CoreLogic says average value of NZ homes increased $3696 in January

Property / news

CoreLogic HPI shows average dwelling values are rising but the pace of growth is slowing

1st Feb 24, 12:01am by Greg Ninness

The average value of New Zealand dwellings increased by $3696 in January, according to the property data company CoreLogic.

According to CoreLogic's House Price Index (HPI), the average value of all the homes in the country was $928,184 at the end of January, up from $924,489 at the end of December, giving an increase of 0.4% for the month.

CoreLogic's HPI measures average housing values on a three month rolling basis, meaning the average for January was based on sales made during the three months from November to January, while December's average was based on sales data from October to December, and so on.

The national average value increased by 2.1% over the three months to the end of January this year but was down 2.7% compared to January last year.

The main urban centres all started this year with increases in their average dwelling values, although value changes in Wellington were patchy.

The table below shows CoreLogic's current average values in all urban districts throughout the country and their changes over one, three and 12 months.

The HPI has recorded gains in average values for four months in a row, although the rate at which values have been rising has been decelerating.

"The slowdown in the pace of monthly gains is a timely reminder the emerging recovery trend remains tentative and shows some variability from region to region," CoreLogic NZ Chief Property Economist Kelvin Davidson said.

"Even though most indicators are pointing up, there's still the challenge of high interest rates to contend with, both for new borrowers and those who are replacing existing loans."

"Granted, there's now a whiff of Official Cash Rate cuts on the horizon, which will help mortgage rates drift lower on the popular, shorter fixed terms, but that's probably a story for the second half of 2024, not the first," Davidson said.

The comment stream on this story is now closed.

CoreLogic NZ House Price Index
January 2024
Average Dwelling Value
Territorial authority	January 2024	December 2023	1 month change $	1 month change %	3 month change %	12 month change %
Far North	$706,142	$693,782	$12,360	1.8%	3.9%	-0.3%
Whangarei	$739,827	$740,076	-$249	0.0%	0.4%	-7.1%
Kaipara	$834,525	$845,590	-$11,065	-1.3%	1.2%	-3.7%
Auckland - Rodney	$1,252,761	$1,247,586	$5,175	0.4%	1.2%	-4.6%
Rodney - Hibiscus Coast	$1,168,581	$1,172,801	-$4,220	-0.4%	1.5%	-3.8%
Rodney - North	$1,320,646	$1,308,639	$12,007	0.9%	1.2%	-5.2%
Auckland - North Shore	$1,481,330	$1,476,448	$4,882	0.3%	3.5%	-1.3%
North Shore - Coastal	$1,668,361	$1,667,225	$1,135	0.1%	2.2%	-3.0%
North Shore - North Harbour	$1,462,953	$1,458,941	$4,012	0.3%	4.0%	1.2%
North Shore - Onewa	$1,194,102	$1,191,185	$2,917	0.2%	4.4%	-1.2%
Auckland - Waitakere	$1,008,909	$1,009,099	-$190	0.0%	1.6%	-5.4%
Auckland - Central	$1,474,694	$1,469,442	$5,253	0.4%	2.1%	-6.7%
Auckland City - Central	$1,260,047	$1,256,135	$3,912	0.3%	1.0%	-4.7%
Auckland City - Islands	$1,601,692	$1,592,354	$9,337	0.6%	8.8%	-5.2%
Auckland City - South	$1,326,639	$1,320,766	$5,873	0.4%	3.0%	-7.1%
Auckland_City - East	$1,833,944	$1,827,514	$6,430	0.4%	1.4%	-7.4%
Auckland - Manukau	$1,173,250	$1,160,072	$13,178	1.1%	2.9%	-2.5%
Manukau - Central	$905,550	$881,594	$23,956	2.7%	3.0%	-1.7%
Manukau - East	$1,484,144	$1,474,977	$9,168	0.6%	3.5%	-0.9%
Manukau - North West	$1,013,606	$994,375	$19,231	1.9%	2.4%	-3.8%
Auckland - Papakura	$932,562	$929,884	$2,678	0.3%	-0.1%	-2.5%
Auckland - Franklin	$917,421	$898,267	$19,154	2.1%	1.6%	-1.6%
Thames Coromandel	$1,151,147	$1,158,706	-$7,559	-0.7%	1.7%	-4.8%
Hauraki	$636,422	$640,416	-$3,994	-0.6%	0.2%	-0.8%
Waikato	$753,704	$735,798	$17,906	2.4%	4.3%	-4.0%
Matamata Piako	$689,145	$700,782	-$11,637	-1.7%	-0.2%	-5.2%
Hamilton	$807,938	$806,226	$1,712	0.2%	1.3%	-3.1%
Hamilton - Central & North West	$756,105	$757,225	-$1,120	-0.1%	1.2%	-3.9%
Hamilton - North East	$996,206	$993,035	$3,171	0.3%	1.3%	-2.9%
Hamilton - South East	$749,599	$744,030	$5,569	0.7%	2.3%	-2.0%
Hamilton - South West	$710,149	$711,523	-$1,374	-0.2%	0.1%	-3.8%
Waipa	$869,051	$878,267	-$9,216	-1.0%	-1.0%	-1.4%
Otorohanga	$538,293	$539,492	-$1,199	-0.2%	1.3%	3.3%
South Waikato	$419,087	$420,216	-$1,129	-0.3%	0.6%	-7.9%
Waitomo	$360,118	$364,520	-$4,401	-1.2%	-2.3%	-4.8%
Taupo	$836,994	$830,501	$6,493	0.8%	1.4%	-2.6%
Western BOP	$1,003,811	$1,000,572	$3,240	0.3%	-0.2%	-1.0%
Tauranga	$1,038,691	$1,032,090	$6,601	0.6%	3.2%	-3.7%
Rotorua	$642,462	$664,533	-$22,072	-3.3%	-1.6%	-5.5%
Whakatane	$740,299	$737,357	$2,942	0.4%	-0.2%	2.8%
Kawerau	$349,890	$362,845	-$12,954	-3.6%	-11.4%	-17.7%
Opotiki	$499,497	$502,760	-$3,263	-0.6%	-1.7%	-2.9%
Gisborne	$610,183	$592,160	$18,023	3.0%	2.4%	-5.4%
Wairoa	$401,206	$405,771	-$4,565	-1.1%	4.6%	-4.9%
Hastings	$800,446	$802,195	-$1,748	-0.2%	1.9%	1.3%
Napier	$756,079	$745,834	$10,245	1.4%	1.2%	-4.6%
Central Hawkes Bay	$588,799	$579,031	$9,768	1.7%	-0.1%	0.3%
New Plymouth	$716,288	$710,795	$5,493	0.8%	3.0%	-1.5%
Stratford	$500,270	$495,079	$5,192	1.0%	5.2%	-1.2%
South Taranaki	$431,264	$430,650	$613	0.1%	-0.7%	-0.8%
Ruapehu	$366,199	$361,595	$4,605	1.3%	2.4%	-4.2%
Whanganui	$507,403	$506,792	$611	0.1%	3.5%	-3.0%
Rangitikei	$424,891	$426,732	-$1,841	-0.4%	1.3%	-7.1%
Manawatu	$612,202	$609,662	$2,539	0.4%	2.3%	-3.2%
Palmerston North	$648,190	$644,228	$3,962	0.6%	1.8%	-1.3%
Tararua	$405,945	$405,657	$288	0.1%	-1.8%	-7.1%
Horowhenua	$567,257	$571,336	-$4,079	-0.7%	0.1%	-5.4%
Kapiti Coast	$809,062	$803,509	$5,552	0.7%	2.5%	-6.3%
Porirua	$836,821	$845,021	-$8,201	-1.0%	1.5%	-0.8%
Upper Hutt	$746,478	$743,255	$3,223	0.4%	2.7%	-0.7%
Hutt	$793,327	$789,203	$4,124	0.5%	4.7%	-1.4%
Wellington City	$1,023,966	$1,022,234	$1,732	0.2%	0.6%	-2.7%
Wellington - Central & South	$975,913	$978,045	-$2,132	-0.2%	-0.2%	-1.8%
Wellington - East	$1,131,216	$1,133,505	-$2,289	-0.2%	-0.5%	-4.6%
Wellington - North	$973,292	$966,725	$6,567	0.7%	1.2%	-3.1%
Wellington - West	$1,153,202	$1,159,570	-$6,368	-0.5%	0.2%	-1.8%
Masterton	$569,697	$562,998	$6,699	1.2%	2.3%	-4.8%
Carterton	$632,117	$622,397	$9,720	1.6%	2.3%	-4.5%
South Wairarapa	$744,389	$733,598	$10,791	1.5%	1.9%	-10.2%
Tasman	$781,836	$777,363	$4,473	0.6%	1.3%	-4.8%
Nelson	$782,829	$780,528	$2,301	0.3%	1.3%	-2.9%
Marlborough	$703,292	$698,781	$4,511	0.6%	1.1%	-3.0%
Kaikoura	$682,692	$644,155	$38,537	6.0%	2.4%	6.4%
Buller	$339,922	$335,293	$4,629	1.4%	2.2%	6.4%
Grey	$376,763	$373,539	$3,224	0.9%	1.4%	4.6%
Westland	$417,631	$402,816	$14,815	3.7%	9.1%	5.5%
Hurunui	$635,370	$631,793	$3,577	0.6%	2.8%	4.3%
Waimakariri	$706,969	$704,265	$2,705	0.4%	1.4%	-0.8%
Christchurch	$757,881	$754,858	$3,023	0.4%	2.3%	1.9%
Christchurch - Banks Peninsula	$830,792	$858,699	-$27,907	-3.2%	1.6%	4.3%
Christchurch - Central & North	$856,116	$856,439	-$323	0.0%	1.3%	0.8%
Christchurch - East	$594,731	$590,083	$4,647	0.8%	2.9%	2.4%
Christchurch - Hills	$1,062,960	$1,066,501	-$3,540	-0.3%	1.5%	3.4%
Christchurch - Southwest	$723,846	$716,532	$7,314	1.0%	3.1%	2.3%
Selwyn	$830,303	$829,524	$779	0.1%	1.4%	0.1%
Ashburton	$537,794	$533,223	$4,571	0.9%	1.8%	1.2%
Timaru	$523,162	$523,163	-$1	0.0%	2.3%	0.9%
MacKenzie	$756,226	$755,481	$745	0.1%	1.4%	6.3%
Waimate	$433,282	$424,160	$9,121	2.2%	3.7%	2.6%
Waitaki	$471,630	$472,250	-$620	-0.1%	1.3%	-2.8%
Central Otago	$805,499	$797,422	$8,078	1.0%	1.6%	5.3%
Queenstown Lakes	$1,781,475	$1,768,437	$13,038	0.7%	6.2%	6.0%
Dunedin	$634,894	$630,582	$4,312	0.7%	3.1%	-1.3%
Dunedin - Central & North	$642,214	$632,804	$9,409	1.5%	2.7%	-2.0%
Dunedin - Peninsular & Coastal	$603,820	$609,391	-$5,571	-0.9%	2.1%	1.9%
Dunedin - South	$593,757	$592,202	$1,555	0.3%	1.6%	-2.5%
Dunedin - Taieri	$677,760	$672,431	$5,329	0.8%	5.1%	-0.6%
Clutha	$392,516	$391,330	$1,186	0.3%	3.4%	0.5%
Southland	$510,683	$494,985	$15,699	3.2%	4.4%	4.3%
Gore	$419,024	$415,511	$3,514	0.8%	6.5%	0.8%
Invercargill	$463,840	$460,431	$3,409	0.7%	1.3%	-0.1%

Auckland Region	$1,289,768	$1,283,432	$6,336	0.5%	2.2%	-4.7%
Wellington Region	$909,498	$908,228	$1,270	0.1%	1.8%	-2.0%
Main Urban Areas	$1,026,289	$1,021,888	$4,401	0.4%	2.3%	-3.1%
All of Aotearoa	$928,184	$924,489	$3,696	0.4%	2.1%	-2.7%

•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.

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.

81 Comments

by 1689 Baptist | 1st Feb 24, 7:38am 1706726288

Patchy

by tothepoint | 1st Feb 24, 9:15am 1706732115

So, even though the housing market is turning around (albeit a patchy recovery), many respondents here will plead terminal doom and gloom……

Oh dear, what can be done about them? 🤔

TTP

by Harvey W | 1st Feb 24, 8:39am 1706729999

Will prices rise 10% this year? Or maybe a little less?

by Amokk | 1st Feb 24, 8:59am 1706731155

Not to rain on your parade with my doom and gloom but going on this info from a recent article I’d suggest the spruiking and speculation that keeps the ponzi alive is in for a lot more pain….

Centrix data shows that there were more than 20,000 home loan accounts past due in December, a 21% rise compared to the year before.

Maybe, just maybe the property pumpers are the doom and gloomers? Nah, not in New Zealand as houses are first and foremost shelters not ways for the greedy to milk them eh.

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 9:30am 1706733021

There is definitely some doom and gloom to be had; building, council, and compliance costs are still all heading in the same direction, with virtually no signs of reducing. So unless there's less people competing for current stock, hard to see much changing.

Unless there's a total economic collapse. In which case, house prices are the least of people's concerns.

Pointing that out isn't spruiking, just as highlighting the inflationary pressures of sustainability initiatives isn't anti-environment, or rising freight costs isn't condoning terrorist actions in the Red Sea.

The world's a hard place, and so are adult discussions.

by the Joneses | 1st Feb 24, 1:09pm 1706746156

If you want an adult discussion, better go somewhere where TTP doesn't start it.

by Pragmatist | 1st Feb 24, 10:01am 1706734897

Overall I think this year is going to be pretty flat, neither up nor down significantly (ie. <2%). Pockets may diverge from the overall malaise, but the DGMs will be resorting to using their precious Scrolls by Purex to mop their tears as the crash fails to materialise in 2024.

by 1689 Baptist | 1st Feb 24, 9:38am 1706733536

I don't know what it is about my one word comment that makes me a doom and gloom merchant. I am regularly accused of being a spruiker on this page as well so who knows. Most people seem more interested in attacking and name calling anyone who doesn't echo their own convictions, rather than engage in reasoned discussion.

In the last month, of the 92 regions listed, 25 regions fell in value a bit and 67 went up a bit. Is that not patchy?

I suppose any response other than a spontaneous ejaculation of ecstacy makes me a DGM.

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 9:44am 1706733867

If you're not in agreement with the tribe, then you're our enemy.

We shall dismiss you by attaching a title to you, and overlook anything you say regardless of it's bearing to reality.

by Pragmatist | 1st Feb 24, 9:56am 1706734572

Hang on, which side are you accusing of this behaviour? :)

by 1689 Baptist | 1st Feb 24, 9:58am 1706734729

It could apply to either side. But my response was to TTP who accused me of doom and gloom for calling the January data patchy.

by Pragmatist | 1st Feb 24, 10:02am 1706734948

You seem to have trouble following threading, my post was not addressed at you.

by HouseMouse | 1st Feb 24, 10:24am 1706736281

Best to ignore that dude

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 10:08am 1706735300

Any "side". There shouldn't actually be "sides", people should be able to identify and address individual issues on a case by case basis.

by Pragmatist | 1st Feb 24, 10:36am 1706737004

Indeed, but the reality is that most do join a side then label everybody that disagrees with them as the other side.

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 11:15am 1706739332

Living dualistically as we do, there's an evolutionary benefit in categorizing. That's not the same as joining a club or tribe to rail against the other group.

Fairly common though.

by Averageman | 1st Feb 24, 9:12am 1706731935

Businesses tanking left and right due to wallets locked shut. Inflation still pumping. Bank rates still at historically average levels. New reports IRD etc is pursuing those behind on tax, much more so than during covid.

All that, but banks still on extend and pretend for loan defaulters. Which one will switch to pushing financial reality first?

by BigOldWeapon | 1st Feb 24, 10:33am 1706736820

I'm not seeing this 'wallets locked shut' when out and about. Shops, bars, cafes restaurants all seem very busy.

by Sluggy | 1st Feb 24, 3:08pm 1706753314

My Accountant in central Auckland looks after a lot of hospo business, his numbers would beg to differ with your reckon.

by RickStrauss | 1st Feb 24, 3:26pm 1706754402

It's one of those Y-shaped things, I guess. Folk who had low debt but benefited from the RBNZ's circa $12 billion in taxpayer handouts to property are on the top of the Y, those who desperately jumped into the market with huge debts in case the govts and RBNZ found yet more ways to push up property prices, well they're on the bottom and not spending.

by tuisbest | 1st Feb 24, 10:27am 1706736476

Personal question I'd love some opinions: Saw a beautiful family house, amazing location, and am thinking of buying. It's a cross-lease with 7 others, but the house 'feels' freehold, has its own driveway and all houses on the land are fully fenced. It was built in 1989-1990. Brick ground level, but roughcast upper story. Reportedly not a leaker, but a comprehensive building inspection would obviously be imperative.

The cross-lease is not ideal, but that factor keeps the price down for an awesome house we'd love to live in. Same goes for the roughcast upper - less ideal, but could work out well for a cheaper house. Hopefully the built period means it escaped the worst practices from the asbestos and leaky homes disaster eras. Looking at houses is a hobby of mine and this one stands out as amazing value (in terms of 'niceness' to live there) for the price. We'd never attempt to convert to freehold and won't be adding any rooms, garages, balconies, etc. It's all there already.

We're in no hurry to buy and very happy renters at the moment with a large deposit in TDs.

Any insights appreciated! I'm thinking everything could still tank in 2024. Or the insane immigration and the handy property market fall from 2021 might make this a good time to buy.

by HouseMouse | 1st Feb 24, 9:13am 1706731981

Not in a flood prone area?

by tuisbest | 1st Feb 24, 9:18am 1706732293

No, it's a bit higher than the surrounding areas and not in a flood plain or flood-prone. Thanks for checking, HM, appreciated.

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 9:24am 1706732656

Leasehold is avoid at all costs, but cross-lease is generally fine, unless you have a strong desire to do some big changes to the property.

by tuisbest | 1st Feb 24, 9:29am 1706732968

Thanks, Painter. Sounds right to me.

by Pragmatist | 1st Feb 24, 9:55am 1706734506

Also check the crosslease terms, some of the older cross leases don't actually split the land into two seperate "sections", so the land is basically communal, and you have no rights to stop the neighbour from wandering through 'your' backyard. 95% of the time its fine, people are mostly sane & decent, but if you get that one guy thats just a bit weird its a major PITA.

by HouseMouse | 1st Feb 24, 9:32am 1706733122

Nice work. You seem very thorough in doing all the right checks

by Averageman | 1st Feb 24, 9:14am 1706732059

Check the title for any "exclusive use" areas attached to the unit your interested in. If there is its freehold use in all but name.

by tuisbest | 1st Feb 24, 10:27am 1706736422

Thanks for pointing this out, Averageman. The graphical 'flats plan' is a bit of a challenge to decipher, but it mentions 'restrictive covenants' and says "Restrictive covenant boundaries are the centres of wooden fences.." (if I deciphered this correctly). The relative high fences around every property most likely mean the house will be freehold in all but name, but I'll be sure to check with my lawyer. Thanks!

by 1689 Baptist | 1st Feb 24, 9:49am 1706734157

My first home was a cross lease and it is absolutely fine.

I had a bit of time to wait until the other title holder could share the cost of sealing the shared driveway. Other than that I was very happy with it. It was about 300k less than the equivalent freehold property in todays money. When I moved overseas and rented it I discovered that tenants don't care about the title. The rental yield was over 15% and more than covered the mortgage repayment. The rates were only $900 a year which was amazing for central Hamilton.

Cross leases make a far better entry level home than freehold townhouses or houses miles out of town in my opinion.

All the Best!

by tuisbest | 1st Feb 24, 10:21am 1706736110

Thank you very much for your comment, Baptist. It's very helpful!

by 1harlow1 | 1st Feb 24, 10:35am 1706736931

I'd just be very mindful of a few things.

Any monolithic plaster systems from the late 80's onwards are very much in the leaky building era.

Anything pre-2000 will require an invasive absetos survey prior to undertaking any refurb or demolition work.

A normal pre-purchase inspection typically won't comment on leaky building issues beyond whether or not internal linings and framing appear dry. Infact don't just employ a tradie with a moisture meter in general for your inspection.

Even if you undertake a more comprehensive weathertightness inspection, without the co-operation of the homeowner to do invasive testing, all you will get is an outline of visually apparent risks, and there is guaranteed to be plenty with a plaster clad upper story of that age.

by tuisbest | 1st Feb 24, 11:07am 1706738855

Thanks very much, 1harlow1. What I get from your advice is to only consider a monolithic plaster house if it is possible to do invasive testing? I was wondering how successful invasive testing is in diagnosing leaky homes. Is it possible to miss leaking by only testing in areas that happen to be OK? Or is invasive testing considered reasonably failsafe?

by 1harlow1 | 2nd Feb 24, 11:51am 1706827878

Yes absolutely possible to still miss it, the only failsafe way of detecting any issues is to remove all of the cladding. The older plaster systems without a cavity are entirely reliant on the paint finish to exclude moisture. Even a small pinprick left over 20+ years can result in a lot of damage.

An invasive inspection by someone who knows what they are doing will give you around 90% certainty that there is no significant consequential structural damage associated with any potential leaks.

Someone who doesn't know what they are doing, but owns a moisture meter, will tell you the house is fine based on nothing more than the inside plaster board being dry. I've seen this happen many times, yet the framing has turned to sawdust.

I personally wouldn't even bother with a plaster cladding system, unless you are getting a significant discount. Even if installed flawlessly, you are unlikely to get more than 50 years out of it, particularly if substrate is polystyrene. So plan for a re-clad in the next 10 years as a minimum.

by tuisbest | 2nd Feb 24, 1:22pm 1706833337

Thank you for sharing your expertise, Harlow. Very much appreciated. The 50-year 'expiry date' you state for cladding 'done right' is pretty sobering.

I did find the following guys and think I'll give them a call: https://www.moisturedetection.co.nz/helps/buying-a-house/ But we will think very carefully, bearing in mind the house has been built 30 years ago, so a reclad will probably be on the cards sooner than we'd like or could image.

by BigOldWeapon | 1st Feb 24, 10:42am 1706737338

Something else to consider would be to subdivide it off into eight fee simple titles. This would require agreement from the owners of the other seven dwellings and you would need to enlist a surveyor and planner which isn't exactly cheap. However, if you managed to get everyone on board and split the consulting and council costs eight ways, the increased property value to each party would massively outweigh the costs.

by tuisbest | 1st Feb 24, 11:12am 1706739135

Thanks, but I'm going to assume we won't get this many property owners to agree to a conversion. However, if that turns out to be an option, that would be a nice bonus.

by Chairman Moa | 1st Feb 24, 12:51pm 1706745075

My last family home in Newton/Newmarket area, Auckland was in cross-leased arrangement. It's the original 1900s home and they built two new townhouses in front of it. We had our own section and garden, fully fenced but in the cross-leased terms, it considered to be common land.

We never had any issues with it and we all got along well. The other thing you will need to be considered is that if you have any extensions planned, it might need sign off from other owners.

We sold it in 2014 in days, so cross-leased wasn't an issue to buyers.

Good luck

by tuisbest | 1st Feb 24, 2:16pm 1706750185

Glad it worked out so well for you, CM! Thanks a lot for sharing your experience - appreciated.

by Matt_09 | 1st Feb 24, 2:48pm 1706752108

Just remember that the reasons this is cheap, or relatively cheap, to you (crosslease/ cladding etc) will be the same reasons that when you try and sell puts people off… I know that seems a long way off now but still a consideration

by tuisbest | 1st Feb 24, 3:41pm 1706755282

Yes, thanks. Fair point.

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 9:25am 1706732714

So the January cheap house buying bonanza that was being promoted on here was about a good a deal as a Briscoes sale.

by delboy | 1st Feb 24, 10:19am 1706735957

I still feel if there was a good time to buy it’s now.

Interest rates will start going down, continued high immigration and a lack of supply in my opinion will see prices double in the next 7-10 years.

by HouseMouse | 1st Feb 24, 10:33am 1706736827

I tend to agree, noting it’s not a one size fits all equation, as per my recent posts that there’s lots of different ways to skin the cat.

Don’t agree with prices doubling in the next 7-10 years though. If I was to hazard a guess, perhaps half as much again, absolute max.

I think there could be reasonably strong growth in prices in 2026-2027, following a profound house building slump that we are about to enter into this year, and falling interest rates.

by J.C. | 1st Feb 24, 10:30am 1706736631

You have to ask yourself the question, if prices can double in the next 7-10 years, why can't they 3x,4x over the same period?

I've asked similar at the water cooler and the response was mute.

People are captured by the 7-10 year theory, but only if it's like Goldilocks. Not too hold, not too cold. House prices going up 3-4x is too hot, but 1x is just right.

Ashley Church will know what I'm talking about.

by 1689 Baptist | 1st Feb 24, 10:51am 1706737883

To see house prices double in 10 years we will need to average 7% growth. To double in 7 years it will need to average 11%. That might be a tad optimistic. house price inflation has flattened in the last few years in places of lowest affordability.

I think over the next 10 years house prices will average 2-3% which means over 300k in capital gains in 10 years regardless. Rents will go up more.

by General Comment | 1st Feb 24, 11:08am 1706738901

I think doubling of occupants per residence is more likely than prices doubling. As a multiple property owner doubling of prices would be great, but as a parent whose children are likely to be looking to buy in about 10 years' time, no thanks.

by Nifty1 | 1st Feb 24, 10:37am 1706737078

To the moon 🚀

by J.C. | 1st Feb 24, 10:42am 1706737354

That's the spirit. If 1 million South Asian IT workers enter NZ, they have to live somewhere. Houses don't come out of a genie lamp.

by 1689 Baptist | 1st Feb 24, 10:54am 1706738084

At some point NZ will adopt factory build prefab houses. Until then, the average building cost is over 4k/m2.

by Zwifter | 1st Feb 24, 11:43am 1706741003

I see you finally get it, only Bitcoin comes out of a genie lamp.

by J.C. | 1st Feb 24, 1:59pm 1706749153

Nothing to do with the ol' rat poison. Only that house prices only go down over time when measured in Bitcoin, but in fiat currency they only go up.

There's a simple reason for this.

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 2:19pm 1706750362

I wonder what percentage of bitcoin collectors can afford to buy a house.

I'm envisaging the distribution in a pointy geometrical shape.

There's a simple reason for this also.

by J.C. | 1st Feb 24, 3:11pm 1706753465

A better wonder might be can 1 Bitcoin increase in fiat value to the equivalent of a median priced house. Given that 90% of wallets hold <BTC1, you can assume that most BTC collectors cannot use their holdings to buy a house in Nu Zillun.

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 3:51pm 1706755898

That is a good wonder. If the belief was strong enough and the reality backed it, you would expect a greater volume of people holding larger amounts, not less. Instead, it's got the same amount of conviction as buying a lottery ticket.

Although I was talking about the average collectors overall net worth, not just the value of their BTC holdings. A sort of indicator of the overall financial acumen and ability of the average collectors.

by J.C. | 1st Feb 24, 4:03pm 1706756604

Instead, it's got the same amount of conviction as buying a lottery ticket.

Possibly. The world's largest financial institutions seem to reckon lottery tickets are necessary in their product suite.

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 4:07pm 1706756848

The carrot of a high windfall for a relatively small outlay is a fairly profitable model.

by J.C. | 1st Feb 24, 4:51pm 1706759499

The carrot of a high windfall for a relatively small outlay is a fairly profitable model.

True. Opportunities for investments to 10x+ are few and far between. Ratty has been that vehicle for those with diamond hands.

Now the only 100x opportunities are in the degen space. Not Bitcoin in the near term. Can't see a USD4 mio Bitcoin before 2030.

by John from Bunnings | 1st Feb 24, 10:44am 1706737466

I reckon a rise of 5-10% for the year is not out of the question.

by HouseMouse | 1st Feb 24, 10:54am 1706738066

Possible, but I would suggest contingent on there being at least 2-3 OCR cuts by year’s end. Line call if there will be that many

by Zwifter | 1st Feb 24, 11:44am 1706741071

Been with 4 to 5% for months now, lets see how that pans out for 2024 by January.

by ozzzy2 | 1st Feb 24, 11:47am 1706741237

On average, I would say that every house in every region of NZ, is at least $100k over priced.

by Thats All Folks | 1st Feb 24, 11:48am 1706741290

Another giant waste of everyone’s time. Thanks Poor Logic!

The REINZ HPI is the only measure worth examining in this climate.

by DTRH | 1st Feb 24, 12:25pm 1706743543

Housing is still way over valued to income. So million dollar mortgage would take 25000 hours work @ $40 thats 3125 8 hours days just to pay principal add interest cost x these totals by 2.25. Just think about it.

by Nifty1 | 1st Feb 24, 12:45pm 1706744731

It may well be but is that stopping people buying?

by Zwifter | 1st Feb 24, 12:53pm 1706745208

Glad I didn't over analyse it back in the day, not buying a house back in the early 2000's would have been the biggest mistake of my life.

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 1:19pm 1706746791

It's all a bit of a silly exercise, if you're still earning the average wage on your 20th or even 10th year of home ownership, you're doing it wrong.

A better one would be, if you only have around 700,000hrs in life, why would you spend more than 1 making variations of basically the exact same argument.

In the context of those 700,000 hours, spending 3% of them securing a home for you and your family, is actually kinda cheap.

by the Joneses | 1st Feb 24, 1:28pm 1706747315

Spoken like a true salesman.

Roll up, roll up, get your mortgages here! Who cares about affordability if your house price is going to the moon! And your wages! Probably. Now look here at a picture of a poor person in Zimbabwe with a trillion dollar bill, that million dollar loan seems small in comparison now doesn't it! Now sign on the dotted line, unless of course you don't want to realise your potential?

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 2:30pm 1706751057

I'm not selling anything. These are the sorts of equations people should be engaging in when evaluating their life trajectory. Rather than just thinking of 25,000 hours in a vacuum. That's only double the amount of time it takes the average person to get really good at something.

One good one I learned years back was 60hrs a week for 9 months a year is more labour than 40hrs a week for a whole year. 3 uninterrupted months off can be of more personal value than taking tidbits here and there.

by the Joneses | 1st Feb 24, 1:20pm 1706746837

Maybe the sums weren't that bad when you bought?

You know there has been a housing price boom for the last few decades right?

by tuisbest | 1st Feb 24, 2:14pm 1706750081

I'm sure for some people who bought at the end of 2021, that decision will turn out to be the biggest mistake of their lives. It would have been for us, had we taken all the money the bank wanted to lend us and bought at a hugely inflated price and 2% interest rate at the time.

I'm glad it turned out well for you. But I also think it had a lot to do with luck. It's a bit like a Lotto winner saying: "I'm so glad I bought that ticket. The fact that I'm now a millionaire proves that anyone can do it."

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 2:29pm 1706750994

It's probably more the reverse.

Bad market periods are relatively rarer than stable or strong ones, and losing your home ownership in a bad period is rare within rare - it's more like winning lotto, but in a bad way.

So it's more like someone being run over crossing the street, and thinking crossing the street is super dangerous, when the vast majority of people doing it have no consequence.

by RickStrauss | 1st Feb 24, 3:44pm 1706755491

In fairness, being born at the right time to benefit from affordable housing thanks to post-war generations' efforts, followed by stratospheric price rises thanks to a few generations' changing policy at the expense of following generations...that's akin to a lottery win for many.

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 3:53pm 1706756009

Or just being born in this society, at any time.

by tuisbest | 1st Feb 24, 4:10pm 1706757013

Nice argument. However, some people with vested interests are like onlookers encouraging kids to run over a busy street on a very misty morning while the rising sun is blinding oncoming drivers. "Well, I crossed yesterday afternoon before rush hour started and I have been having a great time on this side of the road!"

Then again, none of us can see the future. To some extent, we're like blind people randomly crossing a quiet street. Most will be fine, I suppose.

by Pa1nter | 1st Feb 24, 4:31pm 1706758272

Fair, if people were suggesting others run blindly into the market.

Roads can be dangerous. Use a pedestrian crossing or cross at the lights. Look both ways. Make sure you're visible. That sort of thing.

by ChrisOfNoFame | 1st Feb 24, 9:46pm 1706777191

re ... "Bad market periods are relatively rarer than stable or strong ones, and losing your home ownership in a bad period is rare within rare - it's more like winning lotto, but in a bad way."

Rare within rare to lose a home within a bad period? Prove it. We can wait.

by 1689 Baptist | 1st Feb 24, 7:57pm 1706770665

Its all comparative. Whose to say what is affordable. It wouldn't surprise me if in 20 years time people look back on 2024 with nostalgia at the affordable prices we now have .

by Wrong John | 1st Feb 24, 2:31pm 1706751090

I hope this flatlines [inc inflation] through 2024. Some stability is desperately needed. Let's also wait & see what happens with Mr Seymour's suggestions. If that volcano blows all bets are off.

by ChrisOfNoFame | 1st Feb 24, 3:44pm 1706755478

I have a hacky little program that monitors auction results, including passed-in sales where competitive bids were actually made. It does a number of calculations against various factors to see what's happening. It raises red-flags when exceptionally low or high prices are achieved so I can investigate further. And one thing is very clear at this time ...

In a small but significant number of cases, it is clear people are getting emotionally carried away and are paying way, way beyond what I would consider 'fair value' when surrounding properties are considered. The sums can be as much $250k on a $1.5m property.

Given relatively low sales volumes, such sales will help to drive up the averages. Take care with interpreting rising sales prices. Everything may not be as it seems.

(FYI: Buyers continue to pay top dollar for staged, move-in, ready places. Sellers, don't overlook this. A lick of paint (white) and nice new (undersized?) furniture works wonders on (less than savvy?) buyers.)

by meh | 1st Feb 24, 8:48pm 1706773682

Lol. We know our tokens are losing worth and purchasing power via inflation but apparently when applied to the "value" of a home it means value growth and wealth.

The financial illiteracy is profound.