sign uplog in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here. reports 7.1% increase in Auckland house listings in March; national average asking price a record $484k reports 7.1% increase in Auckland house listings in March; national average asking price a record $484k

A seasonally-adjusted 7.1% rise in Auckland house listings in March helped lift the total of new house listings nationally by 2% in the month, according to

This helps, a little, to reverse the thumping 10.4% national fall in listings in February and 5.7% fall in Auckland.

Compared with March 2013, the actual number of new listings nationally, at 12,488, is down 1.9%.  In Auckland, the actual listings number in March, of 4389, is up 5.2% on the figure at the same time a year ago.

An increase in listings in the sometimes overheated Auckland market is likely to ease pricing pressures. The heating state of the Auckland market in particular was one of the reasons why the Reserve Bank introduced 'speed limits' on high loan-to-value lending from October last year.

The latest figures have helped to improve the inventory levels of available listings, which have been at very low levels, particularly in Auckland.

As expressed in the number of weeks worth of available properties, the national inventory has moved up to 27.9 weeks worth, from 25.9 in February this year, while the Auckland figure has improved to 15,2 weeks from just 12.7 weeks in February.  The latest figure is actually Auckland's biggest inventory since November 2012.

ASB economist Daniel Smith said the house listings data for March showed a slight lift in the number of homes on the market, "which is an encouraging sign that supply pressures may be starting to ease".

"But listings will need to continue rising for some time to make a serious difference – total inventory remains around 5% below where it was even a year ago," he said.

Smith said the most encouraging sign from the March data was a lift in availability in both Auckland and Canterbury, the "most pressurised regional markets".

"Because the data series do not go back a long way, the seasonal adjustment applied by probably shouldn’t be relied on totally – there does seem to be a seasonal element to the adjusted Auckland listings data in particular.

"But to see the number of homes coming onto the market lifting back towards the levels seen before the RBNZ’s LVR restrictions came into effect is encouraging – there had been a significant drop-off in listings over the first few months under the restrictions. We will look at the monthly data from Barfoot and Thompson for confirmation of that regional shift."

The new listing figures were released in's latest monthly NZ Property Report.

The report revealed that in the past month the national average asking price edged up by 0.2% to a new record high of $484,263. It was driven up by new record asking prices in Auckland ($683,169), Wellington ($469,487), and Waikato ($393,612). Marketing Manager, Paul McKenzie, said seller confidence in the major centres was rising, "buoyed by strong demand, suggesting that asking prices will continue to rise".

"Particularly notable is the asking price increase of over $5000 in Auckland, where asking prices rose to a new record high of $683,169. Record asking prices in March were seen in three regions, Auckland, Wellington and Waikato, " he said.

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.


Here you go folks, straight from the horse's mouth
After this Garner interviewed the PM and the upshot of that was, that he is not interested, so cast your mind back to his very own words, "we do not want to become tenants in our own land". That was just a lie, a barefaced lie, he could not care less what is going on

If a Chinese buys a property in NZ then a Kiwi gets the money so it's  all  the same in the end.
It good because it means that the Kiwi stays on an equal footing with the Chinese.
Why should a Kiwi take a lesser price than the maximum offered by anyone from anywhere?

Because the kiwis who are first up buyers cannot get a look in. This is DESTROYING the kiwi dream and is absolutely terrible.
If the non resident foreigners were out of the market , it would reflect what it was worth HERE, not there.
Only the greedies want it to stay the way it is

The problem with the Kiwi dream is that it came true

It was happening long before interest rates rose or LVR restrictions came in, it's just now it looks like it has become utterly undeniable, so next idea, please.

Crazy and deluded.

a) Kiwis are not forced to sell to chinese, mostly they are not even forced to sell. I have been in my home 17 years....hopefully I'll die in it at a ripe old age.
b) Retirement, the profit is only realised if there is a bigger fool.
c) Wheeler is, he's trying to contain the madness before the invariable pop and collapses of prices and bank bailouts....moral hazard.

The point is I see my house as my home. Not an ATM machine, so ppl can buy iphones and new cars or thats "gaining" value for no work/effort but holding on to it.

I think you are spot on raegun. It will stay the way it is because ultimately people are self-interested, or greedy as you state it. Is this really so wrong? Should people not be self-interested?
What you are complaining about are the effects of capitalsim, globalistion and free market economics. I can not see how these systems would lead to any other outcome than an increasing divide between the haves and have-nots. 
The question I ask myself is not what can I do for my fellow countryman, but what can I do to ensure my family and I remain in the haves group and do not become have-nots. I do not mind if you call that greed. I've got a family to look after. Yes, it's a sad state of affairs.

Good for you Machiavelli, look after number 1, NZ should strive ahead with that atttitude. I hope you are teaching the kids Mandarin so you can say hi to the neighbours and make friends at the local schools.

frazz my good chap, don't hate the player. I didn't write the rule book. Heck I think this system is absurd. But I am good at playing the game. Besides aren't we supposed to strive to be like the mighty leader? 
The kids are already bilingual, even the 2 year old. I think the asian kids down at the local school you are so worried about are probably mine. They can say hello in many languages so you have nothing to fear.
My neighbours are indian and they always look at us strangely when we speak to them in mandarin . 

My great grandfathers on both sides arrived in NZ a bit more than 100 years ago. I assume I'm not a new migrant anymore but it's open to interpretation I guess. There is another half to the equation and she is less than a decade in country, of asian origin and yes buying up property.

beads and blankets.  As anyone with a clue about property or investment can tell you.

"If a Chinese buys a property in NZ then a Kiwi gets the money so it's  all  the same in the end.
It good because it means that the Kiwi stays on an equal footing with the Chinese.
Why should a Kiwi take a lesser price than the maximum offered by anyone from anywhere?"

Where does the Kiwi spend his money?  How does he repurchase in NZ?
Inflation and increasing scarcity of local property will reduce the value of his cash and increase the value of the foreign owner...whats more, by paying above market the foreign owner increases ALL the local prices, given them all more profitable holding...and makes it harder for ANY kiwi to buy back in, or to recover the property into NZ ownership.     Why can the foreigner not buy in his own country?   How is any NZ supposed to buy in NZ?

Just reheard a snippet from John Key on Garner's show and this is was his lame comment.
"If it were true that all these places were being bought up for rentals, then rents would be going down"
Good grief, rents are going up because kiwis have to rent in greater and greater numbers and many of the houses being purchased by foreigners are being left empty so the stock of houses is actually dropping.
Key must be made to face this truth and live up to his own words

Actually in effect rents are going down, ie I believe the reports are the rents are flat. So inflation adjust looks negative.  Or as pollies of the right like to say, "there is a downward pressure on rises".
Anyway he's an idiot....sadly David Cunlifee is as bad if not worse.
Live in a democarcy and get to choose the moron in charge.....oh yeah...

B B III .... those readers comments in that Telegraph article are a cracker !! .....Here's one for SK et al .....
"Stage 5: Revulsion
Just as prices became wildly out of line during the early stages of the bubble, in the final stage of revulsion, prices overshoot their fundamental values. Where the press used to write only positive stories about the bubble, suddenly journalists uncover fraud, embezzlement, and abuse. Investors who have lost money look for scapegoats and blame others rather than themselves for participating."
My question is, why don't journalists, instead of supporting the top 1% ie Murdoch etc because it's where their "bread and butter" is.......  get out there now and independently totally uncover what is really going on out there......they could start with our very own Mr John Key....not that you would get a straight answer.

I've got a cracker for you:
"On housing supply and demand, available estimates still suggested Australia had an undersupply rather than an oversupply of housing.
"Here is the basic arithmetic. Population growth is currently 400,000 people a year and the average household size is around 2.5 persons a household. So, to meet new population demand we would need to be building at least 160,000 dwellings, and probably more like 175,000 dwellings, if around 10% are built to replace demolished buildings. But last year there were only 148,000 dwellings built.
"Doing the same arithmetic over the past five years implies a cumulative shortfall of housing.
"New population demand has been for around 825,000 dwellings but only 760,000 houses have been built in the past five years. Unlike Spain and the US before the global financial crisis, Australia has an undersupply of housing, not an oversupply."
Sound familiar. 

Happy123..... this "under supply" you all rave on about and I will talk about Auckland only, is just another "red herring".
Sorry if I have to keep on repeating myself, if there was an undersupply of houses, the rents would be much higher.
At the moment the ROI for the capital value of the property vs the gross annual rental income are around 4% pa .....where I operate they are 16% that's more like it !!

Zz .....what's your rental ROI on the full capital value of the properties ? .....not the equity.

Yes correct.
Price falls require over building. Happened in US, Ireland, Spain, every market that fell.
N.Z has had underbuilding throughout. 
Seeing the prices for those 40 sq m hobsonville homes on 111sqm of land confirms the fairly high floor under nz property prices.  We pay a lot more for everything in this country because we lack economies of scale.  We will NEVER be able to build a house a cheaply as Aussey or US.  Get over it and buy a run down second hand house and roll up your sleeve, because doing that up yourself we have more of a positive impact on supply (and your own pocket) than any of the stuff the govt. is trying to do.  Or as I have suggested here before, buy something in the provinces (p.n is my pick for a number of reasons).  Tony A has again suggested rises spreading outside of Auckland and Chch in his lastest letter this morning.  Accept reality and play the hand your dealt rather than trying to force some idealised notion of how you think the world should work and what you think is fair.  There are billions of ppl living around the world who struggle for food to stay alive and has been the case for a very long time; fairness is not something that the world strives to converge to.

We need to do more to protect the resident tax payer. Why cant we implement land tax on overseas owners, start at 10% p/a. Overseas owners dont vote, and definitely avoid declearing ther international incomes as taxable here.

Put this in perspective, NZ is on 9th position on the list; US and Australia are the top 2. 

Yeah/Nah. While NZ is 9th, if they had published the raw figures you could divided the number of searches by the number of dwellings in each country, as in terms of rankings most people care more about the amount of interest in proportion to the size of the market. I suspect that as NZ is a very small country, we would get a push up the rankings if that exercise was done.

Its all planned by John Key and Graham Wheeler.  They know there's BILLIONS pouring into kiwi residential.  They know it's killing the dream of home ownership and driving up non tradable inflation.  But they don't care.  They just love that rent seeking foreign capital.  Someone correct me if I'm wrong but that foreign capital is deleveraging our massive private debt without slowing the economy!!  The benefits (to the banks & baby boomers) outweigh the costs (to the younger generation).  What's the alternative? a downturn in the housing market with flow on effects to the wider economy and our banking sector in peril.    Perhaps Machiavelli is right, screw everyone and go with the flow.     

Not while I am still beathing, fat pat,  I will speak out against this sort of culture taking over NZ, I'll take the accusations of zenophobia,  I can't stand it. We were a country that was far more decent to each other, but we seem to be willing to change that culture for something far more cut throat. You can stick it where the sun don't shine for my mind.
And now we have Paula Bennett on yet another beneficiary witch hunt. I suggest if she wants to prevent benefits being paid to people outside the country she get something moving to find out how much money from WINZ is going into the pockets of foreign landlords.
That should make that little revelation yesterday look like like your 5 year olds pocket money.

wow, thats a good one.  There are some stats that I would love to know, and this one is almost top of the list.  Imagine if NZ government was paying $500 million a year to non citizen/non permanent residents?
I also want to see a timelapse graphic of the increasing number of lifestyle blocks being converted from farmland.  Where would this data be?  

Every cent of, most particularly, WINZ housing top ups and benefits for people picking them up, who are renting houses of landlords who are non resident foreigners. That represents public money going straight from WINZ to foreign landlord hands. 
You can pretend that it is not happening of course but if you really think about it, you will understand that indeed it is.
Don't need a single solitary graph for that, just a slightly different way of looking at things.
Life style blocks being converted from farmland? I have a feeling it is nowhere near what it was in the 80s anyway. Here in Hamilton it is being converted into 400 m sq sections for new housing which is probably being snapped up by foreigners so they can dip into the public purse as well

Here Raegun you'll love this article.  Chinese buying large chunks of land all over America.  Hmmm I wonder if that's happening here?  

I think it has to go through the overseas investment office, though maybe there is a min size/dollar value.  Of course if the overseas ppl team up with locals and form a company and bankroll them Im not sure if it has to.

yes I follow you, and you make a good point.
Now, can an actual dollar figure be calculated that shows exactly how much money is being sent offshore?  Or is it just like sales of houses to non citizen, non resident foreigners, where there is no data?

Count me in...

Dear raegun. Your fight is the good one. But you are swimming against the tide my friend. Look out the window. Consider the systems we strive for and perpetuate - capitalism, globalisation, free market economics.. Do you honestly believe these systems are designed to serve the greater good?
Have you seen the latest research out of the US? Over the past few years the top 0.1% have grown exponentially wealthier while the "poor" top 1% have just plodded along. Not surprisingly the researchers seem to have discovered that wealth creates more wealth!
Foreign landlords are providing a service and charging a price for it, just like many businesses in NZ. If we are going to attack foreign landlords we should attack half the business and service providers operating in NZ.
I think the problem with beneficiaries travelling overseas is that most tax payers expect them to be looking for a job. I'm not wanting to pass judgement but it's hard to look for a job, or get an interview at least, when you are back-packing around Thailand or on the beach in Bondi..

Simple, we dont have to willingly leave it as it is, by doing nothing about it, that's what we are "achieving".

Foreign landlords are lining their own pockets, no more no less. I don't care if I am swimming against some sort of tide at least I am not prepared to be simply swept out to sea without putting up a fight, UNLIKE SOME.
Foreign landlords are cutting regular Kiwi Joe out of the house market and frankly it is them, the foreign landlords that WILL be cut out of the market, in the end, I just hope before the situation becomes completely unbearable.
And you call yourself an NZer. 

Foreign landlords are looking out for themselves. Just like JK. Just like Paula Bennett. Just like the majority of NZ'ers!
Never will you find me saying I agree with the current state of affairs raegun. On this site I have chosen to state things as I see them and to demonstrate how the intrinsically selfish motivations of the general man are driving us further down this path. It is only when we admit this self-interest to ourselves that we will be able to find a path to change. Not building more houses. Not banning overseas buyers etc. Those are all just short term fixes. As long as we continue to combine capitalism, globalisation and free market economics I think the result will be the same. 
I try to teach my kids that just because you don't agree with or don't like a system (school in their case) you still have to learn how to get on and be succesful at it. That's what I'm doing. That's what most are trying to do. That's what I recommend you do. 
Yes I call myself a NZ'er, unless the cricket is on, then I call myself an Australian. 

The whole buy your way into NZ has to change, money should be the last qualifier to get in and you'd have to have most of the rest for it to figure at all as far as I am concerned


"we have Paula Bennett on yet another beneficiary witch hunt"
It's comments/views like that which are making Labour less and less relevent in my opinion.  How could you ever, ever, justify my tax dollars being paid to a 'beneficiary" so they can take holidays....
I fully, whole-heartedly support Paula Bennett and her crack down on benefit cheats. 

Of course beneficiaries should not be swanning off overseas and living some sort of high life. The truth is more likely to be, on a general scale, they have been shouted trips to visit family they might otherwise never see and attend things like funerals and/or family occasions. There will be extremely few doing this as a means of rorting the system, just Madam Lash will not be doing anything to make that clear.
And that fact that they have not gone through a correct process will demonstrate perhaps a fair chunk of people who are not sure of rules. 
Od course there will be some rorters, but I bet any one of you, they will be the minority

I read trips for funerals etc are allowed. You just have to apply/notify. I don't think these numbers relate to trips for these purposes. 
How lovely to visit family overseas but should the taxpayer really have to foot the bill? I decided to put my spare cash into the mortgage this year rather than visiting family overseas.

A lot of assumptions there and no facts to back it up, a bit like your rants about foreigners. 

Well Happy 123 as it is becoming galringly clear that it is foreigners skewing the housing market I will continue to rant about the fact that we must be the only country in the world that allows our stuff to be hoovered up by them with no restrictions whatsoever.

and farms getting affected now....  perhaps this is what OIO considers "specific positive benefits for NZ"

Beneficiary Witch Hunt!  Great!  
Let's start with punishing those who currently own a $500,000 house.  At 7% capital appreciation on their house, they are getting $35k a year free money from government policy!  That is without even looking at the money from renting it out.  
Meanwhile, the poor old sod on the dole gets $250 a week,   $13,000 a year,   and is made out to be a bludger.
The real beneficiaries are the ones benefitting from perverse government housing policy !

I'm not making anyone out to be a bludger bob. Just asking if you think it is fair for the tax payer to pay for someone on a benefit to have a holiday overseas. I'm not talking about funerals etc. I'm talking about heading off for a week in Sydney next week, instead of working like the guy paying the mortgage on the $500k property has to.
I think we are distracted from the real issue though. 

Where can i download the form i need to have the government refund my holiday expenses?
I'd really like the taxpayer to pay for me to have a holiday but i just can't find the form anywhere...

I think a lot of people see life on the dole as easy.   There is no 'benefit' of being on a benefit !  There are probably a few good reasons for people to be overseas while on the dole, but yes they shouldn't really be travelling, they should be looking for work.  I agree with you.
My point is this:  It's easy to kick the unemployed.  At the same time though, they are small fry.  There are bigger flaws in government systems that should be faced.  
People creaming government money who fly under the radar:   owner occupiers of property, elderly on the pension, property investors...

Bob, that's why Labour is becoming more and more irrelevant. 
Punish success, reward the useless. 
Look at the recent polls, only 1 in 5 Kiwis would vote Labour.  And they tend to be the vested interests, people working in the public sector who want to bloat it out, or beneficiaries. 
Do you work in the public sector?  Are you just being selfish? 

I don't work in the public sector.  
Selfish?  I don't think so.  I'm not a Boomer.  I'm just a believer that the essentials for life shouldn't be so expensive that a fulltime wage can barely pay for them.
Also, I have a crazy idea that housing should be about a place where you live, and thats all.  I don't think people should be able to get rich quick by taking away someone elses housing opportunity.

 the essentials for life shouldn't be so expensive that a fulltime wage can barely pay for them.
I will agree with you on that bob. 


who's paying that 35k a year bob?  It's not out of my pocket, it certainly isn't out of the governments pockets.... so just who'se paying that money BOB?

is the "poor old sod" getting $250 (!!)  on the dole who/what has he paid for ?  Where then is the 250 coming from?

and which "government policy" is giving free money

This is the easiest question I have had to answer all day.
The person who pays the 35K, is the person who buys the house.  You see NZ has a nasty habit of houses going up, up UP.  A house that sells for $500K today, will sell for $535K a year from now.
It's a really great scheme...  If you already own a house.  It lets you feel rich and smug and gives you free money.  
You are half right, the 35K doesn't come directly out of the governments pockets, but it comes about as a direct result of their policies.  They can control the market.  There is a long list of demand and supply factors that could be adjusted to stop the rampant house price inflation.  But nothing has happened since 2002.  Absolutely nothing.  Meanwhile house prices have more than doubled.  In some cases tripled.  And that is because the majority is eating the minority.  People with houses are loving it that their pride and joy is skyrocketing in value.  And they will never allow a policy that will erode their 'hard earned' wealth.  (vomit).  
As for the poor sod on the dole, that's a different conversation.  But I do believe in helping those genuinely in need, and I don't hold a venomous grudge against beneficiaries.  What would you do, not help them, and let them grovel in the streets?