Why 77.4% of agents advertised below final sale

Real estate pricing tends to be framed as a balancing act: set the number too high and buyers stay away; set it too low and you leave money on the table. But four pieces of 2026 research suggest the initial asking price is not just a filter. It is a psychological signal that shapes how buyers judge value, where negotiations begin and how a property is perceived over an entire campaign.

More bidders, lower opening bids

A study published in the European Economic Review tested what happens when a property is deliberately marked below a publicly observed estimate of market value. The result was familiar: the lower price attracted more bidders. The less familiar part was what those bidders did. Their opening offers came in lower, and the final sale price ended up closer to the markdown than to the property’s estimated value. As the researchers put it, “a mark-down implies more bidders, but lower opening bids.”

This matters because real estate campaigns often use an attractive guide to generate competition. The study does not say under-pricing always fails, but it does challenge the assumption that extra buyer participation automatically converts into a stronger result.

Even professionals anchor

The first number also shapes the professionals doing the pricing. A 2026 paper in Real Estate Management and Valuation asked 170 property professionals to value a simplified apartment. Across valuers, brokers, property managers and academics, the initial reference price still pulled their judgements. The anchoring index reached 46 per cent, and the researchers concluded that “expertise in real estate market does not guarantee unbiased assessment”.

For brand managers and founders, the insight is broader: anchoring does not disappear with experience. Whatever number enters the conversation first tends to become the reference point, even when better evidence arrives later.

What 427,447 Australian sales show

Microburbs analysed 427,447 Australian transactions recorded between June 2024 and February 2026. Among 31,208 agents with at least three sales, 77.4 per cent had a median advertised price below their final sale prices, with a typical gap of 3.5 per cent. That is about $35,000 on a $1 million property.

The gap varied by market and method. Sydney’s Inner West showed a median gap of 7.9 per cent and Adelaide South 7.7 per cent. Auction properties sold 8.4 per cent above their guide prices at the median, compared with 2 per cent for listed-price campaigns.

None of this automatically proves underquoting; guides change, markets move and auction competition can lift results. But the data confirms that the initial price is a powerful reference point, not a neutral starting line.

When ambitious pricing backfires

Savills’ October 2026 analysis of the UK prime market looked at the opposite risk. In a weak market, an ambitious asking price can reduce early interest and prolong the campaign. Time on market then becomes its own signal: buyers start wondering why the property has not sold, and that doubt gets priced into their offers. Savills observed that “logic and seller psychology do not always go hand in hand”.

The takeaway for marketers is not that there is one magic pricing formula. It is that price is part of the positioning story.

What to do about it

• Treat the first number as a reference point, not a promise.
• Measure enquiry quality, not just enquiry volume.
• Re-anchor decisions with fresh comparables and buyer feedback.
• Watch time on market as an input into perceived value.

Pricing that attracts attention is useful. Pricing that pulls the whole negotiation towards your preferred reference point is better. Research says the two are not the same.

Source: Elite Agent