Residential auction activity is steadily increasing as we head towards the busiest time of year for the real estate market, however fewer properties are selling under the hammer in Auckland compared to the rest of New Zealand.
Interest.co.nz monitored the auctions of 166 residential properties in the last week of January (22-28 January) as auction rooms started coming back to life after the Christmas/New Year break.
Two-thirds of those properties were located in the Auckland region with the rest spread around the rest of the country from Kerikeri in the north to Gore in the south.
While Auckland may have had the lion's share of the auction activity, properties there were significantly less likely to sell under the hammer than they were elsewhere.
The auction sales rate for Auckland properties was 44% while elsewhere the sales rate was a healthier 66%.
That gave an overall sales rate of 51% for the entire country.
Those results suggest the market may be starting the year slightly softer than it was in the latter half of last year when sales rates above 75% were common.
However we should be cautious about drawing too many conclusions from January's results because activity is still relatively restrained after the Christmas break, with numbers then usually building strongly over February.
However the early results suggest vendors and their agents will need to take particular care when setting reserve prices and post auction negotiations are likely to play a much bigger role in achieving a sale this year than they did in 2021.
The results of all of the auctions monitored by interest.co.nz are available on our Residential Auction Results page, which is fully searchable by location.
The comment stream on this story is now closed.
- You can have articles like this delivered directly to your inbox via our free Property Newsletter. We send it out 3-5 times a week with all of our property-related news, including auction results, interest rate movements and market commentary and analysis. To start receiving them, register here (it's free) and when approved you can select any of our free email newsletters.
71 Comments
So not much change in the RE world.
Just a bit of slow down as banks not giving away money easily.
The kiwis will not stop borrowing because that's what we have been told from everywhere that debt is good. Media, friends, family the pressure is on to drown in debt as much as possible.
Soon the average will be 2 mn dollars per house and average salary might just go down as borders will open and low skilled, low paid workers will be in like a bee swarm.
Just keep enjoying the rot our politicians keep giving us.
Housing market in for an easy soft-landing.
History repeating itself.
TTP
Yes but its going to also have to be very flat now for a period of like 4 or 5 years so we are going to run out of things to talk about here.
When in history have you seen a situation like this?
Hi rjn1
Most recently, it was Oct/Nov 2016 - or just over 5 years ago.
TTP
It has been flat for a period from 2005 when I go my mortgage. The RV's never shifted at all, I remember 2 being the same and one even dropped when we joined the supercity so yes there are period of flat but the problem is the sudden bull runs still have you house price doubling in 7 to 10 years. Housing peaked in like November 2016 and only exploded again over the last 12 months or so.
Have you ever heard of Russell's inductivist's turkey ? You sound like one, on the morning of Christmas eve.
You mean just keep enjoying the rot from the politicians you voted for. Absolutely no sympathy from me I didn't vote for this lot and half of you out there did .They were terrible in the first term and then you clowns put them in for a second term.
Not me. I didn't
I basically don't like politicians since all of them lie. Hate liars from the core of my body.
But this lot who's in charge now really do not have a speck of self respect in themselves.
So how can they even do anything good for anyone. Selfish beings in control of this country. Only worried about themselves.
Rot is on.
Here here… I want to see these people cry and repent their sins!
House prices doubled in 1971/2 when we first bought a house so nothing has changed except the price. In 71 we payed 4,950 pounds and in 1972 we sold for 10,500 pounds. We also thought that was outrageous at the time. So as long as you want to stay in the market for the long term it doesn’t really matter what you pay now.
Speculators locked out by requiring real, vs vapor paper equity, and no more tax rinsing for existing dwelling purchases. FHBer's killed of by new borrowing rules. Foreign cash laundering being limited by law changes. Cashed up investors waiting for the math to make sense and a degree of reset. Then little old NZ is the more or less the most expensive residential market out there.
Who's gonna buy unless they really really have to?
Going to be interesting for developers with projects in flight potentially - they have to sell at some stage……
46% in Auckland is not that bad.
To say housing market is changing will be wrong as will need to wait for next few week data to confirm one way or the other.
For now, market is still holding, maybe not rising but too early to say is falling. Confident That Government and RBNZ will be shit scared with all the news of market being slow orturning and are bound to take step to support the housing and they can do it by either withdrawing few restriction imposed or by diluting those restriction to release free flow of money.
Perfect opportunity / excyse for Mr Orr to sleepover DTI.
Wait and Watch.
The DTI would be catastrophic for the over valued NZ market. That’s the reason behind the procrastination. It’s an effective tool and will correct the market overnight. They understand the impact so I personally can’t see it being properly implemented in NZ. I know the banks have started using it as but we still have a DTI of around 11!!
Sensible borrowing should be done at half that
Bankers I have spoken to talk about an unofficial 6-7x being applied. Govt should hold the line and let lasts year frothy cheap debt binge be erased. For the good of society it should be more but agree that would be politically unpalatable.
My DTI in the UK was 3 which was barely manageable not sure how NZers can handle 4 let alone 11. We sold our house but before we could sell we had to sit on a variable rate which pumped our house interest rate up by £300 a month, this sucked as it hit my £9 for 18 cans. Which is cheaper then NZ beers. Not sure how NZers can manage and still maintain some semblance of a lifestyle.
Im setting up a business rather then play Russian Roulette with NZ property, the good thing with my business its all online so you can do it from anywhere in the world, relatively straight forward once you setup infrastructure . Its also like building blocks, the more products I add, the more I make. Its not a get rich quick scheme, but once I have a foundation it should start to pump and get bigger and bigger. I'm two years down the track and already its working well, so in two years time I will be able to buy a cheaper house while my business continues to grow.
No need to wait and watch, Labour have suddenly got into 1st gear and released the border reopening plan. All we need is a net immigration gain and away it all goes again. We are going to be economically forced to fully reopen by the end of the year or the Hermit Kingdom will become a banana republic.
Now that the Nats (finally) have a plausible leader, Labour is facing the point of termination……
Jacinda will go down in history as the COVID Prime Minister and she’s done a very good job. But things are moving on rapidly now and she’s fast approaching her use-by date.
She can move on holding her head high. Clearly, one of NZ's better prime ministers.
TTP
The word "plausible" when applied to a person means persuasive but deceptive, as in 'a plausible rogue'. Are you sure you've chosen the right word here?
Yep, Streetwise, I choose words prudently.
TP
He’s a Nat, of course he’ll be deceptive…until after the election, then he’ll be as easy to read as any capitalist in government always is.
Median prices have fallen both in Dec and Jan.
For Eketahuna?
But Toye, don’t you know you’re not supposed to look at the median. That number is far too accurate, you’re supposed to look at the average, so your FOMO continues to drive your realestate purchasing decisions.
Death knells ringing for Auckland
I doubt it. All this government knows how to do is pump the hell out of the property market. They get an A++ for housing price gains. Border reopening in the nick of time and if this doesn't work fast enough look out for them pulling all the dates forward because everything is "Better than expected".
My understanding is that the labour shortage is for fruit pickers and health workers. How many of these are going to afford the stupidest housing market in the world?
I agree that Jacinda has done ok with Covid19 and she’s had her time. Luxon is definitely not the guy to take the country forward, John Key 2.0
Luxon is most defiantly the guy to take the country forward, anyone could see he was lining up for the job years ago. Labour simply has to go, nobody else could have done a worse job over 6 years, its been an absolute shocker and the worst is yet to come before the next election, your going to be begging for a change.
He comes across as a decent guy and competent. Let's see what his policies look like.
He doesn’t strike me as overly defiant.
Can't agree more
They don't need to buy- just filling up rentals will help keep the ponzi going a bit longer.
Careful Tom, these Interest threads are jam packed with the investor class who crave a little neoliberal love in with their own kind.
Buyers can’t get fully qualified for auctions under the tight CCCFA bank rules so most sales are via negotiation outside of auctions currently. Auction events are not being held by many RE companies in regional cities now for this reason.
If CCCFA kills auctions as the primary mode of sale in NZ, that would be something to celebrate IMO.
Exactly right. And having said that 44% is actually very strong.
Auctioning shouldn't be used as a gauge of the market? Perhaps sellers are waking up to the fact that auctioning is NOT the best way to sell a property.
Firstly only cash buyers can participate and bid at an auction, and cash buyers make up only 8% of buyers. Secondly, agents rely on three weeks of advertising to attract buyers. While they may find a buyer, it is unlikely they will find the best buyer, which is every seller's goal.
There is a big difference between finding a buyer and finding the best buyer, typically 20-30% more in the sale price. Auctions are easier for real estate agencies, which is why they promote them. On auction day, when trying to convince sellers to lower the reserve, they tell them the market has spoken, but the truth is "only the market of cash buyers they managed to attract in the 3-week campaign has spoken."
The majority of buyers are not cash buyers. Some need finance; some have properties to sell; some are waiting for inheritance probate.
Any agent telling you auction is the best method to sell a property is looking after their best interest, not yours. They'll use your money to promote their brand. Whatever the result on the day, they will convince you the market has spoken, and they get paid in 4 weeks. They are conning you.
This should be printed on page one of that Guide to Buying that salespeople must give to the buyers
A friend of mine wanted to sell his house and he was strongly against auction for the reasons you correctly highlighted, but after a little while he was put under extreme pressure by his agent to sell through auction, up to the point where he felt forced to change agent; he was then threatened with legal action. Many agents have no morals nor ethics whatsoever. A low form of life indeed.
So if there was a significant correction and many got burnt is anyone going to go after some of these morally corrupt, greedy agents/companies who do everything to pump up the market/prices for their own benefit including blatantly lying, manipulating facts etc? They are effectively giving financial advice?
Anything to do with shares or other types of investments there are disclaimers everywhere and people are very wary about the comments or advice they give out of fear of being challenged down the track.
RE agents are parasites.
Real Agent
”Only cash buyers can participate and bid at an auction, and cash buyers only make up 8% of buyers”.
That is not correct.
Sales on the fall of the hammer are unconditional; however that does not mean that the buyer is a “cash buyer” as you later confirm is a person who has the cash and does not need “finance”. Many buyers, if not the majority, at auction will have mortgage finance specifically arranged with their bank for that particular property (not just simply a pre-approval) to be able to be in a position to bid unconditionally. This is common practice and those FHB who have bought at auction will be familiar with this.
The rest of your comment also has some questionable assertions.
My understanding is the same as real terms. A cash buyer is someone who can purchase without the condition of selling another property, so buyers at auction are cash buyers. The source of the cash is not relevant.
rob
That is not his understanding.
He states that only are 8% of potential property buyers are "cash buyers" and goes on to include someone needing finance as not being a "cash buyer".
It is a nonsense for you to argue in support of him that only 8% of potential property buyers are "cash buyers" as they don't have a property to sell . . . the vast majority of people looking to purchase a property do not have a property to sell.
His post throughout is ill-informed and shows a poor understanding.
“Auctioning shouldn't be used as a gauge of the market” – changes in the number of properties going to auction over a number of auctions and success rates provide a possible indication that the market may be changing (note: use of “possible indication” and “may”). Falls or rises in clearance rates – as well as number of properties coming to auction – are indicators of possible changes; that is why interest.co publishes this data and it is followed by many on this site but care needs to be taken in both interpreting it and putting too much weight on it. If I was either buying or selling a property, I would be taking a keen interest in auction data in trying to gauge what was currently happening in the market rather than waiting for even REINZ monthly sales data which relates to settlement of agreements usually signed six to eight weeks prior - auction data as published by interest.co relate to the current week.
“Perhaps sellers are waking up to the fact that auctioning is NOT the best way to sell a property”. When there is uncertainty as to market price being either a strong or weak market, or a property is unique, or someone is under pressure to sell then a competitive auction provides a way of achieving that. As the market currently appears to be slowing it is not surprising that the number of properties going to auction is slowing - over many years as the market changes the number of properties going to auction changes rather than people "now waking up".
“Only cash buyers can participate and bid at an auction, and cash buyers make up only 8% of buyers’ That is incorrect.
“agents rely on three weeks of advertising to attract buyers”. There is no set period for advertising and as it is the vendor who pays for the advertising, they will have a strong say in the period that they wish or are prepared to pay for. Unique and very expensive properties in particular are likely to be advertised for far longer periods.
“There is a big difference between finding a buyer and finding the best buyer, typically 20-30% more in the sale price”. That is a nonsense statement. Firstly, I don’t know where the 20 to 30% is plucked from other than thin air; and secondly, it is well known that in the heat of an auction there are many, many instances where buyers bid well beyond their intended limit. (To not over bid is an important warning especially for FHB)
“Any agent telling you auction is the best method to sell a property is looking after their best interest, not yours”. That is nonsense . . . if the market is either very strong or weak with values uncertain, then it is in the vendors interest to seek that through a competitive auction . . . and at the end of the day the vendor does not need to sell if the reserve is not met. It is well known that when the market is stable with more price certainty, agents will be likely to be recommending negotiating range and a number of posters on this site have commented on a recent shift towards this - and this is consistent with auction data.
“on the day, they will convince you the market has spoken” is not entirely correct. If the reserve is not met, then the agent will be negotiating equally with both vendor and highest bidder to close the difference to get agreement as in any negotiation no matter what the method of sale.
Me thinks we’ve found one of the agents in the forum.
Spiceeh
Hiss . . . the big insult - he's "an agent". :) :)
Sorry son, wrong. A pity you haven't been on this site longer to realise in this case you are another shooting your mouth off without knowing the facts.
Now put up a constructive comment if you can.
Cheers
Don't bother with Spiceeh, all his comments are sarcastic, he has nothing constructive to say
Not quite…Property Investor Association
Indeed. Well that would explains the unswerving loyalty/blindness to endless stacking of debt for tax free outcome. #veryvestedinterest.
Most articles on housing have well over 100 comments, yesterday's call by Interest to get support to keep operating has… 5 comments : (((
Com'on folks, click the link below and participate in how to keep our beloved Interest going!
https://www.interest.co.nz/personal-finance/114180/interestconz-free-se…
Yep good call, I will get on to that.
There was part of me hesitating, because of what I saw as some quite heavy handed editing at times around criticizing politicians in mocking terms.
But I think I have got over that :) and generally the editing is pretty damn fair and limited.
It's a great website, with many good articles. I would like to add that some of us regular commenters are pretty important too! But critically, we need this platform/forum to comment! So its financial sustainability is key.
I think the monitoring is excellent....the most difficult job their could be.
Well said.
It’s how I stay up to date. I’d hate this website to go. Well worth the patronage. Top articles!!
The likes of yourself, HW2, pa1nter, Brock, HouseMouse, CWBW…. And anyone else I’ve forgotten, make the comment section hilarious and informative. Long it may continue.
Barfoot auction clearance rate in the first week of February (1 to 4 Feb) was 27%.
Building strongly!
Come on all you finance geniuses (genii?) so how does the CCCFA apply to this situation:
Investor wishes to sell one of his properties. He has owned it a long time, is himself getting too old to carry the worries of tenants, and is mortgage free. He knows both FHBs and investors are having trouble raising finance through usual channels (banks, etc) so he decides to 'leave a first mortgage in' to assist buyers with the purchase. It is a 2brm brick and tile home unit with a contemporary full make-over in a sought-after area. Similar nearby units have sold recently for between $850,000 and $950,000. His unit is in good nick. The online advertisers price estimates are between $900,000 and $1,080,000. He decides to sell it himself but soon finds that though there is keen interest the stumbling block is securing finance. So he decides to provide the finance himself : he advertises for the top estimate of $1,080,000 on a $280,000 deposit and leaving in an $800,000 with a 5 year interest-only first mortgage giving plenty of time for the purchasers to arrange a bank mortgage in the future when they can show the bank evidence that they have managed regular interest payments to the vendor over 5 years.
The vendor charges an interest rate of 6%, a lot more than he can obtain on a bank 5 year term deposit. This rate will bring him in a gross $48,000 a year with no outgoings for a normal landlord's expenses. The initial deposit of $280,000 would more than cover any expensive maintenance if he had to repossess the property.
The buyers are desperate to own their own property and they fell somewhat under the banks' tightened rules but they have reasonable jobs and are confident they can meet their interest payments to the vendor. Also their solicitor has approved the scheme.
In summary, the vendor gets top price, no agent's fees, and the amount received, $800,000, will not be sitting in a bank term deposit with the possible risk of the bank going under in these uncertain times.
I don't see how the CCCFA rules can affect this structuring of the finance.
The vendor/seller/investor has effectively made an 800k loan to a stranger secured on a property.
If the mortgagee has problems with repayment then what will the cost of legal enforcement be including a possible forced sale or mortgagee sale etc and the potential overall losses?
May have been less risk staying on as a landlord.
As today, the costs of the mortgagee default sale auction would be paid from the proceeds of the mortgagee sale. The mortgagee wouldn't pay a penny. The mortgagee would also have the buffer of the original $280,000 deposit to compensate for any loss on sale.
I'd imagine if the home seller is going down that path of effectively loaning $800,000, they fall under the category of Lender and so the CCCFA rules apply to him. So these restrictions may outweigh the benefits you mentioned, and he may be just as reluctant to lend the money, maybe more so (since he is not a bank, and doesn't have the mass of wealth of a big bank backing him up)
Who the hell would take the risk and do this?
This is where my age, 74-years-old, comes into play and I can tell you categorically that back in the late 1950's and through the 1960s this means of financing a property purchase was not unusual. In fact, many sales those days involved non-bank mortgages.....I bought my first house in a south Auckland suburb at 19-years-old with solicitor's trust account mortgage. I would say that most FHBs purchases involved a first mortgage, together with a second mortgage which was supplied by the vendor, a parent, or finance company, etc, usually at a higher interest rate, interest only, and for a period of 2,3,or 5 years. I can also remember that sometimes a third mortgage was taken out to clinch the purchase. And even banks (another bank) sometimes left in a second mortgage.
Today, we tend to think that the bank financing with a sole first mortgage has been set in concrete from time immemorial.......not so. This belief just shows how monopolising the banks have become. (Solicitors' mortgages faded out when their clients stopped putting their money into these trusts because week after week greedy solicitors were caught with their hands in the till.)
I don't think mum and dad or grandparents leave money in by way of a second mortgage these days...they more likely just donate to the deposit of FHBs.
I would say that those days the FHBs worked harder, and saved more, to pay off their second mortgages than FBHs today do. There were no cafes or tech junk to waste their money on. Sometimes both partners worked two jobs.
It would be an interesting exercise for some property economist or journalist to do the research and find out how the means of financing property has changed over the years.
You forgot to mention the interest rates. In the 70's. We paid 11% on a 50% deposit. Second mortgages probably 18%.
Back then you borrowed manly through building societies which you saved through for your deposit. Other sources were universities, councils and banks for their staff and usually for lower rates.
That's why houses were cheap. No one would lend you any money.
And back then term deposit rates were significantly higher so people shouldn't have really needed to take out mortgages. They could have just saved 2 - 3 years wages to buy the house outright. Many young today are saving 2 - 3 years wages just for a down payment, while TD rates are abysmal.
Indeed. How the manipulation of the creation of debt has changed this lending landscape, with a side order of ballooned property values to create even more debt.
Question Mr Streetwise, if you were 19 now, motivated etc, what would you do when faced with the realities of today's lending and price expectation landscape?
Was there not another gain of 2% gain for the Auckland Market in the month of Jan?
All depends on exactly the house. Homes.co.nz has some small gains for some but for the first time in a very long time some small price drops for others. I'm expecting Auckland to get hardest hit for any price decreases, people have been bailing out of Auckland and heading for the regions for a while now. Anyone who can "Work from Home" should bail from Auckland, we have 300Mbps fiber internet even in Tauranga.
Dont come to the regions en masse please, choking up the streets with parked cars and bad auckland driving of oversized SUVs. No thanks.
Tony Alexander reckons they’ll all be heading for OZ… so I think you’ll be fine.
Funny you should mention oversized SUV’S. I was at the gym this morning, as I walked back to my car it was like a millionaire’s paradise. Merc SUV, Audi SUV, Tesla SUV. All of them on the drip courtesy of the Reserve Bank no doubt.
climbing into my 2002 Isuzu, I thought, oh well Jonesy.. at least you are keeping it real. $5k paid for in full!
Good on ya Jonesy - keep on keeping it real fella!
A 230sqm new built in Hamilton for an asking price on 1.7mn+.
Isn't that a steal in heaven like NZ? That's what it is being marketed as.
I am sure this a heaven now and I am probably dead because I don't believe it's affordable for the living in this country.
What more examples do we need for this sleeping government to do Something about it? They talk about Mahi. What mahi do i need to do to be able to afford that?
This is the rot the government and their pet puppy RBNZ has created.
The whole industry is a racket.
I have been researching building.here’s a typical snip...
”They originally planned a 100sqm single storey house, but to obtain finance, they needed a higher floor area, so they built into the roof void – which had been a longer-term plan – to give a total floor area of 169sqm.”
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.