A review of things you need to know before you go home on Thursday; TSB drops mortgage rates, House price growth slowing; NZDMO tenders $1.5 bln of inflation indexed bonds; Australian unemployment flat

For Thursday, November 6, 2014. Image sourced from Shutterstock.com

Here are the key things you need to know before you leave work today.

TSB Bank drops four and five year mortgage rates by 15 basis points each. The new four and five years rates are 6.65% and 6.85% respecitvely. The new rates are under what the 4 largest trading banks are currently offering but are not quite as good as Co-operative bank. 

There were no changes today.

QV says house prices are rising at the slowest rate in two years. National residential property values for October increased 5.9% over the past year and 1.1% over the past three months.

The Debt Management Office (NZDMO) confirmed they have received over $2.2 bln of interest for the $1.5 bln worth of 2035 inflation indexed bonds made available via syndication. The inflation linkers carry an interest rate of 2.5% and have a current yield to maturity of 2.74%. No further issuance of inflation indexed bonds with this maturity will occur before February 2015.

The latest reading of Australian unemployment came in at 6.2%. Westpac Australia's economists note that if it were not for the decline in participation, from 64.7% in Jan to 64.5% in Oct, the unemployment rate would be much higher. They go on to say that if the participation rate is held at the average rate since Apr 2012 (65.2%), the unemployment rate would now be 7.2%.

Domestic swap rates rose today but only by +1 or +2 bps across the whole curve. The 90 day bank bill rate was unchanged at 3.68%.

Check our real-time charts here. The NZD rally was short lived as the USD gained support post the US mid-term elections. It is now at 77.3 USc, and 90.0 AUc, and the TWI is down to 76.6.

You can now see an animation of this chart. Click on it, or click here.

Daily exchange rates

Select chart tabs »
The 'US$' chart will be drawn here.
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The 'AU$' chart will be drawn here.
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The 'TWI' chart will be drawn here.
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The '¥en' chart will be drawn here.
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The '¥uan' chart will be drawn here.
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The '€uro' chart will be drawn here.
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The 'GBP' chart will be drawn here.
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The 'Bitcoin' chart will be drawn here.
End of day UTC
Source: CoinDesk

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment or click on the "Register" link below a comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current Comment policy is here.


Peak Water...  Poor old peakies - insignificant global warming, dropping oil and gas prices and now the water isn't running out...
"In short, the US has reached the era of peak water."
"The assumption that demand for water must inevitably grow is false. Let’s start planning for the reality that a healthy economy and population can mean more sustainable, efficient, and equitable water use."
Old fashioned innovation and capitalism 1 Gloomsterism 0.
And this is from a rabid greenie so will be tricky to shoot the messager.

There you go taking things out of context and lying again....
ah well....
I shouldnt feed to troll really.
Meanwhile in the real world,

Different country run by socialists.Thanks for reinforcing the point. So many own goals of late Steven. Calling me a liar every time the data doesn't support your world view. How lame. I guess you couldn't shoot the messenger this time.

The data supports itself.  Maybe if you compared that change in water use with what else happened at time?
or maybe not...

What happened was the economy grew but the demand for water did not hence the statement "the most recent water withdrawals data show that withdrawals in 2010 were lower than at any time in the past 40 years back to 1970." Quite remarkable really.

Don't you know Steven, oil is dropping because the world economy is booming and growing so fast. Look around Steven, the US QE programme, BoJ money printing, and continued Eurozone 'strength' should tell you that things are fine! Sure, things were meant to 'recover' in 2009, which became 2010, then 2011, 12, 13 etc.. But it's definitely this year I tell you!
As for climate change, don't listen to the scientists, they're all chicken littles - yes, all thousands of them. Would you listen to a qualified doctor for medical advice or the guy down the road who tells you he's knows the cure for cancer? Obviously, you'd be a fool not to listen to the guy down the road!

Thanks to the 'shale' tight oil revolution we are sorted for centuries. Ignore the poor energy return and the high extraction costs, they're irrelevant. It may look like we're scrapping the bottom of the barrel but it's just another sign that things are on the up for us. Don't be glum, we are living in a rock-star economy after all!

None of that speel has anything to do with efficiency gains. Context and all that.
Scientists make observations... 0.04 dec/dec warming vs predicted 0.21. Spin any way you like but that is the observed warming this century makes the chicken little predictions look silly - when 20% of of industrial CO2 went into they system. Trenbeth said it was a "travesty" they couldn't find the missing heat - it is still a travesty all these years later.

Oh dear....yet more "selected truth". Scientists do more than take observations, they  use that data to support theories and predict outcomes, build models, verify them.
So yet again you cherry pic with "dec/dec"  ignoring the escalator which is only obvious when you look at say 60~80 years.
Then the rise is blindingly obvious.
then you dont care about truth and honesty do you....
"all these years later" nope now explained in the escalator effect...
Of course if you were truthful you wouldnt have anything to print would you.

This is the approach to try and discredit an argument - find one small detail no matter how insignificant and show it to be out of line with the rest then extrapolate to say the whole theory must be wrong.
Reminds me of the creationist arguments. They said you have no proof showing dinosaurs evolved into birds - show me the fossil evidence. Sure enough, it turned up eventually but then the creationists said that there was no proof linking dinosaurs with the intermediate fossil and the intermediate fossil with birds - where is the evidence?. So, from their point of view one hole turned into two.

Yes they make predictions but in this case the predictions have been crap.
"Simulations conducted in advance of the 2013–14 assessment from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) suggest that the warming should have continued at an average rate of 0.21 °C per decade from 1998 to 2012. Instead, the observed warming during that period was just 0.04 °C per decade, as measured by the UK Met Office in Exeter and the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, UK."
Degrees/dec isn't a cherry pick - Phil Jones, Nature, the IPCCm CRU, UK Met use it... Are they all liars too? Or religious freaks or something?
"As for the two periods 1910-40 and 1975-1998 the warming rates are not statistically significantly different (see numbers below). " http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8511670.stm
Who uses the "elevator effect"? Most scientists use statisitcal significance. Most people are pleased it is not warming as fast as predicted nor faster than 1910-1940 but not Green idealogues.
Its an inter glacial so just get used to it getting warmer.

We are certainly living on a rock going around a star economy.

Looks like a similar story in energy consumption.
"...a January 2012 study by ACEEE on long-term energy efficiency potential estimates that by 2050 we can use energy efficiency to reduce U.S. energy use, relative to a business-as-usual basecase, by 42–59%. In 2035, the midpoint estimate is equivalent to 17.5 million barrels per day."

Nope, As I posted earlier, that because of the changing economy (this also applies to water use BTW).  
"U.S. energy efficiency has also increased substantially since 1997.  According to EIA, in 2011 the U.S. consumed 2,300 fewer Btu per dollar of GDP than in 1997—a 24% decline."
So the US switched to a service economy from a manufacturing economy, hence the less BTU  per GDP.   So to compare like with like, use the US's total energy use for ALL the goods it consumes has to include the energy content of what is made offshore. 
Oh and yet again out of context and effectively the articles lies as gas does not equal oil, its purely an economic fudge factor,
So when they say gas  is "the equivalent of nearly 3 million barrels of oil per day" it isnt.  The energy content, yes OK, but what it can be used for, no and thats the crux.
and in terms of the sale oil/gas myth it and the EIAs clueless figures/projections is starting to unwind....