Housing market on a high with July's sales at their highest level in 5 years - REINZ

Property

Winter weather and economic uncertainty not holding back the real estate industry with residential sales surging in July

14th Aug 20, 9:48am by Greg Ninness

The housing market performed strongly in July with sales volumes up 25% compared to July last year.

The latest figures from the Real Estate Institute of NZ show 7854 residential properties were sold throughout the country in July, up 24.6% compared to July last year and the highest number of sales made in the month of July in the last five years.

The buoyancy in sales was almost nationwide, with July sales in Auckland up 30.3% compared to July last year, which was also the best July month for sales in five years. For the rest of New Zealand (excluding Auckland) sales were up 21.5% compared to July last year, which was the best July for sales in 15 years.

The only region where July's sales were not higher than July last year was Gisborne.

The biggest increases in sales compared to a year ago were on the West Coast +57.1%, Tasman +55.7%, Nelson +42.4%, Waikato +34.8% and Taranaki +30.8%.

The national median selling price was $660,000 up 3.4% compared to June and up 14.8% compared to July last year.

In Auckland the median price was flat at $920,000, down just 0.1% compared to June, but still up 11.5% compared to July last year.

In the rest of New Zealand (excluding Auckland) the median selling price hit a new record of $559,000, up 3.5% compared to June and up 15.3% compared to July last year.

"Even though anecdotally we've had a great start to August, the real question now is how long this can be sustained for, particularly now Auckland has gone back into Level 3," REINZ Chief Executive Bindi Norwell said.

"Part of the sales volumes can be attributed to post-COVID pent up demand, but underpinning this activity during July was strong levels of interest and engagement from all buyer levels including first home buyers, investors and families looking to upgrade.

"Even Queenstown-Lakes, which everyone predicted would be one of the most hard-hit regions due to a lack of international tourists, saw a record median price for the district in July of $1,100,000, up from the prior record set in March 2020 of $1,080,000," she said.

The interactive charts below show the sales volume and median price trends for all regions.

The comment stream on this story is now closed.

Volumes sold - REINZ

Select chart tabs

Source: REINZ

Median price - REINZ

Select chart tabs

Source: REINZ

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to 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.

131 Comments

by Ben72 | 14th Aug 20, 9:52am 1597355552

Can’t believe Queenstown data is real !!!

by Boatman | 14th Aug 20, 11:19am 1597360755

Me Too

by tothepoint - d… | 14th Aug 20, 9:55am 1597355715

Hardly a surprising outcome for the country as a whole.....

In times of uncertainty, people vote for bricks and mortar.

TTP

by Ben72 | 14th Aug 20, 9:58am 1597355880

ORR’S Brick and Mortar

by tothepoint - d… | 14th Aug 20, 10:22am 1597357337

Auckland median house price rises 11.5% in a year.

Even the most optimistic people here didn't predict that.

Conclusion: We're all flawed individuals!

TTP (-;

by Quiet Desperation | 14th Aug 20, 10:35am 1597358132

Yes, we're all flawed. But as you clearly believe, some animals are more equal than others. I'm sure all the smugness you have banked up, will find a very willing purchaser in the end.

by Foreign buyer | 14th Aug 20, 11:08am 1597360098

I'm alright Jack

TTP

by Ahuhyeah | 14th Aug 20, 11:26am 1597361187

by JimmyJames | 14th Aug 20, 10:48am 1597358913

It's not optimism, it's negativity. People are running from savings into debt because cash rates are going negative. Maybe one day you will be able to hold two opposing ideas in your mind.

It's not a desirable weather pattern that occurred by chance .This market is the product of desperation and a negative economic outlook. Interest rates are falling not because of strength but because of weakness.

by mikekirk29 | 14th Aug 20, 10:50am 1597359016

Price up when not much for sale: what a shock.
Plus lots of rich folk buying at silly prices in AC and NSC pulling up the median, also big surprise.
Lowest inventory on record Bindi says.
So, people overall not keen on selling?
Lowest inventory despite 30% min of what is on RE NZ being not finished or new build.
So, real people in houses selling them off bottom of chart then. Not a surprise given confidence flattened.
Lots of allusion from Bindi re "interstate's from FHB" but fails to break down by price bracket most of them fall into, in Auckland. Why?
Because does not suit narrative.
FHB bracket sales (750-900k in Auckland) are up 5% in last 2 months. Above $1.5m up 58% compared to 2019. Different eh?

by Yvil | 14th Aug 20, 12:01pm 1597363278

Mike Kirk: "Price up when not much for sale: what a shock."
Except that:
"The housing market performed strongly in July with sales volumes up 25% compared to July last year."
So there must have been quite a few houses for sale

by mikekirk29 | 14th Aug 20, 2:24pm 1597371844

Bindi Norwell stated inventory at "all-time low".
For example, as I keep records:
Hibiscus Coast total listings a year ago were 747. today 607 or 18.75% fewer.
Rodney total listings a year ago was 1938. Today was 1768, or 8.7% lower

by company of heroes | 14th Aug 20, 10:00am 1597356004

Not with huge amount of debt, it would be stupid to borrow huge amount of debt right now.

by Jesse1 | 14th Aug 20, 10:19am 1597357179

I've recently changed my mind on this. Now is the time to have as much debt as possible. The reserve bank is going to force the housing market up, there will be many people having to sell their houses, but many more with have access to cheaper mortgages. It's rational to think this is a bad time, but we live in irrational times and I wish it wasn't so.

by Foreign buyer | 14th Aug 20, 10:22am 1597357338

Orr is relying on more of you to keep his ponzi on track.

by Stev-O | 14th Aug 20, 11:39am 1597361982

Yep, keep fighting the good fight. Everyone who fought the fed made huge profits this year.

by Just Some Advice | 14th Aug 20, 11:53am 1597362821

So, what do you want people to do? They can't wait forever to buy their own home, when is a good time?

by HeavyG | 14th Aug 20, 12:40pm 1597365605

2145, the zombie apocalypse will have run its course by then and 99.999999% of the human population will be dead. That 9 bedroom mansion in Kohimarama will cost you 2 bullets. a dog skull and a box of panadol.

by BearBear | 14th Aug 20, 4:52pm 1597380736

I understand the bullets and meds, but why the skull???

Please explain

by HeavyG | 14th Aug 20, 12:40pm 1597365635

by JimmyJames | 14th Aug 20, 10:31am 1597357862

I think you're correct Jesse. The reserve bank will always support asset inflation until they can't and no one can predict when that time will come. So, maybe if people just want a home, buy but if possible have a hedge against the stupidity of the whole system and hold a bit of silver and gold in a vault in that house for the day the central banks do lose control.

by Fritz | 14th Aug 20, 10:34am 1597358081

Agree. But as you say many will have to sell so I see a bit of an equilibrium arising where the RBNZ's actions balance out a dire economy.
Result- prices will be flattish, or go up a little.

by Spectators | 14th Aug 20, 11:58am 1597363094

Fritz not directed at you as you seem to understand but a general comment here following on from yours. Another result: inequality gap in NZ widens further. Those w/ access to this ridiculously cheap credit double down on leverage into property. Those unable to access (generally most vulnerable people in our country) get left further and further behind. This ludicrously overpriced property market in NZ is the root cause for so many of NZ's societal issues. Before anyone assumes it's probably worth stating that I own my own home freehold so I'm not 'blaming everyone else for my own problems', I'm just someone who chooses not to turn a blind eye to all the damage being caused by the property market because I'm not on the receiving end. I choose to exit the Ivory Tower.

by company of heroes | 14th Aug 20, 10:49am 1597358997

Yes, the reserve bank's monetary policy is going to force the housing market up indeed, but you need to know why they are doing this. They are doing this not because they want housing price to go up. But it's more like assets prices going up or down is not in their consideration. They simply don't care about assets prices. They adjust OCR based on inflation rate. US and China's inflations are start rising already. If the inflation rates are high, there wont be any more cheap mortgage. Those people who just got into the property market with large debt, they will get hurt so badly. There are so many uncertainties ahead. You just don't know how inflation goes in future. With that much money being printed, our low economy performance, we might see a inflation hike soon.

by Theoracle | 14th Aug 20, 8:47pm 1597394872

What you write makes sense, HOWEVER nothing about this year makes sense anymore and that especially includes debt, rates and markets. The situation now, as many other posters have noted re the debt levels and prices paid is that the RB and NZ inc. literally cannot allow rates and inflation to rise. I don't pretend to know how they'll do that given all the money printing.

by Willskux | 14th Aug 20, 3:00pm 1597374005

If I had listened to the terrible financial advice from the posters on this website I would not have purchased my first house 4 years ago and have missed out on it doubling in value.

Posters here are not financial advisers and need to think about what consequences their terrible takes may have.

I hope they have enjoyed their returns from their term deposits and continue to keep all their savings in term deposits while the reserve bank prints 100 billion dollars.

by Te Kooti | 14th Aug 20, 3:18pm 1597375136

Ironic since the strap line is "helping you make financial decisions"! There is a small cohort of sane, financially literate commentators but they are invariably shouted down by the horde.

by printer8 | 14th Aug 20, 4:14pm 1597378453

Te Kooti
I agree with you.

by MadMax | 14th Aug 20, 9:04pm 1597395848

P8
I agree with you

by Nzdan | 15th Aug 20, 1:09pm 1597453740

MadMax
I agree with you

by printer8 | 14th Aug 20, 4:22pm 1597378920

Wiilsux
Great to hear you bought as a FHB - I know that you will be enjoying the intrinsic value and both the social and financial securities of home ownership. It is something I advocate for despite the difficulties of affordability; FHB buy for a home which clearly has intrinsic value and provides family stability and security. Short term fluctuations in the market are irrelevant provided one can service their loan and for that reason I always add the rider that FHB should be prudent and pay the mortgage down as much and as quickly as possible to avoid both wider and personal economic shocks.
Unfortunately there are many unsubstantiated and extreme negative comments related to housing on this site. I feel that an element of these simply based on anger and frustration related to affordability issues. I was particularly concerned at a number of the comments at the onset of Covid and noted them. When posts are predicting a 50% fall and the RBNZ, bank economists and other respected commentators estimate 7 to 10% fall, then those need to be justified - which didn't happen - and therefore were of little purpose other than scaremongering.
Its great to see comments such as yours. You clearly have imitative and are prepared to work to achieve your goal - you will do well in life. A family home has tremendous value as a basis for family life.
Unfortunately, for those others who simply make these extreme and wild unsubstantiated claims - well they will still be crying foul and renting for the foreseeable future as they have done for the past four years. That is their choice, but sadly I see some of my generation, retired, still renting, living in small very basic social houses, paying much of their super on their rent, and not being able to afford simple luxuries. You are most unlikely to be in that situation; there is high likelihood for those who you criticise.

by fortunr | 14th Aug 20, 9:56am 1597355768

Let the party continue. Who cares about the real economy.

by pin3cone | 14th Aug 20, 10:03am 1597356206

Let the party continue.

Let the ponzi scheme continue.

by Logicthinker | 14th Aug 20, 12:35pm 1597365315

If this Ponzi scheme fails we will all be stuffed.

by Foreign buyer | 14th Aug 20, 12:39pm 1597365559

Ponzi schemes always fail.

by mikekirk29 | 14th Aug 20, 10:06am 1597356388

Sales in Auckland up 30% in July cf 2019.
4 month sales down 16%
The hole made by lockdown has not been filled in yet.
Notable that sales in Papakura, which have risen consistently for last 3 years, fell.
Whilst in Franklin they rose
Lots of building and new stuff in Papakura, suggesting that now sales falling that developers not at full steam any more?
Not analysed sales by price bracket to compare to 2019 yet.
However, analysis yesterday showed that June and July sales accelerated a trend that began in November 2019, which is that sales above $1.5m have bene rising faster than 750-900 (FHB) market sales.
In Nov-July (compared to a year earlier) the higher bracket saw sales rise 11%
For lower bracket it was 4%
But in June and July the higher bracket sales raced ahead by 58% rise, whilst lower bracket barely moved, up 5%
Bifurcation of market v plain

by Believer1980 | 14th Aug 20, 10:20am 1597357237

How on earth you keep on comparing a 4 months period of BAU (2019) with a 4 months period with 2 months of total lock-down? On what basis you expect the number of sales in the 4month of 2020 be equal or more than 2019? it is staggering that the sales number is only 16% less, exteremly hard to believe. If it was equal or more it would have been totally crazy.

by CourtJester | 14th Aug 20, 10:44am 1597358695

Yet another person who can't make the connection between the low April-May and high June-July sales...
Think about it. If you were right on track to buy a house in April, but couldn't do so because of the lockdown, would you rather postpone your purchase a month or two, or completely give up on buying a house?
People don't give a sh** about the possible (likely?) recession, job loss, economic shock. They just saw that lockdown was finally over, yay, let's buy that house we were looking at 6 weeks ago.

by mikekirk29 | 14th Aug 20, 10:46am 1597358770

Maybe because there is nothing else to compare it to and media (esp REINZ) don't
And as people keep seeing stats saying sales up 25% on last July and that is utterly misleading as there was no CV19 prior to last July.
And because we are not told what different price brackets are doing in Auckland, but only nationally, which is meaningless given that average price in Auckland is $200,000 higher at least.

by Tillers | 14th Aug 20, 6:53pm 1597387984

That’s a great point.

by Foreign buyer | 14th Aug 20, 10:04am 1597356241

More lemmings queuing up at the top of that very big cliff.....

by Te Kooti | 14th Aug 20, 10:24am 1597357471

More people getting on with their lives and not bemoaning how tough they have it.

by printer8 | 14th Aug 20, 11:02am 1597359766

FB
So when are we going to reach that cliff edge?
You were posting in June "Til next month" . . . "here comes the freefall" . . . . . and by that stage we already knew about RBNZ and government actions.
Despite Covid, over the past year Auckland median up 11.5% all the while we have been continually getting these bubble burst scenarios.
Here is me, listening to your comments and posting "Cashed up, watching and waiting" . . . . . but it still has not happened. I am really disappointed in your calls, and are beginning to think your comments are rubbish and have been horribly misled by you.
Here are all those FHB who - if they have job security and are prudent paying their mortgage - are doing well and have nothing to fear.
Are you still going to be in your rental flat calling bubble burst when you are 65?
:) Cheers

by youngdumbandbroke | 14th Aug 20, 1:28pm 1597368505

If thats the case, you would have spent that cash and bought by now, no?

by printer8 | 14th Aug 20, 3:09pm 1597374574

ydab
I guess the way the market is currently going, I should have ignored all those false claims of imminent bubble burst.
So yes, I should have bought - maybe I should stop listening to those dgm who have been claiming bubble burst for over a year and especially so over the past six months. :)

However, I am purely looking at investment so still cashed up, watching and waiting. I can still look at other alternative investments if house prices don't drop - an option not relevant to FHB.
Critical thing for FHB is job and income security and, as they are in for the long term, short term market fluctuations are not critical. If houses continue to rise FHB will be disadvantaged and given RBNZ commenting that further cuts to OCR and QE, as well as likely extension to mortgage deferrals, are all on the table that is quite possible.

by CourtJester | 14th Aug 20, 10:03am 1597356213

Number of sales not surprising after the lowest April and May sales since... records began?
Price is somewhat concerning, although this is median and not HPI. Looking forward to the HPI data coming out soon. It could be what Mike Kirk said, houses above $1.5 million being sold like there's no tomorrow

by company of heroes | 14th Aug 20, 10:27am 1597357669

This is bad, you know it is abnormal when everything else in our economy has been hit badly by covid criss, yet housing price is still going up. Even experts and economists couldn't make right predictions anymore. It's just like the stock market, when it get crazy, everyone just keep buying without thinking about the values. I just hope that our savings in the banks are still there in future. The USA and China's inflations are pretty high at the moment. The interest rates will have to go up soon.

by CourtJester | 14th Aug 20, 10:41am 1597358471

"The interest rates will have to go up soon." - Is this a quote from 2010?
The negative economic effects were compensated for with freshly printed free money. A large chunk of that free money went to assets, some "productive" (stock market), some not so much (property). It is abnormal, absolutely, but morals, equality, wealth gap don't matter anymore. Normality is just a fairy tale now.

by gingerninja | 14th Aug 20, 11:36am 1597361803

What is normality? Depends who you ask. Depends when you ask it.
What are morals? These also appear to be fluid and changeable.
What is a fairy tale? Ask a flat earther or an antivaxxer or an atheist, or a Christian, or a Yazidi or a Muslim and you'll get a different answer every time, regardless of weight of evidence.

Belief informs decisions much of the time, our brains have both rational and irrational impulses. Economists over the last century haven't agreed on a unified theory and yet we are more or less subjected to one via Central Banks. It's all an experiment because there is simply not enough data for any economic theory to explain the complexity of economies because many economic decisions are completely irrational or involve unforeseen events. The idea that Central Banks can know what is best is an illusion. Even the idea of central bank independence and inflation targetting is relatively new, and also, based on a theory/belief. Not to suggest that its a bad theory, it has merit, but it is unproven and clearly flawed.

by Quiet Desperation | 14th Aug 20, 12:41pm 1597365716

There are certain things that most would agree are objectively wrong. Is there ever a time, a place, a circumstance etc. that would make the morality of something like rape subjective?

by gingerninja | 14th Aug 20, 12:47pm 1597366065

Yes of course!! There have been countless wars and genocides where rape was state sanctioned or military policy. Often rape has been and still is considered spoils of war even, a reward and right of soldiers. Or in Western culture, where rape of a wife was not even recognised as a crime until relatively recently. Arguably, at various times in history, what even constituted rape has changed. For much of history, and even now in some cultures and countries, rape has only been considered a crime only against the man who is responsible or owner of the woman raped (ie father or husband).

The same can be said for pedophillia. The age of consent or "maturity" varies in different cultures. If you look at the culture of ISIS/ISIL, if the child is non-Muslim especially pedophillia seemingly does not exist. If you look at the Democratic Republic of Congo, child and baby rape has been mandated by certain religious movements by priests as giving magical properties to the rapist. Although again, it is not considered rape by those who do it or sanction it.

I am quite shocked that anyone is unaware of how morally and legally ambiguous rape is across the world and across history.

by Quiet Desperation | 14th Aug 20, 1:14pm 1597367667

I am quite aware of that and was not asking whether it has been considered moral/immoral or legal/illegal through history. I was asking more personally, whether people here and now, and particularly yourself as you were the one stating that morals appear to be fluid and changeable, actually believe that there is a time, a place or a circumstance etc., in which you believe that the rape of someone is morally subjective.

If you personally think that the morality of rape is subjective, that the wrongness of such a violation against a person is fluid and changeable, then I don't know what to say. Try making that argument to someone who has lived through it or explaining that to a daughter and telling her that it is only morally wrong due to the particular time and culture in which we currently live. I believe such an act is objectively wrong. That objective morality exists. That it is wrong for all reasons, in all times and places, that nothing can justify it. That regardless of culture or legality, it is wrong in itself, regardless of circumstance.

by gingerninja | 14th Aug 20, 1:26pm 1597368413

What I personally believe in regards to rape is irrelevant but quite obviously as a woman (with two daughters), and someone who has worked professionally with 100's of rape and abuse victims and my own personal experience, I might personally wish for rape to always and everywhere, for all time be considered immoral and to be illegal. But that is not my point. My point is that morality is fluid. It changes over time and something the majority of society may once have considered inconceivably amoral can become moral and visa versa over time or in different places. My argument is that where it comes to human values (and morality is a human value) then nothing can be considered objective, only subjective. In fact I believe that it is extremely dangerous to assume that any perceived moral value is objective, because this leads to complacency and blindness. There hasn't be some constant progression of "Human Rights" as they exist today, laws and rights, morality and social norms constantly change over the decades, centuries and millennia. After WW2 people said "never again" in regards to genocide, but how many genocides have we had since then? How do you police and enforce what you refer to as "objective morality", who gets to decide what objective morality is? History shows us that it is the powerful (whoever they may be) that define what morality is. The powerful may be a democratic country, or maybe just those with the most guns. But there are still people and countries in the world that consider the raped woman to be at fault, where she may be stoned to death, if those cultures had the most guns, and they legislated on morality, what would be "objective morality" then? Those people would believe in their morality every much as we believe ours. We may agree that rape is morally wrong, but they do not. Welcome to the horror of humanity. I hate it as much as you do, I just accept that it exists and consider to be in denial of this, extremely dangerous to the values I cherish. The danger of your perspective, is to assume that others should or must hold your same values and beliefs when there is no way to make them. I think Handmaids Tale is an excellent analogous story about why you should never take "morality" for granted, wherever you are from.

by al123 | 14th Aug 20, 2:04pm 1597370671

There's an important difference here that is being glossed over: it is certainly true that what people consider to be immoral changes over time and is different in different places. But it doesn't follow from this that what is in fact immoral changes over time. By analogy, it's certainly true that what people believed about the shape of the earth changed over time. But it doesn't follow from this that the shape of the earth itself changed over time. The earth was always round, regardless of what people thought. Those who thought it was flat are (and were) mistaken. We might say the same about rape: it is and always has been immoral. Those who think/thought otherwise are/were mistaken.

by Rob Reid | 14th Aug 20, 2:17pm 1597371429

Nah...morality and rights are just made up - not even a whiff of objectivity.
The laws of physics (of which we have a partial understanding) are the only objective rules.

by al123 | 14th Aug 20, 2:51pm 1597373480

That might be right - but the point is that it doesn't automatically follow from the claim that people have different beliefs about morality that morality is made up. It is possible that people have different beliefs and some of them are wrong, because there are in fact objective moral rules.

by Rob Reid | 14th Aug 20, 6:01pm 1597384861

OK, I've had to think a bit more about this. Let's look at what "objective moral rules" would mean.
Definition of "objective" as per Cambridge dictionary: "based on real facts and not influenced by personal beliefs or feelings"
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/objective

So if people have different beliefs about morality because of their personal beliefs or feelings, it follows that moral rules can't be objective.
Or do you think people have different beliefs about morality because of something other than their personal beliefs or feelings? If so, what is it?

by al123 | 14th Aug 20, 6:10pm 1597385441

No, I think you are misunderstanding the definition. People also have different beliefs about scientific facts, because of personal beliefs or feelings, but it doesn't follow that scientific facts can't be objectively true. An objective fact is one that is true (or false) independent of people's personal beliefs - eg, a fact that is true regardless of whether or not people believe it is. It is possible that moral facts are like that. For example, slavery seems like it would be wrong even if every single person in the world thought it was ok.

by Rob Reid | 14th Aug 20, 7:32pm 1597390329

OK yes, I see your point. If I have it straight: Just because we all seem to have our own morals based on our own feelings and beliefs doesn't mean there is not an objectively correct set of morals somewhere.
We might of course never discover them (which doesn't mean they don't exist), but wouldn't it be awesome if there really was a big monolith floating near Jupiter on which the morals are engraved, using words so clear there is no chance of misinterpretation.

by al123 | 14th Aug 20, 8:26pm 1597393617

Yup, that's pretty much it! Though there are probably more plausible candidates than a monolith off Jupiter. But yes, the frustrating thing is that even if we have lucked out and have in fact discovered objective moral truths, it will be very difficult to be sure that we are right.

by Quiet Desperation | 14th Aug 20, 3:32pm 1597375974

I absolutely agree that there is danger in my perspective, as there is in the perspective that everything is subjective, where all morality is changeable and fluid. Some things are clearly very subjective and both views are completely open to abuse. I know a victim of rape who barely survived, and I have not come upon a single argument that holds up for believing that this act was morally subjective. If it only matters what people currently believe to be moral, if who currently holds the power and the general sentiment is what determines the wrongness or rightness of something, then this conversation is beyond pointless. Your values, my values, Offred's plight - none of it really matters when you take it to a logical conclusion.

There are many scholarly arguments on both sides and I don't mean to be argumentative - I very much appreciate your comments on this site. But I look at my family, and I know that what happened is horrifically wrong. It doesn't matter that it happened in this culture, in this time. The wrongness of it is outside of the law or the opinion of others. It wouldn't matter if I myself, and everyone they knew, thought it was nothing. It would still be a horrific act of violence, wholly without justification and utterly wrong.

If we each determine this for ourselves, if it's all subjective, then who are any of us to say what is right or wrong. I'm not appealing to any particular religious belief. I just see as much danger in believing that there is nothing outside ourselves that informs this, as believing that there is.

by gingerninja | 14th Aug 20, 3:32pm 1597375944

Morality is not objective. What I believe, or what you believe, is subjective. That is the point I am trying to make. Because it will remain possible that someone else will believe something about morality that is different to us, and that if enough other people agree with them and they have sufficient power, they will eventually be able to enforce their morality on others, regardless of what those others might consider moral, the culture narrative can change, to the extent that what is consider moral can change, no matter how horrific we might consider that. It's like we are fundamentally disagreeing on the nature of objectivity and subjectivity, of what those very words mean.
If we start with a dictionary definition of morality for instance;
morality= "principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour".

Would you not agree that this is a definition describing something inherently subjective? Are right and wrong behaviour always the same, to all majorities at all times? That these things do not change? Are you saying that there is some universal rule maker who dictates these universals or that they are inherent to humanity? Because if that is the case, where is this universal law maker or the evidence of a consistent human behaviour in relation to morality?

I have known many rape and sexual abuse victim, including one that was gang raped by that Taliban aged 12. She was shunned by her family and so she jumped off a sky rise building aged 12. So they put her on a plane and dumped her, alone in front of a London hospital. She spent a year having her spine repaired and in physio before she could walk again before she came to us, a specialist mental health clinic for children. I worked with her Mon-Fri for 18 months. From my value system, what the rapists did was morally wrong, what her family and community did was morally wrong. However, her family considered my just sitting in a room, as a woman without my hair covered, to be morally wrong. And in their world, things like that mattered so much (ie following the rules of Islamic Law) that people would abandon their children and murder, rape and torture each other over it. My morality and value system was to help their daughter heal emotionally, their wish was to disassociate with her and take revenge on the men that had brought shame on their family. Their higher moral allegiance was to shame and honour, not to the pain and suffering of their daughter, who had suffered in a way that few will ever know. Not least of all from the gang rape of grown men, aged 12, but from having grown up in a culture, where she believed that this trauma was her fault and shame. That she would no longer go to heaven and was cursed.

There was nothing I could say or or do that would make them respect me as an uncovered, female and non-Muslim nothing, about my qualifications or professional experience. There was nothing I could say or do to persuade them that their daughter should still belong to them because our entire moral and value system was different and at odds. They believed that my value system was "objectively" wrong, because I did not submit to Allah. My beliefs and thoughts were irrelevant, because for them, relationship to Allah was more important than any of the values that were built on my Western heritage about the rights of a woman's body or the psychological damage of the trauma their daughter had experienced. In fact that thought that my Western heritage was the work of demonic forces. This is not at all uncommon for people who come from rural Afghanistan.

Ultimately, no matter how much, I want my own morality to be the objective truth, the very fact that other truths and moralities exist for other people, and have done so throughout all of history, proves that morality is subjective and unfixed. From my perspective, in order for the values that I hold dear to exist, for my rights as a woman, to be free from rape, to exist in society, I must be ever vigilant to defend the values that inform my culture but to never forget that others do not share my values. I would never assume that my freedom, or my daughters freedom will always exist, just because I wish it to be so or because my upbringing and culturation has taught me these values. History teaches us that such complacency is how atrocities happen in the first place.

by Quiet Desperation | 14th Aug 20, 5:05pm 1597381558

This subject deserves a very lengthy discussion that cannot really be had here. But I must add that what you are saying, ultimately ends up at the conclusion that none of it matters. You are essentially saying that regardless of your personal values, what you wish to be objectively true - your view is that what happened to her is not really wrong or right at all, it's entirely subjective. The horrific rape and trauma, the despicable abandonment of her family - it is all equally as right and moral as the outrage of those who think the opposite. That these opposing truth claims, are both equally valid or invalid. No different than the subjective opinion on what flavor ice cream tastes the best.

Did you tell her your view on this? That though you personally care, according to your subjective values, about what she has been through, that you also don't believe it was truly wrong and that it's just as valid for others to think it was fine. That what happened to her is just as right, as it was wrong. That it was neither right or wrong at all? Why not tell her that it was right for them, and just unfortunately not so for her? That her pain and suffering is entirely subjective and what happened to her means nothing outside of her own subjective experience of it? That she herself could not even truly call what happened to her wrong, without being wrong about that herself? Tell her it's just as moral for her family to abandon her, as her despair and grief over it. Would you correct her on that, as you have me? Would this be explained to your own daughters - that your belief in their rights is purely subjective, and that the people who would abuse them if they could, are no more in the wrong than you for wanting to protect them? Why be vigilant? What atrocities? Other people might consider it just a good time. Wanting to prevent them is just as wrong as it is right.

I've seen many cases for and against a universal law maker. But regardless, the fact that what is considered moral has been inconsistent throughout history, is not sufficient to determine that morality is entirely subjective. If it is, this conversation and everything else hardly matters anyway. We might as well all do whatever we want with no regard for anyone but ourselves. Not even arguments about herds and survival should get in the way.

by gingerninja | 15th Aug 20, 8:57am 1597438644

You are twisting and perverting everything I am saying and missing my point entirely. It's not like choosing an icecream, it's not flippant or superficial. When have I ever suggested that? Morals are deeply rooted and based on often centuries or longer of culture debate and thought. Often influenced by an underlying belief system that existed centuries. And on the understanding that morality is subjective, I draw the opposite conclusion to the perverse one you have tried to put in my mouth. That the subjectivity of morality means we have to work hard to uphold and defend the values that we have developed, which we might call "humanist" and which seek to minimise harm and suffering. To acknowledge the thinkers and social reformers who dedicated their lives to progressing the ideas on morality, who worked to create the laws that protect our human rights.

by Quiet Desperation | 15th Aug 20, 2:59pm 1597460357

I am not twisting anything. You either do not understand the logical consequences of subjective vs objective morality, or you do not want to understand. You speak of needing to defend your morals legally, socially and philosophically, all the while ignoring the fact that when you proclaim these morals to be subjective, they have no claim other than the agreement and power which currently upholds them. There is no logical way for you to claim that they have any right to prevail over the opposing morals of people who believe very differently than you. If morality is subjective, then the people who believe they should have the right to rape others with impunity, hold a moral belief that is no less valid than yours. This is the logical outworking of your belief that morality is subjective. You have nothing to appeal to in order to justify why your morality should prevail over another persons. You cannot point to it being hard won. It does not matter that it has improved over time with progressive thought - according to who's standard exactly? You are making a moral claim there, without acknowledging that this standard is supposedly entirely subjective.

If enough people were to overthrow the current moral standard upheld by our society, what exactly would you have to appeal to in opposition to this? You want to uphold and defend your own values and morals, while literally stating that they are subjective and yet not recognizing that this logically means that they hold no greater claim, than those of anyone else. You seem to be completely unaware, that under subjective morality, a group of people who hold the same moral beliefs, no matter how large in number or how they have come to this belief, are no more right and have no more claim, than a minority of one who just decided theirs yesterday. The perverse conclusions you detest, are simply the logical outworking of holding the belief that all morality is entirely subjective. I can understand wanting to have your cake and eat it too, given the absurdity of the position.

by CourtJester | 14th Aug 20, 12:45pm 1597365901

Even a flat earther, an antivaxxer, an atheist, a Christian, a Yazidi or a Muslim would agree that a couple working full time at the median wage should be able to afford their own home by their late 20s. As has been the norm since the end of the middle ages.

by gingerninja | 14th Aug 20, 1:07pm 1597367267

That's completely and provably untrue! There are millions of people across the world who own no land, who have next to no rights going back generations. How do property rights work out for Yazidi's at the moment as thousands of them live in tents in migrant camps? How were the expectations of the countless Irish tenants who were moved off land for the aristocracy to repurpose it in the 18th and 19th centuries, without any concern for their life or death? What about the 1 in 4 women who were servants and lived in servants quarters in Britain during the Victorian era? They were planning on buying a house too eh? Before Maggie Thatchers "right to buy" millions of Brits lived in Council Houses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Since the Middle Ages??How many centuries from the Middle Ages until women joined the workforce? How could a couple in the 15th, 16th,17,18th,19th century have used a combined salary to buy a house when women mostly didn't have paid employment? How many centuries from the Middle Ages before mortgages became available to any kind of widespread number of people? Do you have ANY idea of the history of mortgages, home ownership or banking? What planet are you on? People were majority tenants until post WW2.

The very brief period in time and space where Western Democracies have afforded their populations wealth sufficient that they have come to expect such things as owning a home by their 20s have only existed post WW2 and is the ANOMALY NOT THE NORM over the course of human history. Pre-history is another matter. But from the first cities of Uruk and Ur and throughout most of the last 5000 years, civilisation has mostly consisted of a privileged land owning elite class and usually a single monarch/emperor and then a bunch of serfs/slaves/peasants who own almost nothing.

by Quiet Desperation | 14th Aug 20, 1:12pm 1597367577

I don't think CJ is drawing his sense of what is right from the mess of inequality and injustice throughout history - but from what most reasonable and decent people would consider a fair means of access to something as fundamentally important as a home of ones own.

by gingerninja | 14th Aug 20, 1:37pm 1597369057

Oh well, how wonderful, presumably, all these "reasonable" and "decent" rational actors will vote for policies that bring about something nice and fair then! HUZZAH!! You have solved inequality, I shall look forward to every couple across the land owning a home during their 20s!

CJ can draw on a sense of what he perceives is right, all he wants. As can you. The reality is that everyone else is also doing what they believe is right. And what they believe is right is different to what other people believe is right. And even worse, as a social species, we are easily influenced by each other and come to defend our beliefs and tribes and opposing tribes can have completely different and opposing views about what is fair or decent.

by CourtJester | 14th Aug 20, 2:42pm 1597372926

The problem with philosophical discussion like this is that you can keep going deeper and deeper until you eventually reach a very fundamental question such as "what is existence". I would rather not go that far just to make a point about housing affordability. Your points are valid, but by normality I mean something my parents, my grandparents, their parents and grandparents etc. took for granted. I'd go as far as saying that having your own place should be a basic human right but then I'll be labeled a communist.
Today NZ can feed everyone and there is enough accommodation for every adult couple. Yet some people own 100 properties while many others own zero. There will always be inequality and that's fine, but we should be working towards *decreasing* it - which is exactly the opposite of what's happening right now.
I'd be OK with """""hard working savvy investors""""" owning 100 properties each, as long as there were no actual hard working couples out there not being able to buy their own, one home.

by Dale Smith | 14th Aug 20, 8:06pm 1597392377

Yes, the investor who owns 100 would only have to give up 1% (not buy) for someone else to go from 0% to 100% by owning their first home.

NZ is light years behind the likes of the USA where only about 33% of their household wealth is in their house, whereas in NZ it's about 75%.

Talk about all your eggs in one basket. And the wrong basket at that.

by Quiet Desperation | 14th Aug 20, 3:29pm 1597375759

Why such sarcastic annoyance at my comment? The fact that anyone wants to argue over whether it is reasonable or decent for people to believe that a working couple should be able to start paying off a home of their own by their late twenties, sums up this whole mess pretty well. There was no claim to have solved inequality. Should we all try having a conversation that gets anywhere by throwing out the use of any word that implies judgement and not pure absolute facts? Do you want to argue over what defines reasonable and decent here or is this more about accepting the irrationality of humans in general?

by gingerninja | 14th Aug 20, 3:45pm 1597376756

I was sarcastic because a reasoned attempt to discuss the difference between subjectivity and objectivity resulted in you implying that i might not understand or empathise with the rape victims. Knowing NOTHING about me personally.

CJ just said something that was patently false. There has not been a common expectation to home ownership since the Middle Ages.

In 100 years time, there is a possibility that NZ could be a communist dictatorship, a feudal system, a world leading super power with its own empire and soft power, something not to dissimilar to now but with more roads (slow clap for National) or an abandoned half sunken island or desert because of climate change (or a million other variables). Honestly, there is no way of knowing. But whatever NZ is in 100 years time, will be the product of human belief and human behavior. Human belief and behaviour is the product of the culture and society that we co-create within and in reaction to the environment and society and culture that currently exists and there is also an objective, nuerologically measure aspect to our reactions to belief and to each other and each others behaviour. Just because you and I believe that it is fair and decent for 20 something couples to be able to afford to buy a home now does not mean that society in majority agree with that now, or will in the future.

by Quiet Desperation | 14th Aug 20, 5:02pm 1597381331

You have yourself made it clear that you believe the morality of rape to be entirely subjective and are now reacting angrily to that being challenged. I feel no empathy or understanding from your view of the wrongness of rape being changeable and fluid.

by gingerninja | 15th Aug 20, 8:46am 1597438000

Not angry no. I just came to accept the futility of trying to discuss something that is subjective to be objective. I am not the least angry to maintain the position that the morality of rape is subjective at all. For me, it necessitates not taking the rights of women for granted. They were hard won and could be lost again in the future. So they are values that need to be defended legally, socially and philosophically. The danger of assuming that there is some kind of universal moral, is assuming that everyone else should or will agree with your own morals. And they don't. Morality is often a battle between social groups as to who has the most power and influence. So we need to consider how different cultures clash and how we can uphold and defend our own values and morals by those who do not share them.

by Quiet Desperation | 15th Aug 20, 2:38pm 1597459127

You are completely misunderstanding the logical consequences of subjective vs objective morality here. I've replied above.

by house hunter | 14th Aug 20, 9:59pm 1597399170

HPI came out at the same time.

by mikekirk29 | 14th Aug 20, 10:05am 1597356320

Question: who is doing all this buying above $1.5m in Auckland?
And why has this bracket accelerated so much in post lockdown?
Not connected to interest rates, except that rich can leverage more easily.
Safe haven of international finance class seems more likely.
Orr giving QE to infinity now, so bound to continue.
But prices have stalled despite MANY houses selling in NSC and AC for substantially above CV and list prices, if any given.

by CJ099 | 14th Aug 20, 10:17am 1597357028

"Safe haven of international finance class seems more likely." Absolutely nail on head, you can even see it in the auction results by the REA's who are making the successful sales. So in the early part of the year we saw prices continuing to stagnate in Auckland and Queenstown sales were sliding downwards then all of a sudden sales and prices pick up in Auckland and Queenstown.
And no, it's not the Americans or Europeans buying we had that one debunked yesterday.

by J.C. | 14th Aug 20, 10:34am 1597358072

Safe haven of international finance class seems more likely.

NZers are possibly the most financially savvy people in modern economic history. Punching above our weight. A team of 5 million. Kia Kaha.

by CJ099 | 14th Aug 20, 11:09am 1597360180

Relying on a overseas money pouring in to our property market is a false economy and a bad investment and we all know that. Problem is it's not going to last more than a few months. You have to look at the bigger picture. Asia Review News: China watches big cash transactions to stem capital flight. "New rules and digital yuan give Beijing a complete view of monetary activities". https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Markets/Currencies/China-watches-big-c…

by J.C. | 14th Aug 20, 2:36pm 1597372560

Relying on a overseas money pouring in to our property market is a false economy and a bad investment and we all know that

What do you mean? Most houses would be sold in NZD.

by printer8 | 14th Aug 20, 3:17pm 1597375075

mike
"Question: who is doing all this buying above $1.5m in Auckland?"
Keep in mind that the $1.5m houses were just $1.3m houses in 2019.
Maybe its just that there are lots more $1.5m houses and lots more people paying $1.5m for those houses formerly $1.3m??????? :)

by mikekirk29 | 14th Aug 20, 3:36pm 1597376199

There are not “lots” more because of price inflation. But REINZ does not give stats on Same house price rises over time. If assume ( a practice I am loathe to follow!) that inflation Same across brackets in such a short period, then in last year each bracket should have increased 11.5% which is median price rise. Stats I gave make it abundantly clear that no such evenness of advance happened

by Ryu | 14th Aug 20, 10:10am 1597356640

I went to an auction in Wellington yesterday and a house I was looking at sold 25% over RV! The auction room was packed to the rafters. I know people who have now given up on auctions due to costs incurred (LIM, Legal, Building Reports,time,etc for each house you look to buy). Buying a section and building soon becomes a more attractive option.

by Kezza R | 14th Aug 20, 10:31am 1597357909

If you are looking at doing that try getting a quite or two off some of the smaller builders. They don't have the nearly as many overheads as the big players.
Also setting up your own trade account and getting a couple of quote for materials direct from the merchants. If you have a trusted smaller builder you can tack an account onto their account useing their discount rate. This creates less risk / work for the builder and he can concentrate on the job at hand.

by Fritz | 14th Aug 20, 10:39am 1597358381

That's no surprise. Wellington has an army of government workers and associated contracting leeches.
The govt has shown no interest in cutting that bureaucracy, despite the fact that many councils (and of course businesses) are.
So Wellington is a one way bet.
And as I said many months ago, the council is going to rezone many areas for high density, they released a plan for consultation this week. That will further inflate property values, as the Unitary Plan did in Auckland.

by gingerninja | 14th Aug 20, 11:41am 1597362072

Fritz, do you know which areas are being re-zoned for high density? My Planner told me a few weeks ago that WCC are also removing the requirement for developers to provide a parking space.

by Fritz | 14th Aug 20, 1:26pm 1597368372

Planningforgrowth.wellington.govt.nz/spatial-plan

The National Policy Statement - Urban Development requires that all councils must remove minimum parking requirements from their district plans.

by Fritz | 14th Aug 20, 5:22pm 1597382555

You are Brooklyn ey Ginger?
Looks like a mix of 3-4 storeys, 2-3 storeys, and 1-2 storey development is planned, depending on where you are located

by Dale Smith | 14th Aug 20, 8:09pm 1597392595

So the rezoning is still not increasing supply above demand?

by Dale Smith | 14th Aug 20, 8:09pm 1597392595

So the rezoning is still not increasing supply above demand?

by Foreign buyer | 14th Aug 20, 10:10am 1597356649

Orr is just using one credit card to pay off the other. He is close to using up every card he has. My guess is that he will retire soon.

by Davo36 | 14th Aug 20, 11:05am 1597359927

Except for that MMT card which has no limit. This can go on forever.

by printer8 | 14th Aug 20, 11:08am 1597360124

And here is FB, continually calling bubble burst. Renters getting further and further behind. My guess is that renters will soon resign themselves to renting for life. :)

by JimmyJames | 14th Aug 20, 12:13pm 1597363997

But if everyone owned their own home and no one rented, how then would the RSV’s embrace and celebrate their inhumanity in this world. Vampires have to feed :).

by J.C. | 14th Aug 20, 10:56am 1597359384

There's some real positives here: The higher the prices on greater volume, positive effects on bank earnings. Helps to keep the bank foot soldiers employed and keeps the bonuses fat for those higher up the food chain. A lucky agent has an opportunity to clip a ticket. And for those rising prices, the local govt has a claim to secure more rates. On achieving a good price, the seller can treat the family to a splash-up meal and maybe even consider buying that boat if the sale price achieved was better than expected,

The NZ economy in action.

by b21 | 14th Aug 20, 10:14am 1597356898

The real estate sector is not a productive sector hence cannot be qualified as an industry.

That being said this was expected, savvy investors are handing over their investments to the wave of stupid money provided by the irresponsible banks lending more than they should. The last ones in will be the first ones out.

Those commentators encouraging people to bet on brick right now are doing a poor favor to your country!

by StuckAtHome | 14th Aug 20, 10:24am 1597357468

Anyone know what the HPI has done? Everyone seems to quote a different stat to match their narrative - HPI seems the most accurate.

by mfd | 14th Aug 20, 10:34am 1597358060

It's always posted on the REINZ website.

https://www.reinz.co.nz/Media/Default/Statistic%20Documents/2020/July/R…

Surprisingly strong result, I must say, ~2% bump in the last month nationwide, just Dunedin with a significant fall. Queenstown-lakes up 10% in a month which is remarkable but perhaps suffers from a little noise.

by Pragmatist | 14th Aug 20, 10:27am 1597357643

whats the three month figures for this year and last? as pointed out, its mostly catch-up from when nothing happened during lockdown.. but 3/4/5 month figures should show if there is really an overall increase.
(anecdotially, everything round here with a for sale sign gets a sold sign pretty smartly and has done since lockdown was lifted, so it may well be up YoY)

by RWC | 14th Aug 20, 10:30am 1597357845

Considering the "COVID free July" buzz + interest rates dropping by 33%.... This is actually quiet disappointing.

Who ever paid 930k for Manukau will be sweating bullets right now...

by CTK | 14th Aug 20, 10:59am 1597359554

Very brave to buy house at the moment but I do hope those FHBs have done their homework and understand the risk of servicing mortgage when job security is on the line. I am gonna go against the report and bet on house price to drop 10% in a year time so I can buy a second house in Auckland.

by Doggog | 14th Aug 20, 11:09am 1597360153

Good luck to all the money printing asset price inflation deniers. You can stand at the bottom of the cliff and wait as long as you like. Where there is one NZ dollar there will be ten. Nothing can stop the QE juggernaut!

by Boatman | 14th Aug 20, 11:26am 1597361211

I wish I had access to more actual data to understand the market dynamics at play here

Are prices increasing , or just steady ?
Who exactly are the buyers entering the market ?
What is the reasons for such high numbers of sellers, are some stretched or over-extended ?
How many of the sellers are at risk of income loss due to Covid ?
Which banks are advancing the most ?
What are the LTVR 's of the loans ?
Who are the buyers , migrants / younger FHB's / returnees / investors ?

This market exuberance seems a little misplaced to me

by VeryInterested | 14th Aug 20, 3:03pm 1597374237

The selling agents would probably know most of this info

by printer8 | 14th Aug 20, 11:27am 1597361268

Me?
Comments by Orr/RBNZ suggest that future QE and negative OCR are very much on the table - so while Covid is not necessarily over, so too is RBNZ action not necessarily over. As noted in the Orr interview, while endeavouring to maintain economic stability, asset including house price inflation a (undesirable) consequence of that.
While one can question RBNZ strategy and for how long it is sustainable, that appears to be the ongoing reality for at least the medium term.
Most importantly however is if that is the reality, what are the implications at the personal level?
Wrongly or rightly of this, it looks like house prices could well not only stay up, but could continue to show significant increase. Despite the alarmist calls, REINZ sales data and auction attendance and sales prices and rates suggest that many are of this opinion.
Yes, very uncertain times and good reason for FHB to act - but be very, very prudent in paying that mortgage down.

by Te Kooti | 14th Aug 20, 11:48am 1597362534

P8 Imo, a cash rate of -.5% would see 2y mortgage rates down to circa 1.5% to 1.75% and keep the Kiwi competitive. It would mean retail depo rates would stay positive as well, so I see this as the most likely path. No point accumulating more debt when the RBNZ can actually get paid for cash on deposit with them.

by The best statu… | 14th Aug 20, 11:33am 1597361629

House with CV of $1.66M sold this week in my street for $3.05M. My CV is $1.60M, happy days.

by CourtJester | 14th Aug 20, 11:38am 1597361939

I take it you'll put your house on the market ASAP then

by The best statu… | 14th Aug 20, 11:42am 1597362141

No, but I know I can afford a court jester to amuse my kids.;)

by CourtJester | 14th Aug 20, 12:46pm 1597365960

For the right price...

by Yvil | 14th Aug 20, 11:54am 1597362863

by Foreign buyer | 13th Aug 20, 12:42pm

No sane person would buy a house in NZ at this time

by Voiceofreason | 14th Aug 20, 12:11pm 1597363886

Like the stock market, it is a very strange time. Housing market stays high, retail day trading from newbies making a reappearance in the stock market because it seems easy. From this you would not know the world is in a deep recession.

by EmperorXi | 16th Aug 20, 1:05pm 1597539948

Remember the shoe shine boys were giving tips before the market crashed some 90 + years ago ?

by Jesse1 | 14th Aug 20, 1:16pm 1597367799

I'm starting to think this is the beginning of the next big leg up in the property market. It seems crazy and I hate that it will probably happen but the reserve bank is doing all it can for this outcome.

by Shoreman | 14th Aug 20, 2:18pm 1597371520

Jesse1 - I believe you are correct !

by Voiceofreason | 14th Aug 20, 6:28pm 1597386510

Nah I don’t think so.

by morphyoss | 14th Aug 20, 12:07pm 1597363673

Surely this is just clearing the backlog of pent up demand from the lockdown. Supply was also light as sellers were put off from listing due to the uncertainty. Things will start to fall away from here.

by mikekirk29 | 14th Aug 20, 1:06pm 1597367195

Sales type and price bracket: July 19 v July 20 (total for all sales , up 30%)

500-750k: up12%
750-900k: up 37%
900-1.2m: up 60%
1.2-1.5m: up 84%
1.5-2.5m: up 247%
2.5m +: up 205%

Apartments up 11%
Sections sales up 67.7%

April to July 2019 v same period in 2020 (4 months)

500-750k: - 25%
750-900k: -15%
1.5m+: +20%

Clearly, FHB sales have fallen in last 4 months, not risen, whilst upper bracket sales have increased and this is accelerating. Would be nice, therefore, if media stopped using weasel terms like "FHB interest" rather than "sales" without giving relevant price bracket figures in enough detail.

by J.C. | 14th Aug 20, 2:03pm 1597370591

Are these sales volume or price increases? If it's price, looks better than Bitcoin or Ethereum.

by mikekirk29 | 14th Aug 20, 2:17pm 1597371436

Sales volumes, in identified price brackets

by Laminar | 14th Aug 20, 2:38pm 1597372711

Here is actual data: https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/c31

by mikekirk29 | 14th Aug 20, 3:42pm 1597376532

That is lending in June. Not sales in July

by Username | 14th Aug 20, 4:02pm 1597377749

Thanks for providing this very interesting information. In your opinion, where is the money most likely coming from?

by mikekirk29 | 14th Aug 20, 4:39pm 1597379963

People cashing in share portfolios plus foreign money coming via Corporations who escape OBB as do not have to declare residence status. From memory of last stats on that , corporates up to 10% of sales in Auckland central spine (partic Waitemata)

by mikekirk29 | 14th Aug 20, 2:16pm 1597371381

FHB (500k - 800k for NZ) v $1.5m + bracket. June and July 2019 v same in 2020

FHB bracket: up 29%
$1.5m + bracket: up 97%

So, can we please stop citing averages, which are totally misleading as to "market" direction.

by J.C. | 14th Aug 20, 2:40pm 1597372805

High priestess Bindi is so shallow and fraudulent to anyone with a basic understanding of statistics.

by Rick.James | 14th Aug 20, 6:51pm 1597387909

Humours me how quickly they acted to reduce LVRs etc when the market "might" slow in April, yet have been dormant in the face of 10 - 30% annual growth rates of past few years in many places... and will probably do nothing if the market continues to take off under falling mortgage rates...

by Seve | 15th Aug 20, 9:11am 1597439504

I feel as the government continues with it wage subsides etc -prices will drive higher-emotions not logic seem to be the driving forces now.

by Pathos | 15th Aug 20, 10:01am 1597442468

Are all the rejoicing comments here from property owners relieved that they are still getting richer from this insane game of pass the property parcel? Do they ever expect the music to stop?