House values are continuing to slide - falling nationally by 2% in the three months to August, according to Quotable Value.
The average national value stood at $905,357 last month - down from $909,517 in July, and essentially flat since the end of 2023.
The largest city, Auckland, has now recorded declines in average value for seven consecutive months. The average value dropped $5,958 in August to $1,232,455.
Since January, average values in Auckland have declined by $58,932, which works out at $8,419 every month, or about $1,940 a week ($11.50 an hour). The rate of decline in August (0.5%) was a little slower than it had been in July.
QV notes house prices around the country "do not yet reflect the marked increase in consumer confidence following recent interest rate cuts".
QV operations manager James Wilson said the nationwide value trend was reflective of a housing market that has been "severely constricted by strong economic headwinds – including rising unemployment, credit constraints and, of course, high interest rates".
"Now that interest rates are finally coming down, we are seeing renewed interest in housing generally across the country. However, this won’t necessarily translate into home value growth while there’s such an excess of stock available for sale. Values will tighten again when prospective buyers aren’t as spoilt for choice as they are currently, which could take a while," he said.
It was the largest cities that experienced the largest average home value declines in the three months to August. Home values in Auckland and Wellington reduced by 2.8% and 3% respectively, while Hamilton (-1.7%), Tauranga (-1.5%), Christchurch (-1.3%) and Dunedin (-1.1%) also recorded modest home value reductions during the period.
Relative bright spots were few, but Rotorua saw a 8.7% spike in values to an average of $723,488.
However, among the 16 regions, there were 12 that saw declines and just four with rises in value.
Wilson said "an abundance" of real estate listings, especially in and around the biggest cities, is expected to "keep a firm lid on home value growth", even as increasing numbers of buyers start coming out of the woodwork as we move into spring.
He expects to see "even more" listings in the coming months as the spring real estate selling season starts ramping up again.
"More investors will look to sell properties following the changes to the bright line test back in July, and sellers who pulled their listings after trying and failing to sell earlier in the year may even look to try again now that there’s an uptick in activity and a general sense that confidence amongst buyers is increasing."
Wilson said this would continue to promote soft-to-flat value conditions nationally in the short term.
"Spring has sprung and interest rates are coming down – but don’t expect to see house prices suddenly take off again soon."
174 Comments
You topping up the mortgages much?
15% would be at higher end of my thinking in those locations and cashflow will be rubbish unless multi dwelling or similar.
I'm buying cashflow positive in growing cities that didn't get inundated with cheap nasty side by side townhouses. That means not auckland or even hamilton or greater welly or chch. Palmy with a 600sqm section is where you get land cap gain and cashflow. Don't tell anyone up here though I've still got buying to do haha. Que the john cleese joke! Been laughing along to the bank with you all the way
Buy something where you can add value. Be that a renovation, adding a granny flat, subdividing. Those townhouses will not appreciate much in value, and over time with the lack of maintenance (and no body corporate to ensure maintenance is done) they will start to depreciate as they become more and more run down (they are of such poor quality that it won't take long either).
Body Corporates exist under strata law and are enforceable. A Residents Association is just a niceity. What happens when 18 townhouses all need to be repainted? Who is going to force 18 owners to stump up for scaffolding and repainting costs? There is no sinking fund for maintenance like a body corporate.
"cheap nasty side by side townhouses."
Like these you mean? 6 on a narrow 911sq m section:
https://www.barfoot.co.nz/property/residential/north-shore-city/milford…
Hardly cheap! And yet 4 have sold- though 3 were 2 storey and they were asking $1.6 million for those.
Been to those (twice). Very nice indeed. Good location too. Handy to mall, hospital, schools, beach, marina, motorways - very walkable. Generously proportioned and feel like a normal house. The two big balconies make for good entertaining spaces. My kind of project. (But I'd never put the bathrooms where they have.)
Just to harp on about 'density' once again. These 6 very livable dwellings replaced a single house. Ratio 1:6. The surrounding sections are similarly sized with 2, sometimes 3, houses. Ratios 1:3 and 1:2. Thanks to Auckland new Unitary Plan of 2016 we now have heaps and heaps of land on which to build. (Still have silly height rules hence two 3 stories and four 2's.)
Pricewise, yes, these aren't cheap. That's mainly down to quality of these ones. If you're looking to build exactly the same shape and size, meet code with a bit on top, no lifts, using less expensive land, they'd be way cheaper. As the Dutch say, lekker.
Reasonable space, the stairs take up a lot of room but look good. Only downside is of course that the closer you are to the road, the more residents you hear at all hours coming and going past you on the driveway. The price however, reminds me why I don't live in Auckland and don't intend to, but there's plenty who would love to live in units like that.
"Green shoots..."
As per usual by the time buyers see in the data prices going up it will be too late and once again they'll moan about missing the boat.
These qv figures are old new based on sale several months ago just settling in the last 3 months.
REINZ will be a bit more up to date.
I just locked in a 5.99 for 1 year down from 6.95 I was paying.
Locking in under 5% I can see many cashflow options coming back again. And remember that cashflow just goes up as rents rise and mortgages reduce.
Gotta love nz property mate ;)
Nearly net 1,000 people have left NZ every single day for the last six months. Rents are like house prices. They only go up, right?
Edit: Just for perspective, in terms of supply/demand this is like having a stagnant population and a national building initiative constructing around 450 homes per day. Can you imagine the impact that would have on the housing market?
Its not the just the number leaving - its also the type leaving. We are losing professional occupations who earn good money and can afford to buy houses, and replacing them with low skilled, low income migrants who cannot. So the net number of lost "house buyers" is much higher than the overall net number.
Yep - the number of skilled workers entering the country is dropping like a stone. Our outward emigration stats would be much worse if it weren't for an increase in non-working family members immigrating in. Still sobering read. Interesting how we were getting monthly updates on the number of immigrants entering the country all of last year in MSM. Now that number is plummeting, silence.
Wrong.
Running at positive 80k plus net.
And incomes of those arriving are significantly higher than the NZ average, so they're lifting the economy.
Scruffy gen Z are ditching uni and heading to Aus looking for anything soft and easy - they won't find it in any of the main centers there. It's 10x tougher. But hey the cheese is cheaper so you can save the 10k needed for a 20 year old rust bucket of a car.
Degrees are watered down these days with the level of people with them. 2008 heralded a huge influx of university attendees due to the lack of jobs going, and with the level of debt one needs to own a home these days, who wants to hinder their savings opportunity by 1./ not working much for several years and 2./ Having to spend ones 20's paying down that debt, only to look forward to loading up on more with a mortgage. Scruffy Gen Z, or, astute, observant and adaptive to the world around them which has changed a lot in only 10 years.
Based on the level of damage done by Labour, 3 years isnt going to be enough to get the country back on track. The question you should be asking is "will it ever get back to delivering the standard of living it once did?". I believe it will not - we are headed down the South African path, only faster.
I agree. Most cities around the world with very high rates of violent crime have something in common: medium to long-term economic stagnation or decline disproportionately hitting low-income households hardest leading to high levels of wealth inequality.
That's why the worst American cities are not the ones in their deep southern states that never had much to begin with but the ones that are adjacent to wealthy areas or in the rust belt - Oakland, Baltimore, Milwaukee, Chicago.
Not sure where you are getting your data from. Perhaps you can share your source. As of May 2024 we still have a net positive migration. International migration: May 2024 | Stats NZ
Sure!
Two sources, first is Migration data explorer (useful for breakdown of immigration, but excludes citizens): https://mbienz.shinyapps.io/migration_data_explorer/#
Second is actual border crossings via Customs: https://www.customs.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/statistics/oia-respo…
Both show we are deeply negative this year. Yearly migration is positive still by between 35-45k, but given the trend this year it could easily be negative by the end of the year. We need ~25,000 positive migration monthly for the next 6 months to avoid being negative yoy come Feb, or slightly less than 1,000 arrivals per day.
The 6 months to Feb 2024 was the highest positive net migration we've ever really had, and even that figure again would only put us back at ~40k positive (as is current). We turned deeply negative from March onward, ~1,000 outgoing per day, much more than twice as many as the same period last year. Hence the 6mo comment.
The Stats NZ migration number isnt based on real numbers - its based on a computer model that outputs a "best guess" based on historical assumptions. Its only after 16 months when Stats NZ gets actual passport data and cross matches it against what they guessed 16 months ago, and then adjusts the number, is the "real" number calculated.
1000 net for per day for last 6 months hahaha your just making up lies - net loss of 180k that would mean -
Stats NZ has a net GAIN in last 6 months of around +40k - back to around pre-pandemic levels +80k plus a year - that's an extra Napier city every year to build houses for.
And consents have stopped.
Wonder what all that means for supply demand for houses over the next 3 years?
Try a solid 20% increase. Come back fact check me. You tend to guess right when you use real stats and not ridiculous claims like you make.
Source?
Oh right, this is using Stats NZ and their best guess. They assume that a portion of leavers are going for a holiday and hopefully coming back within 16 months. If not, they revise the stats. Actual negative border crossings is nearly 180,000 for the last six months, yes. Hopefully they come back, sounds like you need them to.
not exactly true, both of these charts shows clearly that rents have been increasing over time.
https://figure.nz/chart/azFwYTVvUcrcxT3m-Cn6TyuSQBZ8Kacee
https://www.interest.co.nz/charts/real-estate/rents-average-north-island
if you consider rents dropping $5 one month then maybe.
Just like any market there are peaks and troughs.
Or +4% year on year, normally tracks at or slightly above inflation and has done forever.
From your graph, a relatively recent 2018 property purchase was getting say 420 on average. That's now 600 a week. In another few years 800 a week and you've had 10 years of say a 20 year mortgage term paid off. Your sitting very pretty. It's why everyone does this.
Just don't buy rural backwater high maintenance low demand rubbish. Cause they might shut down your one industry (e.g pulp and paper.....) and the amazing yields you once got turn nasty as half the 800 population town vanishes overnight.
$1.6b investment company, PAG, wants to buy more property in NZ. In the Herald.
Here's a couple.
That's my concern with PPP financing, great if the project has enough revenues to pay, but crap for the road to Whangarei imho, Puhoi holiday highway pays as its high traffic short road, traffic to Whangarei is low. They should have tolled transmission gully to help pay
They couldn't toll transmission gulley, the demand isn't there. It would have resulted in people using the old alternative route, and they would have lost the safety benefits they were claiming for the new road.
Tolls will only cover between 5 and 15% of the cost of roads in NZ. The rest will come from borrowing (hidden via PPP) or additional crown funding.
Their market is a captive one. Its recently arrived immigrants who have no work or credit history, so nobody else will rent them a home. Thats why a recent BTR building had 26 different nationalities living there. BTR is not designed to house Kiwis, and any PR that claims its "solving the housing problem" is just that - propaganda.
Why would a BTR business want to take the risk where others won’t, in terms of work and credit history?
How many new immigrants can afford $630 pw for a one bedroom apartment? I guess if it’s a couple it’s quite doable, even on minimum wages. They will be warm and energy efficient, at least, keeping power bills down
They only make a commercial return if heavily subsidised by Governments. The people who are currently outraged over little landlords being able to tax deduct interest will be aghast at the BTR outfits who can tax deduct interest, claim depreciation, receive huge rent subsidies, and expatriate all income back overseas so little to no tax is ever paid in NZ. Its taxpayers paying for housing for the middle class.
How much will house prices go up in 2025?
ASB +10.9%, BNZ +6.9%, Westpac +6.4%, RBNZ +4.8%, ANZ +4.5%.
Median +6.4%, average +6.7%
https://www.opespartners.co.nz/private-property/issue-124
Would it not be better if house prices stabilised for a while which in turn might slow down the flow of our citizens who are currently exiting NZ to get ahead. Beware what you wish for. My children and grandchildren all live in NZ. My wife are I are quickly becoming the exception.
On 31 Dec 2023, The Comb predicted 10% increases in 2024
The banks were all circa 7-8%
Independent economist Tony Alexander is among the most optimistic pundits, tipping prices to jump by up to 10 per cent next year.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/nz-and-auckland-house-prices-what-can-we-…
Anyone know how many houses Jarrod Kerr owns?
Anyone left wondering how we got into this mess?
I think the banks are being more bullish - and they are talking about national figures.
Regions may increase but Auckland and perhaps Wellington will be relatively static. My personal guess is that Auckland will be within 2% of its current prices this time next year. Every chance of further declines when the reality that further interest rate declines don't result in house price increases.
In May Auckland had a record housing completion - of around 19,500 for the year. Given the numbers in the pipeline, that suggest that there will be another 10,000 completions before Christmas. That is homes for 25,000 people on top of current oversupply. And even where those 10,000 homes have been sold off the plans before completion - there will be 10,000 new rental homes on the market. And this is in a location will static population.
For Auckland (because it's where I live and what I know), I think the stats can be misleading. Values can still be going up slightly (and I think they are now) while the figures say they're going down.
I live in a nice, but not flash, suburb of Auckland. A lot of 1960s houses on 800 sqm sections. There's a fair amount of intensification happening and in one corner of the suburb there's a large battery-farm style development where street-upon-street of terraces are being shoe-horned in. The suburb averages are still heading down fairly sharply, because the median sale in the suburb now would now be a $700k, small terraced house, despite the values for pretty much the entire suburb being static or slightly up.
Given that the entire Auckland region is dominated by new terrace developments and increased density, decreasing values doesn't necessarily indicate decreasing value for every housing asset..... it just means that the average asset is decreasing in quality, size and amenity.
Don't these sources of the estimates have a strong bias to get Kiwis feeling prices are heading North like a rocket....I am unconvinced - in fact doubtful - I think the ponzi of our lives has just finished and there is no appetite among ordinary folk to reignite it.
The Fed will drop this month. NZ Interest rates are only going further south for the remainder for the of this year. It will take time to filter out the high interest loans and make your average Joe feel like they have more cash back in their pockets. Markets are cyclical and sentiment driven. I doubt the market will be going back in 6 months time from here, on the back end of summer. Taking the emotion away, lower and higher interest rates were the fuel and bust of this latest cycle. Whether the next cycle will go up at the same rate remains to be seen, but it will go up!
Meanwhile US house prices have exploded forming a bubble bigger than prior to the GFC:
https://x.com/gameoftrades_/status/1833203719673958765?s=46&t=MUwQeKa7M…
A quick reminder of just how elevated house prices are in inflation adjusted terms:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QNZR628BIS
Not a prediction, but there is scope for another 30-40% drop as this recession kicks in. That is how out of control prices got the last 20 years.
And remember we’re experiencing the longest yield curve inversion right now since just prior to the 1929 crash the Great Depression.
https://x.com/gameoftrades_/status/1833166295120195932?s=46&t=MUwQeKa7M…
If things get really bad the next few years it can’t be said that there haven’t been ample warning signs (there are/have been). It’s just that they are being ignored by those who want to continue making money from what has been working in their favour in recent years/decades.
There’s a reasonably detailed thread here on Twitter (or should I say X now?):
https://x.com/gameoftrades_/status/1833166295120195932?s=46&t=MUwQeKa7M…
Expect high volatility - it’s possible we see stocks experience an initial blowoff top when the Fed cuts but that is followed by a crash when the market adjust for just how bad the underlying economy really is.
For NZ housing my view is that we are unlikely to see the 2021 peak again this decade with a lot of downside risk the next 12-24 months. Even if rstes drop a lot - it will be difficult for government and RBNZ to keep inflation stable in my view given what has happened leading up to this point. So we could see either of a deep deflationary recession (think 1930’s) or a surge once more in inflation if they overcook any response (think 1970’s) - resulting in even higher future mortgage rates on this high pile of private debt (but private debt to GDP wasn’t a problem in the 70’s = problems for our economy going forward)
Basically we need a lower level of private debt to GDP for our problems to go away - but that is going to be painful in one way or another. That debt is a drag that is going to keep holding us back anytime inflation appears - which if your are a student of history it does and when you least want it to - which is why allowing ourselves to go in such a high private debt drunken splurge has been very foolish in my opinion.
As you can see here our housing bubble/problem is almost entirely related to the quantity of debt we’ve extended/leveraged against the market - which has been tolerated (even enticed) by ever falling interest rates for decades:
https://tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/households-debt-to-gdp
But if you look at long term international interest rate trends, it’s possible we’ve just broken out of a 4 decade downward trend, which could mean big trouble for nations holding high debt relative to productivity/incomes. See the US 10 year long term trends: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-bond-yield (go to max timescale)
What properties bulls won’t tell you is that it is possible that mortgage rates are higher in 5 years time than they are now - so if you have a big mortgage, that pain may not be going away anytime soon.
Neat tool. Shows drop from Q4 2021 is about 22% to Q1 2024, and further REINZ HPI nominal price drop of -1.9% in the 3 months to July before inflation.
If you add in the 90 day rates line it's even more revealing https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1tzuP
The last time interest rates were similarly high for a significant period was 2004 (48% lower than Q1 2024), and also momentarily in a similar position as financial markets went into freefall in early 2008 (42% lower than Q1 2024).
Insulating factors could include rhetoric and hope for falling interest rates as CPI tracks a falling trajectory, potentially also QE and funny money seeking NZ property as capital markets seek higher returns / less losses.
IO - the tool from the Bank of International Settlements is even better Comparative view of New Zealand - Selected residential property prices, Real, Index, 2010 = 100 (bis.org)
"A Wellington real estate salesperson who lost about $200,000 on a new build townhouse says a similar situation is being played out around the country.
Mike Robbers of Lowe & Co Realty..."
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/350409933/wellington-real-estate-agent…
Also from the article:
"He said the end result was that they had a bigger mortgage."
Let's assume that they had an additional mortgage of $200,000 (i.e the amount of the losses) as a result of this investment.
At mortgage interest rates of 6.5% p.a and 30 years, the annual P&I payments are $15,315 p.a (for an investment that they no longer own). Over the 30 year life of the mortgage that is total payments of $459,464 - for an investment that they no longer own. This is $459,464 that they will not have for use in their retirement.
Remember the property promoters: "House prices keep up with inflation." That investment certainly did not keep up with inflation.
Other marketing lines frequently repeated by property promoters:
1. "Buy when you can afford it"
2. "You can't lose with property"
Remember that property promoters will always tell buyers that this is the time to buy due to their vested financial self interests.
Owner occupier buyers: CAVEAT EMPTOR
It looks even worse if you consider they could have invested that $15,315pa instead of directing to the extra $200k mortgage.
$15,315 pa, invested monthly assuming 5% returns over 30 years would be a $1,040,019 opportunity cost.
This same calculation holds for anyone else who overpaid by $200k over the last few years
Peaker vs Buyer Today - calculations as at April 2024, but the essential point remains.
(Note that the current median house price in Auckland is currently $90,000 lower at $950,000 than the $1,040,000 used in the calculations below. This means that the mortgage would be more than $90,000 lower due to continued savings and interest income on the deposit for a Buyer Today)
Here are some financial calculations for owner occupier buyers to think about. The Peaker and Buyer Today.
How does this compare with a Peaker and a Buyer Today (BT) in NZ? (Assuming that the Peaker can hold on and is not under cashflow stress to sell.)
1) Peaker
The median house price at the peak for Auckland was $1,300,000
With an 80% LVR, this is a mortgage of $1,040,000
The 20% equity is $260,000
2) Buyer Today ("BT")
In 2021, the buyer who waited, deposited the same $260,000 equity into a bank deposit earning interest. Also BT would rent an equivalent house and have still saved money due to the rental being below the monthly P&I mortgage payments of Peaker - in 2 years the savings would have been about $20,000 annually. So a Buyer Today would have an amount of $319,349 to use as a deposit.
The current median house price for Auckland is around $1,040,000
Equity deposit of $319,349
The mortgage at this purchase price would be $720,651 (an LVR of 69%)
The Peaker has a mortgage which is higher by $319,349 (mortgage of $1,040,000 for Peaker vs $720,651 for BT)
Assuming BT, pays the same exact dollar amount each year that Peaker pays for their mortgage, as a result of that additional borrowing, Peaker is paying $856,632 more over the 30 years than BT (This is due to higher borrowing amount of $319,349, and total interest on this of $537,283 over 30 years). BT is mortgage free by the year 2042, whilst Peaker continues to pay their mortgage until 2051 (9 years later) - so after the year 2042, BT can save all that money that Peaker continues to pay on the P&I mortgage.
Assuming same incomes, and same living costs (food, travel, etc except mortgage) , BT can save the $856,632 in payments that Peaker is paying.
Remember that at the end of 30 years, the house price will be EXACTLY THE SAME for Peaker and BT.
BT will have more money available for retirement than Peaker. Conversely, Peaker will have less money than BT at retirement.
That single decision to buy in November 2021 would have cost $856,632 extra to buy the exact same house for Peaker compared to a Buyer Today.
Updated calculations
1) Peaker
The median house price at the peak for Auckland was $1,300,000
With an 80% LVR, this is a mortgage of $1,040,000
The 20% equity is $260,000
2) Buyer Today ("BT") - Sept 2024
In 2021, the buyer who waited, deposited the same $260,000 equity into a bank deposit earning interest. Also BT would rent an equivalent house and have still saved money due to the rental being below the monthly P&I mortgage payments of Peaker - in 3 years the savings would have been about $20,000 annually. So a Buyer Today would have an amount of $340,233 to use as a deposit.
The current median house price for Auckland is around $950,000
Equity deposit of $340,233
The mortgage at this purchase price would be $609,767 (an LVR of 64%)
The Peaker has a mortgage which is higher by $430,233 (mortgage of $1,040,000 for Peaker vs $609,767 for BT). BT's mortgage is 41% lower than Peaker's mortgage.
Assuming BT, pays the same exact dollar amount each year that Peaker pays for their mortgage, as a result of that additional borrowing, Peaker is paying $1,232,229 more over the 30 years than BT (This is due to higher borrowing amount of $430,233, and total interest on this of $801,996 over 30 years). BT is mortgage free by the year 2037, whilst Peaker continues to pay their mortgage until 2051 (14 years later) - so after the year 2037, BT can save all that money that Peaker continues to pay on the P&I mortgage.
Assuming same incomes, and same living costs (food, travel, etc except mortgage) , BT can save the total $1,232,229 in payments that Peaker is paying. If BT invests the annual P&I payments that Peaker continues to pay after the year 2037 at 4.0% p.a, then in 2051 this amount will grow to $1,401,500.
Remember that at the end of 30 years, the house price will be EXACTLY THE SAME for Peaker and BT.
BT will have more money available for retirement than Peaker. Conversely, Peaker will have less money than BT at retirement.
That single decision to buy in November 2021 would have cost $1,232,229 extra to buy the exact same house for Peaker compared to a Buyer Today.
A good reminder of why one shouldn't take financial advice from real estate agents.
But there's something else going on here that few have commented on.
Lots of mum and dad 'investors' bought up these new builds as 'investments' (at 1.9% interest rates and word from the RBNZ that rates would stay low for quite some time). They're now sitting on capital losses. And most probably don't understand 'sunk cost'. So they'll continue to pay the mortgage making losses. The problem for the 'economic recovery' is that this money won't come flowing to aid of the economy and bolster spending.
Thus if I'm right in that property prices will flatline for years, then our recovery won't be assisted by spending from these 'investors'.
Who created this mess? Looking at you muggles in the RBNZ ....
"Lots of mum and dad 'investors' bought up these new builds as 'investments' (at 1.9% interest rates and word from the RBNZ that rates would stay low for quite some time). They're now sitting on capital losses. And most probably don't understand 'sunk cost'. So they'll continue to pay the mortgage making losses. "
Given that the market valuations have fallen conpared to their purchase price, how will off the plan buyers finance the shortfall?
1) more equity? either personal or invite family, friends, co investors.
2) main banks may now no longer lend a sufficient amount to settle the purchase so the buyer may need to turn to a non bank lender which has an even higher cost of borrowing. This is likely to put even more cashflow stress and if unsustainable the owner may need to sell at a loss (like the real estate buyer in the original report)
3) sell before settlement date?
4) choose not to settle. This means that the off the plan buyer may be on the hook for any sale price shortfall when the developer resells that property.
The banks know. But they're hardly likely to be telling anyone. MSM? Nope, they need the advertising and the clicks. Social media? Nope. People lie.
And the 'investors'? They'll tell any story to justify their actions. You know, "It's a long term game", "Property doubles every 10 years", "Stay the course", "Interest rates are falling, prices will skyrocket", etc. Same old, same old. You read the same comments I do. They're all here.
"Interest rates hadn't just doubled, they'd quadrupled. Rents had tanked by more than 30 percent - unprecedented. The townhouse was no longer a viable investment and completely unaffordable for us to consider keeping. But property prices had dropped so much, that the property was now worth less than the remaining balance required to settle."
out of the mouths of babes
I would say we are closer to anger now then denial... but prices will keep dropping, You must be a buyer of a derillict WGTN bit of DIRT Wingnut
Average wage couple still has no chance of buying average home in most areas of the country from scratch many people leaving the country renting out house to pay mortgage with some who purchased in last few years deep in negative equity.The housing bubble burst and will be deflated of a number of years and if a recession does take hold hard it will take a decade to recover
On Newstalk ZB there are property rental companies advertising specifically targeting people about to leave but cannot sell, first month rent commission off.... just saying must be a big market if property mgrs willing to pay for Newstalk ad space..... another in Taupo giving first month off for gold card holders.
Smells more of old people and desperation than jet fuel about to explode.
I note the Spruikers, both pro and amateur, have been wrong for some time now, credibility is finished. Bank forecaster reputation also in tatters as well all now realize that we should not take advice from the biggest lenders to the Ponzi, people who cannot use works like decrease, fall or retreat, but rather use weasel words like flat, basing etc.
Its so entwined we cannot even trust the Herald to tell the truth, so tied up in Ponzi advertising.
Do your own research. See you at the bottom
People have been living in houses for thousands of years. If house prices over the longer term always beat inflation, then only the top 0.1% would own property today.
You are looking at things from the last 30 years perspective. 'It's different this time' depends completely on what timescale you are looking at.
https://kpi.nz/kpi/median-house-price-vs-median-household-income
Interesting that the biggest house prices capital gains have been under a labor government and they are the ones wanting to make tax revenue from it.
Wouldn't be more accurate (and less partisan) to say: both government have done 'next to bugger all'?
In actual fact however, both governments have tried and mostly failed.
That said, if asked again in 10 years, I expect to say the NPS/UD and MDRS (Labour) built on work by Auckland and ChCh Councils (and to a lesser extent National) between 2011 and 2016 to fundamentally change things for the better. We'll see.
And I was too.
Tell me why you disagree, I am fascinated. You often make completely incorrect statements. This is yet another (along with your latest, demonstrably false comments on net migration throughout the 1970s and 1980s)
Look forward to your response. Unlike you, I am happy to admit error if I am in fact wrong.
The truth is my obsession, not ego
Re migration - analyze the makeup people leaving. age / occupation / family size / etc. The numbers alone do not tell the full story as far as the housing market was concerned. Further, the impact immigration has is often vastly overstated (back test this against property prices, type by region and the overall state of the economy, especially employment, if you don't agree.)
Re this one: I would describe 2016 AUP debate as progressives vs. conservatives. Party affiliations really didn't come into it as there were both in each camp, with a progressive lean in L/G and conservative lean in N/A. National just happened to be government at the time and copied what they learned from Chch; which again was driven by progressives while being hampered by central government.
You haven’t addressed the question. I said the original council unitary plan as notified in 2014 was lame, and the final product in terms of massive uplift in terms of density and development capacity was due to the National Party (via submissions from Housing NZ etc)
you said that was incorrect
why?
?
You mean progressive wing of the national party?
It’s still the National Party. That was my point. Which you said was ‘incorrect’.
Sorry I can’t take anything you say seriously anymore. You said you were involved. Anyone who was involved in a meaningful way knows that the National Party, via its agencies, had a massive impact on the Auckland Unitary Plan.
I am no National fanboy but that’s the objective truth.
If you set up a tax system whereby the Govt gets a large chunk of its revenue from people buying or selling houses, and that tax revenue is guaranteed to increase as the price of houses increase, what policies do you think the Govt will enact to ensure that house prices keep going up?
As Charlie Munger once said "show me the incentives, and I'll show you the outcomes".
"what policies do you think the Govt will enact to ensure that house prices keep going up?"
Prior to November 2021, many people believed that the government in NZ wouldn't allow house prices to fall. That premise has since been proven to be incorrect.
The Crown's primary objective is not maximising revenues from real estate. This is in contrast to profit motivated non owner occupier buyers operating in the current system in NZ.
"The primary objective will quickly become maximising revenues from real estate"
Let me clarify my earlier comment. From the World Bank:
All governments take responsibility for producing a range of goods and services called public goods that only they are in a position to supply adequately. These include national defense and internal security, money, and the provision of a legal system. Among the most important public goods is a legal and institutional system which reduces the costs and risks of transactions. Certain other goods and services for instance, transport, power, education and training, and research provide a foundation which enables the rest of the economy to work more smoothly.
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/5970/9780195…
As Charlie Munger once said "show me the incentives, and I'll show you the outcomes".
Government is made up of elected politicians. Politician's incentives are to win the popularity contest. To win the popularity contest, politicians engage in political rhetoric, political spin and the blame game.
Look at politicians in developed democracies around the world.
In the US, with the current presidential campaign, one candidate has chosen to engage in name calling as a method of attempting to win the popularity contest.
Labour outright ruled out CGT, now Chippie is advocating for it. He failed in 2 portfolios before being gifted the Prime Ministerial role, and now he has flipped completely on what his party vehemently opposed not long prior. like a parent making too many failed promises, and their child no longer giving any credence to their hollow words, so to do the public with Labour.
Opposed or ruled out in their last term?
Its normal for policies to change between terms as voter demands change. Proper tax reform is gaining favour, as seen by the green vote - Labour likely to better position themselves in order to get those voters back. Politics is a lot of borrowing ideas from other parties and branding them as your own.
Poor analogy, as children don't vote their parents into power triennially
Report from Reuters. Expecting NZ house prices to rise.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/new-zealand-house-prices-rise-6-next-ye…
"Sometimes making nothing is better than losing everything "
These owners never recovered the amount paid for their property.
Paid JPY26 million in 1990's. Just sold for JPY1.1 million - loss of over 95% in 34 years (a loss of 8.8% p.a). Remember that this is before the impact of leverage.
https://youtu.be/j3de0l8Pq-8?t=152
Note :Japan property prices have yet to recover to their peak 1991 levels after 33 years. House prices are currently back at 1987 levels (37 years ago - imagine getting back to your original purchase price 37 years after you bought it - not really a source of funds for retirement).
Glad your finally "head out of the sand" see the market is down a lot.....well its actually just 1/2 way, in the BIGGEST HOUSING CRASH since the 1970s.
This rabbiting on about a certain area, are plainly desperate to hawk off a piece of dirt.
Traffic past Westgate is just terrible and will not attract many punters, unless you love holding a steering wheel and tapping your brakes for hours every day........
Salient bit:
"The median forecast from an Aug. 20-30 survey of 11 property market analysts estimated a 1.0% average price rise this calendar year, down from 4.5% predicted in a May poll. Forecasts ranged from -4.0% to 2.5%.
That was in sharp contrast to the 6.3% gains predicted for Australian home prices this year."
Housing speculation is turning this country into a third world cesspit, where the rich just keep getting richer and richer - while they pat themselves on the back for being such good business people. We need to tax wealth more effectively than we do. Our current system is a huge waste of human potential, where some people are funelled straight to the trash heap while other mediocre trust fund babies spend their whole lives falling up.
Kmart to open colossal store at Westgate. Another boost for the West.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/kmart-to-open-colossal-new-auckland…
Thank God this is not Australia. Australia's GONE - Housing Destroyed It (youtube.com)
If you believe Biko, you'll believe anything.
That dude spruiks gold, one of the riskiest, worst, non-dividend yielding bets on the planet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=OtEJyuIYmSs
"Buy gold before the price explodes."....yeah right....suckers only.
I've heard stories like that for years. Gold's a massive dud. There's scams galore, it costs to store it, it's got no dividend.
And it certainly isn't 'insurance'. In WW2, the most destructive conflict in history, gold declined in inflation-adjusted terms.
Silver's been one of the very worst bets.
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.