We've got, you know, the underlying inflation within target range, but certainly not ideal within the range. You know the underlying inflation at a within target range, but certainly not ideal within the range. You know it's at the top end still. Uh, do you think that they're they are describing something of a peri stagflationary kind of period, or are they not quite committing to that doom and gloom level?
Speaker 1:they're definitely not on that train, no um. So just taking a few more quotes out of their statement. They've got the subheading here maintaining low and stable inflation is the priority. The board judged that the risks to inflation have become more balanced. Inflation is in the target band and upside risks appear to have diminished as international developments are expected to weigh on the economy. That's the whole Trump tariff war situation. The board assesses that this move to cut interest rates will make monetary policy somewhat less restrictive.
Speaker 3:Yeah.
Speaker 1:So I think the RBA don't see stagflation as an issue. I think they can still control the outcome. They still believe they can control the outcome and I saw in the international press today the rba got a bit of a sort of a tick, if you like, from from abroad, from people that are watching our economy is that they have managed to bring inflation into the target band without hurting the employment market, and the article was speaking along on on Bloomberg was speaking along the lines of there could be great lessons out of this for other economies as to how the RBA achieved this.
Speaker 3:Oh, certainly, and we, or you in particular, have talked about that, how that's a risk that the RBA has had to balance all this time and they have limited levers to control inflation and to try and control, I guess, buyer sentiment at a very broad level. Discussions a few weeks ago you know it might be three to four weeks ago now he was putting pressure on jerome powell and the fed, uh, and particularly the commentary was that he was looking to get some rate cuts in the us to stimulate just a greater economy and you know all part of his great tariff. You know reformation make america great kind of campaign. There seems to have been a bit of stagflation in that discussion. Given that you know, pow back a little bit. Do you think that, with what's happening with the tariffs, and the pause.
Speaker 1:Powell pushed back emphatically.
Speaker 3:No, of course, but do you think that that's the end of that discussion or do you think that Trump is likely to re-attack this? And I only ask because let's go back six or eight or 12 months potentially, where we spoke at length about Jerome Powell and the Fed's rate decisions having an impact here, given that we've got a tariff pause and we've got tariffs broadly hanging over the global economy, we've got a bunch of wars in some pretty critical areas and we have pressure from a sitting president to just knock the rates down, do you think that that is likely to become a factor that impacts us in the next six to 12 months?
Speaker 1:What will become a factor that impacts us in the next six to 12 months? What will become a factor?
Speaker 3:If Trump gets his way and manages to get the interest rates cut quite aggressively in the US as part of an economic boom, I guess.
Speaker 1:Look, I think the only way he would get the rates cut aggressively is if he does blast Jerome Powell out. So to answer your first call, do I think Donald Trump will give up on trying to get rates down?
Speaker 3:I know the answer to that.
Speaker 2:Thanks for shaking your head because it doesn't need to be asked.
Speaker 1:Donald Trump, wrongly or rightly, doesn't give up on anything that he wants. So he's clearly on a collision path with old mate Jerome. But Jerome's tenure is assured until 2026. And I've read from Republicans that are pro-Trump that have said he's not moving this guy so he might put maximum pressure on him and, you know, call him names like he did the other week. He called him a fool for not cutting interest rates. But in economic theorem Jerome Powell is right.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:Their inflation is trending up and commentators that I like that are not beholden to vested interest, just call it as it is. They see a case where a rate rise is brewing in America.
Speaker 3:Yeah, which I just can't envisage Trump's reaction to that, to be honest, he's talking the exact opposite. That's right.
Speaker 1:Yeah, you could only imagine the meltdown that would occur if that took place, and he should be grateful that Jerome Powell is neither increasing rates or decreasing them, but he's just letting the status quo brew, even though the data is stacking up against Jerome Powell and just a quick question there.
Speaker 3:I don't know if you know the answer to this, but it's something I haven't given much thought to until really considering this. But given the tariffs and the increased cost of goods coming into the US, do they factor into the US's inflationary basket? Because the cost of goods is rising under the tariff model? I would assume that it does contribute to you contribute to inflation. Yeah, if everyone's putting their prices up yeah.
Speaker 3:Which they certainly are. So I wonder, given the tariffs are designed to make America great and time will tell whether or not they have the intended outcome in the short term, surely there is a large inflationary boom coming in just consumer goods alone, if nothing else in the US off the back of this.
Speaker 1:Well, everyone will do modelling, but, as we've always said, when you change the rules, you change the consumer behaviour, so you get a whole new set of outcomes. And one of the things that I don't like about models is they keep things constant on the one hand, but then fiddle with the dial on the other to see how much money they'll take, like the federal government's proposed tax on unrealised gains. Yeah Well, that's going to have unintended consequences across the board, and I don't pretend to be an expert in all of this space, but I've just been watching political moves over my 25 years in business, and politicians always think they can fiddle with things in isolation and nothing will happen to the system at large.
Speaker 3:Well, I think they always. My take is they always look at the end column on the spreadsheet and they don't look at the 100 columns that make up the end, Correct? And they say well, there's a reduction, but it doesn't matter. That wipes out all of these critical services or all of these people, or you know, whatever it might be.
Speaker 1:Yeah. So you change the rules, you change the behaviours. Therefore you change the model and the outcome. So I don't think anybody really knows, a, what the final position of all of these tariffs will be and, b, how it'll look when it all plays through. We go back to the RBA statement, though. That says, quote the board considered a severe downside scenario and noted that monetary policy is well placed to respond decisively to international developments if they were to have material implications for activity and inflation in Australia. So Michelle Bullock's essentially saying there we've got scope to cut aggressively, if that's what we needed to do, because things derailed.
Speaker 3:And, as you say, they've got so much access to data they're going to see it coming long before we do anyway.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and it's the second month in a row. In their statement it was not in a month, because they meet every six weeks. I should say it's the second meeting in a row where this type of dialogue has been used.
Speaker 3:Yeah.
Speaker 1:And I remember in 2007, as the Liberal government were going out, and in 2006, peter Costello let people sell a property and put the proceeds tax-free into their super and then, 12 months later, in the 2007 election, when he was talking about an issue totally unrelated to that, he said you need to re-elect the Liberal government because a financial tsunami is going to come across global markets very soon. So everyone likes all these commentators on social media say I'm the one that picked the subprime crisis in America. I'm the one that picked the meltdown in 2008. Maybe they were in the space, maybe they weren't, but what I got, the distinct impression of the time, is that people that knew really knew, that markets were heading for a severe storm. And it's just interesting that in the last two statements, when there's no actual evidence for us out there in the real economy that it's going this way, michelle Bullock is warning that we are well placed to prepare and respond decisively to a major event on international markets.
Speaker 3:Yeah, certainly, when you take it in full context, it does show that they are. You know, obviously they're following what's going on, but they're clearly they're modelling and they're running out the data and trying to figure out. You know how do we position ourselves?
Speaker 1:to respond quickly, which is, I think, it's quite reaffirming this statement that we're looking at. It's what is it? Let's call it. It's 200 words, 250 words maybe, and it's taken them two days to write. There's no loose words in here.
Speaker 1:Yeah, of course of course, and she says says the board considered a severe downside scenario and noted that monetary policy is well placed to respond decisively to international developments. That's effectively been in the last two statements. So, um, for someone that's uh using immense word economy, some of the best business minds in the country are sitting around the table with uh crafting this statement. They felt the need to put that out there twice.
Speaker 3:No, look, certainly important, and the language does show that they are working towards something Everyone knows, just quickly commenting on your subprime mortgage crisis, that everyone knows that Christian Bale predicted the fall of the housing market in the US. Oh, that's who it was. It was Christian Bale, although for those, the housing market in the US, oh that's who it was.
Speaker 2:It was Christian Bale.
Speaker 3:Although, for those who haven't seen the big short, it was Michael Burry was the first. Well, he's the one depicted, but interestingly, he's the one who profited. Well, yeah, he profited by predicting, I think is the argument. But interestingly, I only read yesterday and I don't know, I can't confirm this source but he, as of yesterday, offloaded his entire holdings in the US stock market as well, interestingly.
Speaker 1:We don't know if he did, based on what you've just said. It's not confirmed. What we do know is Buffett Did offload Is essentially nearly all in cash.
Speaker 3:Yeah, which I mean. If there's ever an oracle in the stock market, it's Warren Buffett, that's for sure.
Speaker 1:That's right.
Speaker 3:All right, peter, moving on as we sort of wrap up the rest of the episode tonight, we've got a couple more things I want to talk through.
Speaker 3:Off the back of the rate decision from the RBA and the back of the recent election, scott Pape, who is a I guess guess you call him a financial commentator the barefoot investor, better known as the barefoot investor to many australians who picked up his book during covet which I think was a boom time for him he made some comments in his email newsletter that went out on the 19th that indicated that australians, particularly young aust Australians, should be really unhappy with the rate cut and he said you know, whilst some people are going to have a great time off the back of it, everyone else you know in loose language should be upset. Now, he's someone who is considered financially responsible and a good guide and an oracle for people trying to, you know, begin their financial security journey. I guess he's a bit of a shaman. What do you make of his statements and do you think that he has any real basis or is he maybe grandstanding for a bit of speculation and show?
Speaker 1:Look, scott doesn't grandstand. That's not his style, I can assure you of that. He's a great guy. Probably don't quite take the same view of how his comments were characterised. So the heading says Pissed Barefoot investor takes aim at RBA amid predictions housing prices set to soar after rate cuts is set to soar after rate cuts, and what Scott then says in the article is that young people have every right to be pissed off, because every time they get close to being able to afford a property, it's like the deck is then reset against them, stacked against them, and the house that they're saving hard for becomes elusive, and the house that they're saving hard for becomes elusive.
Speaker 1:Scott would know that the RBA has to make an interest rate decision on a whole range of factors, not just house prices. And what I think Scott and I won't speak for Scott but what I think he's most pissed off about, using his words was the incentive to young people to be able to buy property from the federal government at a time that immigration is still too high and construction is too low, if not non-existent. So all that Scott is seeing and he's seeing what we're all seeing, and it's not articulated in this article is the government at all levels is continuing to fuel the demand side of housing and it's doing nothing. It's talking a lot but it's doing nothing to deliver on the supply side.
Speaker 3:Yeah, I'm glad you came around to that, because one of the comments in his newsletter is that you know Albanese charmers and the crew. They all know what's going on? Of course they do, and they knew that we were. Well, he, I guess, intimates that they knew all about the cost crisis. We all do. You know. We talk about it all the time. They know there's an undersupply, they know there's an immigration issue. They know all these factors, yet they still implement these policies because they're great soundbites on the news and they're great pre-election campaign promises. Knowing that, you know and we've said this in different contexts before every time some kind of government or federal political policy changes in housing, someone wins and usually the first home and new entrance and all those kinds of buyers end up losing because the goalpost shifts a little bit every time.
Speaker 1:Oh, it's not. If I can give our listeners a local example that sums up how hideous all of this is, yeah, yeah, chris Minns did a big post this week. Your mate, your mate. He did a big post this week, regardless of whose mate he is, about the Tigers Leagues Club. Yeah, they're finally getting the go-ahead and part of the development consent is they have 59 apartments set aside for affordable housing. I saw that. Yeah, now, when you average and probably a complex like that where Tigers will be and what the design is it probably wouldn't be 2.5% persons per dwelling, but that's the average.
Speaker 1:That's when you're trying to work out the average dwellings per person across the country. That's what it works out at. That's a site that's been a potential site since, I think, 2011.
Speaker 3:Long time, Long long time it's been abandoned for, yeah, however long.
Speaker 1:We are in 2025 as we record this If someone's listening to it well into the future, wondering what the time frame is. So it's it's been a potential site for 14 years and we've got the premier of the state taking a bow because he's found housing for 130 people yeah at a time that the country's let a million people in over the last two years.
Speaker 3:And I hate to say it, but in a location where public transport leaves a lot to be desired. Balmain is not great, and you know I'm just nitpicking a little bit, but I mean excluding the fact that you know this is the last 14 years that could have been utilised for however many people in however design they chose. It's also not a great like. Anyway, I'm not even going to go down that path, chris.
Speaker 1:Minns is not the person to blame for the property sitting there as a redundant site for the last 13 or 14 years, whatever it might be. But you see the hideousness of it all. So bad I can only laugh that you've got the Premier of the state. So bad. I can only laugh that you've got the Premier of the state taking a bow because he's created housing for what's 59 times 2.5?.
Speaker 1:As you said, 130-odd 130-odd people at a time where we are flooded in Sydney with hundreds of thousands of people every year. Now it's not the only development that's been approved, but they are so far off target with housing. The new arrivals that have come to the country never mind that are still coming that. That is why Scott Pape is pissed.
Speaker 3:Yeah, it's also. I mean, what an indictment on the Premier's kind of recent timeframe that that's the victory he wants to announce because there's just nothing else going right for him. Well, he's making terrible decisions.
Speaker 1:I think Well, as we speak tonight, sydney trains oh don't even talk to me about that.
Speaker 3:Yeah, yesterday the wires came off. It was only a couple of weeks ago. I catch the train to Strathfield from the city often and it was only a couple of weeks ago. The trains completely stopped. Maybe two weeks ago. Yesterday they were stopped for half a day hours. It took me almost two hours to drive from the city to my place and then again today out again. Like it's ridiculous. It happens all the time and there's zero contingency in place ever, which is, I mean even this morning. My wife sent me a message and said there are people lined up 200 deep to catch a bus near our house because there's obviously no trains and you know there's one bus every 25 minutes or something. It's ridiculous.
Speaker 1:So the city is bursting at the seams. Yeah, and I can't say I heard the whole quote or the the whole story, but I did hear a snippet of chris minns the other day, who is not to blame for any of these uh issues, by the way, he's just the premier of the day yeah, but he has the ability to uh, you know, he has the authority and the ability to negotiate and to ensure that those agencies and, you know, organisations that he puts in place, particularly public infrastructure, are managed accordingly.
Speaker 3:I know that he's not running transport, but it's his responsibility at the end of the day. Like I disagree, oh, it's his responsibility. Yeah, he's got to make sure it works properly, it's his responsibility.
Speaker 1:But I'm just saying these are legacy issues and it's all unfolding on his watch. But anyway, I heard him the other day say on the news that he's not going to cancel any transport infrastructure because they're saying to him there's a lack of tradies in the city, which there is. Anyone who's tried to get any works done around the house knows exactly. There's a lack of tradies available at the moment and the view is that they're being mopped up and absorbed by the infrastructure with the transport. And they're saying, hey, mr Min's, back off on the transport infrastructure so we can get them to start building houses.
Speaker 1:And he said point blank, which you know he gets a lot of points for being very frank, chris Minns. He said look, labor has a reputation for starting and not finishing transport infrastructure. I'm not backing off on anything to do with transport infrastructure because I want to see a Labor project through to completion. So he's looking at his legacy, which is fair enough. He's looking at his ability to get things done, which is probably halfway through his term. And it's not that the former liberal government had a great um resume at the halfway point of their first term, but people remember what the former liberal government delivered by the end of their tenure. And, as you've alluded to there, with with chris minns, his achievement list is a little bit skinny at the moment.
Speaker 3:Oh, and the yeah, yeah, we've talked about him in the past. The government is facing heat from a whole range of directions, not least of which is housing. Let's not spend any more time on politics, because I know many, many people don't want to talk about it. Religion and politics we're not to talk of those things. But as we wrap, up tonight.
Speaker 1:We got a new Pope recently.
Speaker 3:We did get a new Pope an American, I must admit. I love that. He is a Chicago White Sox fan. He's a baseball man and I do love this is so benign, but I love that after his inaugural mass he walked out and gave his brother a big hug, which I thought was nice. I mean, it sounds silly, but I've never viewed Popes as people in that sense, you know, they just seem like they're kind of beyond that and they don't engage with the normal man again. But it was quite refreshing to see him just walk through the crowd and grab his brother and give him a big hug.
Speaker 3:So as we wrap up then, peter, I would love to just get a quick market recap for this week. It's been pretty dire over the last few weeks Well, last 12 months almost, but last few weeks as well it's stayed below 50%. The clearance rates and you've talked about how you know stock levels have maintained a pretty level value, but how there have been some shifts and we were, you know, anticipating or maybe waiting to see what the RBA were going to do, to see if that did actually stimulate any further activity in the market.
Speaker 1:Yeah, look. So last week, 756 auctions scheduled with a clearance rate of 48%, 167 sold prior, 196 under the hammer, 29 sold afterwards. So look, still stuck below that 50% level. It'll be interesting to see if this one rate cut, one additional rate cut, but this one rate cut, one you know additional rate cut, but this one rate cut in and of itself is enough to lift the clearance rate above 50 in weeks to come.
Speaker 1:We haven't, we actually did. Just when they cut rates in february, we actually did detect a slight uptick in buyer enthusiasm almost immediately. Yep, and I had a journalist ask me, not on air or anything, but just off the record why are people so interested in this? Why is this such a big story? I'm trying to get a feel for the newsworthiness of it and I said it's not the fact that they cut interest rates by 0.25% in February, it's that it actually signalled emphatically through action, through policy, that the end of the rate hikes is over and we're now in a downward cycle.
Speaker 1:So subsequent cuts in interest rates will not garner the same interest as what the February one did, because that was significant after 13 rate hikes in a row spread over two and a half years, to then see it cut. In February it was. It was big news to officially signify a new cycle had begun and that cycle was, you know, solidified this week when they cut again. But it didn't, you know it carried press but it didn't carry enormous coverage like like the February one did, because it's just another rate cut and the RBA flagged there's more coming. So it will be interesting to see the buyer reaction. But I would say 24, 48 hours on the reaction from buyers is more subdued about this rate cut than the February one about this rate cut than the February one.
Speaker 3:Yeah well, as you said, throughout all of the rate rises in this period of you know, uncertainty that we wouldn't necessarily know the terminal rate until it turned the corner. And you say that about property cycles. You know you don't know the top until it drops, and that kind of thing. And it makes sense. You know people use a racing analogy. It's more interesting when someone crosses the chequered flag than when they just make a turn and that's, you know. This next one is just another turn on this journey and you know, next time we cross through the checkered flag it might be a rate rise, or you know who knows where we'll end up in the next cycle.
Speaker 3:The only, uh, interesting numbers from the market wrap. I'm not surprised we're still below 50. What? The only thing that stood out to me and I'm not sure if, uh if, it did to you is, is that out of the last four weeks anyway, this is the lowest number of auctions. The first time I've heard it under 800. Not substantially so, but do you think any of that could be as a result of people just waiting for this week to see what might happen with rates?
Speaker 1:Look good question and the answer is probably not Okay. And the reason I say that is I think this is seasonal and I've spoken to a few solicitors. They said are you preparing many contracts for sale? It's gone dead on the solicitors Because what can happen again? We all live in bubbles. It's like, hey, stock's really tightening. Is it us or is this across the board? So you speak to the lawyers it's like mate, how are you going for preparing new contracts and new matters? It's really tight. No, no, it's tightened up right through May, after Easter. So I think there'll be the traditional spring selling season, but I think buyers and sellers, particularly with the weather we've been having in Sydney, it's cold, it's cold, and wet and it just doesn't feel like it's going away.
Speaker 1:Right, it's probably the biggest weather cell that we've seen since those rains in 2022, which were next level. That was like three, four months of continual rain. But look this, this, this weather in sydney's been set in and, as we know when we're driving our vehicle around town, sydney doesn't do rain real well no, no, and I I was going to make that comment.
Speaker 3:It certainly feels like at least in the last week it's cold. For the first time.
Speaker 1:We've had the rain now pretty consistently for a while monday night yeah it's.
Speaker 3:It's just felt nippy I. I love the cold personally, but even I've kind of, you know, started to get the jumpers out of the cupboard. There. Things are getting ready, so I'm not entirely surprised. Look, um, really really great discussion, peter. A lot to talk about when the RBA do make their statements. I know that in the coming weeks there's going to be some interesting activity across the market. As you say, I'm always. I'd love to next week. I really would love to get your thoughts on what's happening in the rental space, particularly because we do know that winter is a slowish time typically, but we did talk a few weeks ago about how activity was still pretty strong and prices were high. So plenty to talk about in the coming weeks. But, as always, I thank you for coming in today.
Speaker 1:All the best. Thanks, Kieran.
Speaker 3:Thanks, Peter, and thanks to everyone for listening to Current Market Insights. We look forward to speaking with you next time.
Speaker 2:Thanks for joining us on the Current Market Insights podcast brought to you by Harris Partners Real Estate, the podcast providing real estate insights you won't find anywhere else.
