From Jan 2009 until present a 8% increase in house prices, Infometrics' 24% prediction over the next 2-3 years looks likely!

People will stop buying and the price will stop rising when hous prices reach a market value or replacemant cost. The market will adjust itself like last two years.

So the current survey rental property confidence is above the previous 20 months
BUT below the 60 months before that.
Interesting.

Lets put this into perspective...
"investor confidence SURVEY"

So does this mean they are right...still?

"Investor confidence improved in the September quarter to its best level in two years"

This could very well have been the exact same statement made before the Oct share market crash.....

"From Jan 2009 until present a 8% increase in house prices, Infometrics' 24% prediction over the next 2-3 years looks likely!"

Yes I see the "likely" ..trouble is most dont.

"Which means that Bernard's original call of a 30 % fall is even further out . ( 43.5 % ) . "

Nope doesnt make BH wrong...he was commenting on what was happening at THAT time, without any fore knowledge of bail outs, printing money etc. that all changed the basis that where available AT THAT time.
Maybe BH did get the time frame wrong....again because of the manipulation of the fundamentals since that point in time....
The fat lady hasnt finished singing yet, and there are still a few more yrs to go before she does....eventually the value will meet the long term 30 yr ave, when this is all over.

A survey is just that, doesnt make it fact....a prediction is just that, doesnt need to be 100% accurate, its a guide line..
Stop taking stats total summary as indicative of fact....dig deeper, break them down, then you will see things are not what the seem floating on the surface.
Stats are only interpreted in such a way to try and manipulate markets, make media headlines.....
High price coastal, are not selling, and when they do 40% down
High price realestate down but still above ave, holding the ave up
lower end a drop of 18 to 22%, far less selling than previous
And in the middle, a house that at peak would have sold for 425k now sells for low to mid 300k.....large sub dividable house sections sold at premium, now land size means squat.
Think the mean ave in Nov 2007 can be compared to the mean ave now...got to be dreaming.
Yes there are serious investors/speculators still making nice profits...why?
Nothing to do with the mean ave, all to do with the know how to break the stats down at a given point in time.

How's you investor confidence there Harriet....out buying rentals by the dozen are we?
My guess is the airlines will be seeing a rapid increase in the one way bookings to aus by our young and skilled. The rest will stay behind because the WINZ bank keeps handing out the dosh. I think we might see Don the Brash wheeled out next week to take some heat off the fools in the Cabinet. Oh and the great tax working group must be looking forward to hearing Jonkey say "NO" to their advice and thoughts. I've just had a read of Bollard's comments to some mob about Noddyland not being like aus and he seems to see a rather big decline for the Kiwi not too far off. If he's right, it will mean the price of all the imported commodities will shoot up and away we go with inflation.

@ctnz: agree this isn't investing, its speculating, gambling that prices continue to rise...if and its an if this goes wrong there are going to be a lot of ppl worse off....through their own stupidity....but you know ppl visit TAB....

Steps / steven : I am not having a go at Bernard . Far from it , the 30 % would have brought NZ house prices back into an affordable ratio to incomes . But given our particular Kiwi relationship with real-estate , it was a gutsy call on BH's part . Naive perhaps .

Several reports in the NZ Herald the past few days pushing increased immigration into New Zealand. No surprises there- the best way to keep the housing bubble inflated is to import people. We as a country need to have a debate on immigration. In a world short of oil, food and water this country is a haven. I would like it to stay a haven- I would rather have a green, uncluttered countryside and fewer consumable goods than import hordes of people to increase the profits of landlords, property developers and big corporations.

Stacking them there rentals up by the dozen, Wally. Mind you I'm finding that nice copper guttering costly. Have to stick to polyvinyl chloride ones. Just working on getting 'my plans have changed' excuses down pat, and reorganising the trusts.

how the hell are you going to make real captial gains (not paper ones) if no one can afford to buy your house off you ? House Price increases are going to be meaningless.

I feel I am in a good postion to say this as I am gen Y, with savings but little desire to buy at current (maybe future) market rates.

No worries G...word is the banks are setting up a property purchasing trust to which you get to sell your crap for a fat taxfree gain on condition you buy one off them for a higher price and take on a bigger mortgage. That way the bubble can grow and grow and all the players will be rich rich rich. I'm told the govt intends to pork the game with a thousand plane loads of immigrants. Get in there G and grab all you can. It's the great kiwi bubble your way to greater wealth game.

"Several reports in the NZ Herald the past few days pushing increased immigration into New Zealand. No surprises there- the best way to keep the housing bubble inflated is to import people. We as a country need to have a debate on immigration. In a world short of oil, food and water this country is a haven. I would like it to stay a haven- I would rather have a green, uncluttered countryside and fewer consumable goods than import hordes of people to increase the profits of landlords, property developers and big corporations."

This is nonsense, pure and simple. The same lie is played out time and time again across the Tasman as well. If immigration is a panacea for falling house prices then we wouldn't have witnessed massive property prices fall in Shanghai (migration from rural to urban is essentially the same as international migration) and the UK. By the same logic, house prices would be sky-rocketing in Russia with the floods of Central Asians flocking in to the country looking for work. You can even use the examples of Tokyo and Osaka where it is estimated that 60% of citizens originate from somewhere else, yet property prices have fallen for 20-odd years.

So...yeah... immigration is a valid point if
1.) Immigrants can support afford to buy property from savings
2.) Immigrants can generate enough income to repay a mortgage

It's hard to be cynical about immigration in NZ because in many cases immigrants are much more talented and hard-working than the locals yet they seem to get the short end of the stick when having to pay for over-priced accommodation (if they choose not to rent).

Sorry G, I have to disagree with you about immigration. NZ needs the talent, energy and drive that foreigners possess. Most talented NZers live offshore where they can earn better money and find more stimulating challenges. Forget the romanticism of how wonderful NZ is, there is a hell of a lot more happening outside the country.

Interestingly enough, before the Bledisloe Cup in Tokyo last weekend, John Key spoke in front of 80-odd high-achieving Kiwis based throughout Asia. One of the recurring themes was "don't forget us, we need your skills and talents." It's a great line, but I wonder how well it resonated among the audience.

@JC

Net migration is strongly linked to house price rises. In 2003 net migration jumped to 43k and house prices similarly followed with a 20+% annual rise. This was further excaberated by investors jumping on the sure thing.
What you fail to see is that the more money immigrants have the more they are welcomed by the gummint. What do they do when they arrive? They see that investing in productive business is a waste of time and immediately go and spend all their cash buying a house.

@ harriet

In reply to you about my idea on another thread of people working on after retirement tax free and gaining a larger pension the longer they hold off. Until recently there was a lot of hand wringing about the shortage of (un)skilled labour and how could we get more people, well it won't be long before we hear that again. Most graduate employment comes from job growth rather than pensioners retiring. I got my first job in the early 90s when unemployment started dropping from around 12% through jobs growth.

"Net migration is strongly linked to house price rises. In 2003 net migration jumped to 43k and house prices similarly followed with a 20+% annual rise. This was further excaberated by investors jumping on the sure thing."

It's a good idea not to compare absolute numbers with relative changes. It's meaningless when you want to make a comparison or express correlation.You wouldn't have found a single major city in the Anglo-Saxon world where prices weren't rising in 2003 so my skepticism is intact.

I don't have any proof but I bet you my left hand that availability of credit and house prices is more closely correlated than immigration from 2001-09.

We have enough bodies here already.
We have too many already who contribute at under strength and we add more without being able to upgrade average talent. We need to emphasise attracting back the diaspora and it is not only money they want. In fact by adding immigrants of doubtful benefit, we are making it less attractive to getting our own to return.
The holes in our society that remain unfilled are of our own doing.
Too many politicians have academic backgrounds and have spent little time at the "coal face" They are "reacter" rather than "proacter", lawyers not engineers, accountants not scientists, public relation artistes not doctors or nurses.
What do we expect when the MPs know the price of everyhing and the value of nothing.

I'm personally against immigration as the answer to this country's problems. Not only does it change the cultural balance of the country, but it avoids fixing the real issues - the ones that are driving away talented / educated people away in the first place. Why do we need more people anyway? Is 6 million enough? 10 million, 20m? At what point will we have enough people for all our problems to go away exactly?

Also, what is this country's cultural strategy exactly? What will NZ look like a generation or two from now? Asian, Pacific, British, European? or some sort of mixture? I think I missed the public debate on this, or the chance to vote on it.. If the Govt has some sort of strategy I'd like to know what it is and have my say.

One aspect that never seems to be mentioned is the inherited wealth factor.

Those sons and daughters of the baby boomers are going to inherit capital on a larger scale than previously, so probably not doom and gloom for a good number of them

"One aspect that never seems to be mentioned is the inherited wealth factor."

Good one Muzza. Unfortunately, that has to be balanced against the debt factor that inevitably follows asset bubbles fueled by easy credit.

Steps : Younger generations think that " SAW #6 " is a documentary . And they are taking notes . ........ . Watch your back ....... and front , top , under ......... they are biding their time ........... !

Tough luck Veedub. It's immigration all the way and who gives a rats rear end about how bloated the pop is in 2050.

veedub,
careful. The Growth Lobby will track down your ip address, work out where you live, and come around and let you know, in the nicest possible way, that dissent from the Growth Dogma is not allowed.

A steady state economy / population would be anathema to the Growth Economy.

There are some people out there on the internet talking about it. You don't tend to see the steady state view being put in the Main Stream Media. Perhaps because more immigrants equals more potential purchasers of Main Stream Media product. More property for sale ads etc.

A couple of links about the Growth Lobby / population growth issues.

http://features.csmonitor.com/economyrebuild/2009/08/17/economic-scene-i...

http://www.themonthly.com.au/why-australia-should-cap-its-population-gro...

The above liink is a talk by Mark O'Connor, Visiting Scholar in Archaeology and Natural History, ANU, about Population growth in Australia. Some parallels to the issues with respect to the NZ situation.

Matt S- yes- I want my say on this too. Anybody want to form a lobby group? I'm serious. If no-one speaks up then the government will assume NZers have no opinion on the matter and will open the floodgates. Massive immigration would change the country forever - and not necessarily for the better. Surely in a democracy the people are allowed a say on such an important issue.