A good question. Let me explain the situtation so as to provide a picture of the processes.

The implementation of the new Real Estate Agents Act in November 2009 removed the regulatory role from the Real Estate Institute and handed it over to a new government organisation – the Real Estate Agents Authority.

All individuals in the industry now need to be licensed under this authority and do not compulsorily need to belong to the Real Estate Institute (REINZ). That having been said all licensees paid an annual membership to the REINZ in April 2009 and therefore remain members until the 31st March 2010. Under the rules of the Institute all members must submit sales data to REINZ by the end of each month.

The Institute is currently establishing rules for the new future organisation and as part of the structure is the key process of collecting and reporting sales data. From the communication I have had with the Institute they are confident that after 31st March that they will be able to maintain the commitment of all offices in the industry to submit monthly data representative of all offices and reflective of all sales transactions.

Speaking personally I would agree with you. We live in a world in which transparency is the only way to build credibility and respect. Conversely adopting the opposite approach is the sure fired way to loose credibility and respect.

Our website is 50% owned by the Real Estate Institute (REINZ) – I run the website as a commercial business, I write this blog in the belief that providing insightful and transparent data is a valuable service to people who are interested in better understanding the real estate market.

In the long term markets work better with open access to timely, accurate information and analysis. This is a vision I hold for the real estate industry.

Thanks for sharing these thoughts. As you rightly say real estate salespeople are commission based self employed contractors and these sales figures are not good for them – with just under 10,000 salespeople it means that half of them will receive no income in the month (purely theoretical of course). However if you apply the 80/20 rule then many of them may not earn much this year.

As to your comment on encouraging vendors to meet the market – from my personal perspective I could not agree more, however I am not a real estate salesperson, I hope some experienced sales person will share some insight shortly on this question.

As to the stock of property on the market – yes there is 51,000+ homes for sale on the site with another 10,800+ lifestyle properties on the market today – clearly in the high price bracket the pool of potential buyers is less.

As to accuracy of data – we receive over 95% of all listings in data transfer from office’s own systems which means when they put it on the market it automatically goes on our site, and when they withdraw it for whatever reason it is removed from our site – a transparent process.

Likewise, how can there be so many high-priced properties remaining on the market unsold for years and years? There are 4128 properties listed at $1m+, of which 820 have been on the market since 2008, and many even longer. (Cowes Estate at $33m, on the market for 3 years). I can understand an occasional rich owner not really needing the money, but many of these properties (eg the Mt Maunganui apartments at $2-3m) must be owned by investors or developers who surely need the money. It all smells a bit fishy to me.

The point is Tesco is purely providing a branded platform to allow Spicerhaart to springboard off. As I see it (intuitive thought) – you register and sign up pay your money and a estate agent from Spicerhaart turns up on your doorstep complete with sign and signs a listing agreement (or UK equivalent).

This then is a lead generation tool which leverages the Tesco brand for which they clip the ticket as a license operation.