ALLSOP Property Auction

Property Man

At Allsop Property Auctions the seller, the sellers agent, or the auctioneer is allowed to bid for the property when such a bid is below the secret reserve price.

It works like this. The property is advertised with a published maximum reserve price. The seller sets a reserve price in private with the auctioneer, and no one else knows what this figure is, but it must be below or equal to the published maximum reserve price.

If a buyer places a bid below the published maximum reserve price (which happens all the time) he might be bidding against the seller. The only reason I can think of for such a term in the auctioneers conditions is to get as much as possible out of a potential buyer, even if there is only one real buyer in the room.

Tell you friends to take care

Property Man

Pablo Sanchez

Property Man wrote: »

The only reason I can think of for such a term in the auctioneers conditions is to get as much as possible out of a potential buyer, even if there is only one real buyer in the room.

Tell you friends to take care

Property Man

No one said it was a charity auction.

maxer68

Property Man wrote: »

At Allsop Property Auctions the seller, the sellers agent, or the auctioneer is allowed to bid for the property when such a bid is below the secret reserve price.

It works like this. The property is advertised with a published maximum reserve price. The seller sets a reserve price in private with the auctioneer, and no one else knows what this figure is, but it must be below or equal to the published maximum reserve price.

If a buyer places a bid below the published maximum reserve price (which happens all the time) he might be bidding against the seller. The only reason I can think of for such a term in the auctioneers conditions is to get as much as possible out of a potential buyer, even if there is only one real buyer in the room.

Tell you friends to take care

Property Man

do you have any proof, or have you just made it up to equate with what you think?

The maximum reserve in many cases were ridiculously low (hence almost all properties sold), so there was no need for any subversive bidding.

If the maximum reserve was not met, the property was simply taken off the market and the last bidder gets an opptunity to buy at the reserve price.

Possibly the most honest form of auction ever in this country. - Before, they never even disclosed a reserve and if they saw a lot of bidders they simply withdrew and tried to rip another 100k from someone.

Kristopherus

Its well known that auctioneers plant dummy bidders at auctions. Why the Competition Authority don't take action, is beyond me. :(:(

Marcusm

maxer68 wrote: »

do you have any proof, or have you just made it up to equate with what you think?

The maximum reserve in many cases were ridiculously low (hence almost all properties sold), so there was no need for any subversive bidding.

If the maximum reserve was not met, the property was simply taken off the market and the last bidder gets an opptunity to buy at the reserve price.

Possibly the most honest form of auction ever in this country. - Before, they never even disclosed a reserve and if they saw a lot of bidders they simply withdrew and tried to rip another 100k from someone.

This was all included in the pre auction documents; I don't like it on principle but it's all stated in their auction rules. I think it's designed to minimise the number of properties which fail to make thereserve but where the "buyer" is willing to pay more. In conventional auctions there would e a post auction negotiation but bearing in mind the number of properties, I think this would be impractical for these auctions.

Property Man

You asked if I had proof.
You simply have to read the terms and conditions in the Allsop catalogue, page 10, bottom left corner.

Further proof I came by came by comparing the Published Maximum Reserve Price in the catalogue, with the price achieved at auction. When the sold price is below the Published Reserve Price it is possible, and no more than that, that the purchaser was bidding against the vendor. My record from three Allsop auctions produce the following figures

In April 2011, 27 lots (or 32%) were sold at or under or equal to the published maximum reserve
In July 2011, 11 lots (or 13%) were sold at or under or equal to the published maximum reserve
In September 2011, 9 lots (16% of those sold under the hammer) were sold at or equal to the published maximum reserve.

You are correct that a low published reserve price protects a buyer from paying over the odds, as it is likely to attract multiple bidders, although there is no guarantee of course.

You may well be correct that Allsop are the most honest auction house on the Irish circuit. Is it standard practise in Ireland that sellers bid on there own properties, maybe I'm just green behind the ears. It was also standard practise for banks to give 100% mortgages, and for borrowers to self certify their own income, but that turned out not to be such a good idea.

maxer68

If it was included in terms & conditions and clearly laid out, what's the problem.

The vast majority of the properties had DISCLOSED reserves well below even current market values, so once this reserve is met and you are the final bidder the property is yours.

If I see a disclosed reserve, I accept that the property will not sell below this.

If it was a case that the vendor continued to bid even though it had reached the disclosed reserve, then I'd be unhappy.