sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

REINZ figures show median house prices hitting new highs around the country as sales start to slow during winter

Property
REINZ figures show median house prices hitting new highs around the country as sales start to slow during winter

House prices show no sign of slowing down even though the number of sales is declining as the market heads into the winter selling season, according to the latest figures from the Real Estate Institute of New Zealand.

The REINZ's median selling price hit new highs in five regions in June; Northland $360,000, Auckland $821,000, Waikato/Bay of Plenty $438,000, Otago $295,000 and Central Otago/Lakes $730,050.

However the national median price eased slightly, dropping to $500,000 from $506,000 in May. The REINZ recorded 7,864 residential sales throughout the country in June, which was down 13% compared to May but up 6% compared to June last year.

In the Wellington region the median price dropped from $465,000 in May to $455,000 in June and in Christchurch it dropped from $455,000 in May to $440,000 in June.

"Although the onset of winter means that June is generally a quieter month for the real estate market, there has been no let up in the rate of price increases across the country," REINZ spokesperson Bryan Thomson said.

"Although there is much discussion about the housing market and increasing new build supply, the fact remains that the vast majority of supply comes from the sale of existing properties.

"The inventory data continues to show rapid declines in the volume of properties available for sale right across the country, with a number of regions such as Wellington and Hawke's Bay recording very low levels of properties for sale."

According to the REINZ data the number of homes sold for more than $1 million has increased by a third over the last 12 months, while the number of homes selling for less than $400,000 has declined by 6.1%.

Within the Auckland region the biggest price increase occurred in Outer Auckland, which covers Papakura and Pukekohe on Auckland's southern flank, where the median price surged by 14.2% in a month, rising from $655,000 in May to $748,000 in June, up 29% compared to June last year.

The most expensive part of Auckland remains the North Shore, where the median price was $1,068,500 in June, up 3.7% compared to May and up 13.6% compared to June last year.

In an ASB Quickview note on the REINZ figures, ASB economist Kim Mundy said the continuing rise in house prices meant there was a risk the Reserve Bank might delay making further interest rate cuts.

"This increase in prices is likely to be of concern to the RBNZ, especially as the Auckland stratified house price is getting very close to hitting the $1 million mark," she said.

"The RBNZ has been between a rock and hard place for some time now and June's data do little to ease the pressure.

"We continue to expect the RBNZ to cut the OCR by 25 basis points in August, though there is a risk cuts get deferred until further macro-prudential policies are announced," she said.

You can read the REINZ's full regional report, with prices and sales details for all parts of the country, by clicking on the following link:

 

Median price - REINZ

Select chart tabs

NZ total
Source: REINZ
Northland
Source: REINZ
Auckland
Source: REINZ
Waikato
Source: REINZ
Bay of Plenty
Source: REINZ
Gisborne
Source: REINZ
Hawke's Bay
Source: REINZ
Manawatu
Source: REINZ
Taranaki
Source: REINZ
Wellington
Source: REINZ
Tasman
Source: REINZ
Nelson
Source: REINZ
Marlborough
Source: REINZ
West Coast
Source: REINZ
Canterbury
Source: REINZ
Otago
Source: REINZ
Southland
Source: REINZ

You can receive all of our property articles automatically by subscribing to our free email Property Newsletter. This will deliver all of our property-related articles, including auction results and interest rate updates, directly to your in-box 3-5 times a week. We don't share your details with third parties and you can unsubscribe at any time. To subscribe just click on this link, scroll down to "Property email newsletter"and enter your email address.

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.

112 Comments

JK will celebrate as his policy is on right track for him and his party to see that the house prices goes up and up.

Not to talk about action on speculators and only talk about supply as though important will take years to implement and show result if any (As demand will will always catch up with supply).

Labour is doing the right thing by talking about supply but at the same time talking about putting restriction on speculators and non resident buyers along with other taxes.

Can imagine the smirk on JK face and his gang.

Up
0

Congratulation JK for making many NZ feel like beggars as far as house is concerned.

Up
0

More whinging and moaning, usually from those who want something for nothing. It’s also from those who save for 1-2 years after mucking about for years buying lunch, coffees and travelling and now expect a discounted house. It’s laughable and pathetic! I have full respect for those young people out there saving hard for years and then getting in, whether it is South Auckland or Hamilton. At least they have some self-respect and are making an effort.

Up
0

The housing market shouldn't be a challenge to separate the deserving from the undeserving. The country benefits when more citizens have a stake in the country, stability and limited debt. If you had a fresh start and had to choose between Auckland today, and an identical Auckland with house prices half of what they are today, which would you choose? Which would make for a better society?

Up
0

Yes I think you've solved it!!

It's clearly the young people's fault with their coffee and travel....don't forgot the Sky TV and mobile phones!

Let's call John and Andrew immediately and tell them not to worry, crisis averted.

Up
0

And their fecklessness in neglecting to check TradeMe listings. Don't forget that.

Good lord, they should feel honoured that their lives and economy are being sacrified to serve the grotesque sense of entitlement that rental owners have developed.

Up
0

...i usually ignore such ignorant comments. Property King you really are a piece of work, garbage level stuff.

Up
0

Agreed, propertyking is the modern day dickens scrooge.

Up
0

Yes, the whinging on this website cost me at least $100k, waiting for the imminent crash.

I bought a home and land package last month..I'm in.

Up
0

Your $100k will seem minor when the tide goes out, but glad your all in lets keep this ponzi going till the last sucker signs up. In other news the sharemarket continues will solid rises, increasing company profits and employing more people.

Up
0

I always thought the ones that want something for nothing were the small bourgeois that expect prices to keep going up by just sitting on their assets and expecting more fools to join the ponzi scheme.

Now I know the problem is that if people drank less coffee and traveled less, they'd be able to afford $3,000 a week more because that's the house price increase pace.

PS: What I feel about FHB is pity that their hard work is going to benefit speculators and banks, and bring them only debt burden for years to come (if not worse when the bubble bursts) and a false illusion of wealth and social success.

I cannot describe what I feel for those who even encourage them to do so in an apparent disinterested way.

Up
0

I do have to agree with you on this. Bough our first house last year in a resonable suburb after my wife and i saved for 5 years. We set up a spreadsheet and largely kept to it and reviewed it every couple of months to make sure we still hit our target (We jokingly set up an "AGM" at the start of every year and put down some plans for the year ahead and how much it would cost, best thing we ever did and highly recomend it). We still went out of lunch occasionally and drinks when ever it was a birthday etc etc. We are not in overly high paid jobs but work hard and got some promotions over the years to help add to the pot. I do however appreciate that there are a lot of people out there who are not lucky enough to earn a resonable salary and have a double income household and this is not aimed at them. I do get the feeling though that there are some people out there wanting to live in the character villa in ponsonby/grey lynn etc etc and live that lifestyle and not willing to settle for anything less. Sometimes its easier to do nothing and just complain about it ... Just my opinion

Up
0

Property king .....I never had a response to my post yesterday at 12:58pm, in the article "Only one Auckland home sold for less than $600,000 at Harcourts' latest auctions" ?

Your silence tells me you have no comeback to my points raised...... anyway I had a thought, if you do not want to give up negative gearing as an investor, let's have ALL homeowners negatively gear their mortgage interest payments against their income ? .... any thoughts on that one ?

Up
0

Real investors do not negative gear. When you are talking about nothing under 600k, you are merely stating that every investor buys a family home to invest in and it is uneconomic. You are very far off the mark, most investors buy flats that have an investment yield greater than the interest rate on offer; if the yield is not there at the start they derive it from being creative like adding rooms, etc requiring no negative gearing whatsoever. Negative gearing is not investing it is speculating, these sorts always go under, real investors seldom do. Stop listening to Hickey, Equab, etc, they have never made a cent from investing in anything in their lives. Stop moaning, get into the market, even if it is a unit or another region you will be better off. Think, read and realise that there are endless opportunities in property from development to subdividing and flat investing which is a great help to many. There will be no crash, there is no oversupply, economists are always wrong.

Up
0

What's your time frame on stating 'there will be no crash'? Surely as a real investor you're aware that boom and bust occurs in every market? On the plus side, the government will be delighted to hear it can remove the tax benefits on negative gearing without property investors objecting.

Up
0

Agree, negative gearing is not investing. No crash, just trouble for the over geared as per usual but there will be enough buyers to clean that up. Residential Property markets only crash when there is a massive oversupply like the USA and Ireland in 2008. Even from 1987-92, residential property prices here were steady. I don’t invest in Auckland as it can swing more than other markets, however buy in a region with a decent population growth. Christchurch is still good as well as Wellington which is my pick and still undervalued.

Up
0

National government is testing the patience of common New Zealanders by not taking any action on speculation and letting the bubble stretch further and further.

National Party is copying Labour on supply but why not on demand as well :

1 : Capital Gain - 5 Years
2 : restriction on Non Resident Buyer on existing house
3 : negative Gear Tax

Am sure will take other measures that need to be taken. Even if the above measures does not have an effect, atleast are trying to do something.

Not talking about 40% fall but should take measures on demand side to atleast stabalize the market . Government intervention is needed to curb speculation for when the bubble burst it will be bad for many if it continues to grow the way it is and if controlled now, may be the affect is not that bad as it will be when it happens.

Have a house and even if the value goes up infinite will not help me as is only in paper and if I have to sell and buy another house will have to pay more and also hate to see so many of our friends struggling and some leaving city where they have grown up and is not by choice but by compulsion and I very strongly feel that you government is playing with the social fabric of the country which might have very bad repercussion in future.

Is this the type of legacy that national party wishes to leave as am sure they all have enough for themselves and their family to last for a lifetime. Now is the time to come out of business mold and be a leader with a vision - Just and welfare for all.

I am one of the lucky few to have a decent independent house in good area but it is not about me but society. I know quite a few who have been saving for a deposit since many years (not that they were partying and travelling) but no amount of saving with today's wage can help to buy a house in Auckland unless are lucky to have rich parents or Overseas money.

I thought government are not suppose to think like businessmen only but should look after the economy as well welfare of the people - by people I do not mean rich only but all. Society has to move forward taking everyone on board otherwise the result may not be good in future.

Come out of denial and special affection to Overseas rich and make a difference to common Kiwi. Still not too late and can try and come out of it but for that you will have to act.

Up
0

Auckland central is slowing down big time, only outer suburbs propping up the city at all. The rest of the country is flying but Auckland is coming right off.

You'd be crazy to be buying in Auckland right now. Only one way for things to go from here.

Up
0

If I had a penny for how many times that was said in the last 5 years, my deposit would have been double!

Up
0

The trouble is, the longer and faster prices rise, the greater the risk. Many people assume the opposite as they are just extrapolating the past into the future. Unfortunately, mean reversion is a real thing. No one can say what house prices will do next, but to pretend there's no risk would be short sighted.

Up
0

I don't deny there might be a risk, just as much as crossing the road would be a risk.

You can keep whinging about life and all its risk, or you can just get on with it.

You'd be stupid to buy if you think of making money, but for me, I just want my own house for the next 10-20 years, tired of lining my landlord's pockets.

Up
0

If you're planning to be there a while and can afford the mortgage then go nuts, stability is worth something. I don't think it's whining to make an assessment of risks, or to argue that lower house prices would be a benefit to the country. I also think pointing out the risks is useful to deter possible first time landlords from getting stuck in to an expensive market because of historical returns.

Up
0

The data wasn't showing a slowdown 5 years or even 1 year ago. The data is clearly showing a slowdown now.

'sick of paying rent' could cost you a 6-figure number. If you don't care that's fine. It's your money, spend it how you want.

Up
0

'Auckland central is slowing down big time' with all due respect, wait for July stats before saying that. Examples from last 15 days that I am across suggest anything but a slow down in central AKL. In-fact quite the opposite.
Fresh example from last night. 3/125 Donovan Street unit in Blockhouse Bay sold for 793K (GV 450K).

When you say ' Auckland is coming right off', you may be right or wrong depending on how you view it.

Up
0

The recent stats quite clearly show that Auckland, the central suburbs in particular, has slowed right down. I don't need to wait for the July stats to say that. These monthly stats also don't jump around a lot for the bigger cities where the sample size is sufficient. The property market is a big, lumbering, slow moving beast and the heat has clearly come out of Auckland.

What happened on one particular property is meaningless.

Up
0

The crash is just around the corner 5 years ago. He he

Up
0

HOUSTON, WE HAVE A PROBLEM....

Up
0

Why not everyone here put up their best arguments to support their view of the NZ housing market within the next 5 years? Is it going to, on an annual basis, (a) stabilise (5% variation either way), (b) crash (more than 15% correction downwards) or (c) continue to increase (more than 10%)? You can split your answer into (1) Auckland and (b) non-Auckland.

Up
0

I'll happily get the ball rolling....I think there will be a 50% correction over the next 5 years. Timing - I don't know.

Up
0

Thanks. Your reasons?

Up
0

Because everything is pointing towards it being 50% overvalued - yields, price/income ratios.

It's only euphoria and short term (non permanent) events that are propping it up (immigration, land restrictions, low interest rates). These factors won't last forever and when the winds of change start blowing, the foundations will crumble and prices will tumble....

Up
0

I would like to agree with you Independent Observer, but unfortunately places like Auckland are being constantly fuelled by not only immigration but external pressure for Non-resident Investors. Though if the financial taps get turned off else where (Most likely in Asia) it will certainly be a different story.

Up
0

Yup I'm making the assumption that the Chinese and Australian property markets will correct at some point - don't know which could go first, but a general shift in sentiment towards property.

And what change/s in policy will we see from the government we elect next year?

Up
0

Nah...house prices won't crash. It's far more likely that they will remain stable while average household income increases by 20% year on year.

Up
0

i dont see incomes increasing unless inflation does

Up
0

I just saw some strange pink creatures flying past my window. I could hear a faint oinking sound from their direction

Up
0

Terrinle news feom Nice.With all the terrorism in Europe, that is almost certainly going to get worse, I think immigration levels will remain high.

Up
0

Funny how I keep hearing these arguments. My workmate just told the same :)

Here's the thing: Europe is huge! Europe is safe, the chances of being involved in a terrorist attack are tiny, very tiny. Not sure what the chances of being involved in an earthquake in NZ are, but it cannot be too different. New Zealand is pretty much irrelevant for Europeans (although attractive as an exotic holiday destination). There is no such a desire to leave Europe for the vast majority and settle down in a remote quiet country because the quality of life in Europe is generally very good and fun (we also have villages over there anyway).

Even if more people were interested in doing so that wouldn't make any difference in immigration in NZ because the resident visas are limited and because work visas are restrained by the amount of jobs offered in NZ. So it's not as if Europeans were going to decide to come to New Zealand illegally because they are afraid of terrorism. That's nonsense.

I know many, many Europeans in NZ and I think I don't know anybody who is not thinking of going back to Europe as soon as the jobs prospects are better over there than over here. The thing is different with the Asians I know, who mostly are happy to remain here and even bring relatives.

Immigration levels are high mainly because:
-New Zealanders are returning home.
-More students come to NZ using the immigration backdoor.
-There are jobs available for foreigners because there are professions in high demand.

My point is that terrorism is not the biggest concern in Europe, not even close, and that if NZ immigration increases is not because of people running away from terrorism, which no country is completely safe from.

Up
0

All the British people who emigrated to NZ I speak to never want to return.

Up
0

do you ask them that right after "how do you like it here you pom? Isn't a great place to live much better than Britain?" :P

Ok, maybe for British is different since they share the language and closer culture and since their weather is really really shitty over there.

I have to say when I talk about Europe or Europeans I personally don't think of Britain as Europe. I mean continental Europe.

PS: Having said this, yesterday I went to say goodbye to a British football teammate because he and his English wife are taking their newborn son and going back to England. He said he got a job there (he's an engineer) and the pay is less than in here, which surprised me.

Up
0

I was born in England but came to NZ when I was 5. Most expats seem to have a very low opinion of Old Blighty. I was telling one I was thinking of heading back for a holiday and he was quite astonished I was considering that.

Up
0

I can't understand how many old rich folks are apparently moving to NZ from their home country. I mean my parents would never ever leave the place the lived in for so many years, all the friends, the places the habits.
Young people, ok, it's an opportunity but for old people leave me perplexed, unless they have something to flee from (war or taxman.......)
And most if not all of my European (continental) friends already went back as well

Up
0

Anyone who left - left for reason which is personal to them. Your sample only includes those who have moved to New Zealand who are mostly just a little biased.

Up
0

Fair comment but all my European contacts say economically the outlook is very poor. Many of them say if they could afford to they would prefer to bring up their children and grandchildren over here.
500,000 French people have moved to London to escape France and Mr Hollande's taxes. They are probably not sure what to do now. Only need a few of them to move here and it makes a big difference.

Up
0

Fair comment but all my European contacts say economically the outlook is very poor. Many of them say if they could afford to they would prefer to bring up their children and grandchildren over here.
500,000 French people have moved to London to escape France and Mr Hollande's taxes. They are probably not sure what to do now. Only need a few of them to move here and it makes a big difference.

Up
0

National government is dividing the society by playing upto one and ignoring the need of other. Consequently the anguish among many is on rise which may not be good for country.

Current PM will go dowon in history as...............

Up
0

I agree 12000 - at a birthday party recently I happened to be sitting opposite a gentlemen in his early 60's who over dinner kept going on about his investment portfolio in the Auckland housing market, his wealth, his capital gains, then how wonderful he thought John key is. How he thinks JK is a leader of the people, a guys guy. How he's the kind of guy he'd have a beer with.

All the time I sat there silently trying not to vomit my dinner back up. I rather eat John Key's used underwear than have to have a beer with the guy. He's a BS'er who likes to be popular - but unable to make the tough decisions that the country truly needs for it's long term prosperity - and not just to maintain popularity in election polling.... In short - I think our prime minister is a dick who has most the country blind-folded and is leading them towards a financial cliff...

Up
0

The majority of voters disagree with you unfortunatly

Up
0

And here here we find the problem with democracy and the current mindset of the typical kiwi voter. You want capital gains and this gravy train to keep rolling. National knows this. And yet it will be our downfall as it's unsustainable. You can't have your cake and eat it too...

Up
0

Based on what evidence ? I would say the voting population in Auckrent is equal to if not more than Auckown. Being that multiple families live in single houses in rentworld.
NZrent vs. NZown ... I dont know.

Up
0

We will see :-)

Up
0

We will see :-)

Up
0

What tough decisions are you talking about IO?

Up
0

- Immigration settings
- Taxation
- Foreign buyers

Tough calls are needed on these issues (although its probably already to late) - yet National are all flip/flop do nothing on them.

Up
0

So these things perhaps fit your needs.......is that not playing the I can't do something because the conditions are not right card?

Up
0

I don't understand what you're saying?

Up
0

Hi IO
You sound young and angry (based on your comments about the PM)
My suggestion is first learn the game then play to win the game
There are broadly speaking two types of people - the sayers (talk a good game, have big theories, full of thoughts and opinions) and the doers (spend their energy getting on with life, adaptable and already thinking ahead about opportunities)
Good luck with your property ventures

Up
0

Appreciate the advice - I understand the rules of the game. And the rules we're currently playing by mean that 'at the end of the day' everyone looses. But don't worry about that so much as long as you think your capital gains over the next few months are worth the risk.

Up
0

If you are a young couple in Auckland with your own home and reasonable equity where would they be best to look for their first investment property. They have only got into the position to do this recently as their home has increased so much in value in recent years.

Up
0

How about anything but houses, that is not their purpose.

Up
0

Hope that someone from national party read the comments from so many and passes it to their bosses for an insight of how NZ feels, even if not of all but am sure above comments share the sentiments of many.

May be one of the experts who have approach to government, passes few comments to national for them to read and come out of their arrogence and denial in in interest of the country

Up
0

Be careful assuming commenters here are a reliable sample of anything. We get +/- 200 comment per day from about 60/70 individuals. In contrast, we are read by about 15,000 unique readers each day. They read about 50,000+ pages of content each day. Comments are not representative of our readers, just the ones with time on their hands. For a more representative idea about "NZ", we have started embedding the Curia poll-of-polls in the RH sidebar. It auto updates with each new poll. That is a more robust and scientific idea of Kiwi views.

Up
0

David - just interested to know why you also fill the outside of this site with a continuous stream of real-estate and tax company advertising such as the Bayleys and BCL adverts you have at the moment.

Without drawing too much from it, it could potential suggest that interest.co.nz is pro property investment, negative gearing and tax avoidance. But that is just an observation. And would this have any impact on any independent polling that you refer to in the comment above - because having this advertising, from a psychology perspective, could well have a 'suggestion' effect that will bias your results - making them hardly scientific as you suggest above.

Up
0

So you don't actually read any of our stories, then? Or any of our comment pieces either?

Advertising pays the bills, keeps the platform open for you to comment. And allows all our databases and other resources to be offered 'free' to readers to access.

No advertiser has ever even raised the subject about our editorial stances. I suppose those that take offence just don't book space. But we are hanging in there with the many who do, and clearly it works for them.

If you have any other suggestions of how a service like this can be financially sustainable, I am all ears.

Up
0

Hi David - yes I appreciate that and yes I do. Do you not get approached by businesses for advertising? Because I honestly can't recall anything on here the last few years other than real-estate and banking adverts (happy to be corrected on this though) - could well just be a sign of the times....

Edit - BTW maybe real-estate and banks are our only business in the country?

Up
0

Take the housing ponzi and immigration 'gain' away and how would our economy look?

Up
0

Greece?

Up
0

Im not spruiking Labpour, but keeping a watch on who will do what..have you read this doc -
Labour will..

•Tax speculators by extending the bright line test to five years.
•Ban non-resident foreign speculators from buying existing New Zealand houses.
•Consult on rules around negative gearing to prevent abuse by speculators.

http://www.labour.org.nz/cracking_down_on_speculators

Up
0

Thank you David for this honest insight.
Yes this site has become heavily infested with nutters and screamers and does not reflect true New Zealand.
You and I are among the very few posters who have a fair and unbiased view backed up by the silent majority.
The rest want hand outs driven by envy and greed.
I would like to see one person on this site offer to give away their house or any other major possession for one cent less than the market price.

Up
0

Lets be realistic, it's impossible to have an unbiased view, but it speaks volumes to your psychology that your instant reaction is that he is referring to everyone except you. It's healthy to be aware that you can be wrong about things. For what it's worth, I have no need for a hand out, nor do I see how anyone selling items at a discount is at all relevant to the discussion.

Up
0

And you wonder why the younger generation hate you? You're a fool BigDaddy. I don't want a hand out. I'm not driven by greed. I want to a house at a fair and reasonably price and 10x income certainly isn't that!! Go jump of a really big bridge...

I think if the BB's had to live a few weeks in the lives of the younger generation they too would soon turn into a 'nutter and a screamer' - having to deal with their parent's and so called 'leaders' of this country. What a bloody joke!

Up
0

No one is forcing you to spend 10 x income on a house......so I would suggest that you are wanting a handout.....you're telling yourself that you can't do something because of (numerous reasons people to blame) the way the county is run or policies that are in place etc.......you can keep finding excuses or you can find a way to get what you want but you can't do both at the same time!!

One thing the BB'ers have in abundance is attitude.......don't go thinking they all had it easy because many didn't...they just don't complain about the journey they have been on.......in fact most BB'ers had to rebuild themselves after 1987 and interest rates were 20+%............don't go round thinking the grass is greener on the other side of the fence!!

Up
0

Yes the BB's really know how to pile into a bubble when they spot one don't they ('87, dotcom, GFC). So wise on all things financial.

Well done!

I certainly don't think it's greener on the other side because the 'green grass' I think you're referring to is being fueled by debt. It's false wealth. We need change - not status quo.

If the government won't do it, Mr Market will do it - and I think Mr Key knows that Mr Markets forces are far more powerful than his. Hence little or no action.

Up
0

OMG you are a spoiled brat !!!

Up
0

Why because I'm having to rent and pay someone else's mortgage? Mostly because property investors think it's their right to own more homes than they need to live in, while taking on a lot of risky debt that places the countries economy on shaky ground. Yeah that's really spoilt...

And that is a classic BB comment. Oh my gosh, he can see the truth. I best label him as spoilt. Just like how JK calls anyone a racists when they call him out on the foreign ownership issue. Heads out of the sand please children.

Up
0

And good to see that abundance of attitude there with that last comment. It blew me away...

Up
0

Mr Market? Is that a new character on Sesame Street or some NeoLibtard economics term? Can't tell the difference.

Up
0

You're an investor and don't know who Mr Market is?

Up
0

Quite right Big Daddy. National are afterall out democratically elected government, that means most have happy to have them there. Although does that just mean that there more with their fingers in the property till than not?

Up
0

You're making the assumption here that everyone who votes National does so because of their view on the housing market. They're not a one-issue party, so it's quite conceivable that they could be the most popular party while still being unpopular on certain subjects. In fact, this seems to be happening right now.

http://www.newshub.co.nz/opinion/opinion-john-keys-govt-has-failed-new-…

Up
0

How exactly do I imply that? Because I don't say it. Where I am consistent on these forums is looking at the raw numbers that show property (non tradeable & non productive to the economy) is essentially the New Zealand economy, backing up Bernard Hickey's comments from some years back. Residential Mortgages were at one point equal to 74% of the M3 money supply. So if you voted National and didn't consider housing (or immigration driving it) then you are a simpleton that has no right to complain. Housing underpins everything else in our economy, if it fails so does everything else. It was your choice to volte national, and you according wear some of the responsibility when the wheels fall off.

Up
0

LOL im sure david chuckled at that one

Up
0

"...are among the very few posters who have a fair and unbiased view..."

Coming from someone who writes property books and peddles his services as a property mentor - yet you claim to be unbiased! Baarfff ha ha hahahaha .... and you call other people nutters. Too funny!

Up
0

"Sitting on the sidelines, cribbing and moaning is a lost opportunity. I don’t know how people who engage in that don’t commit suicide because frankly the only thing that motivates me is being able to actively change something."

Bertie Ahern, former Irish Taoiseach (July 2007)

Who will be our Bertie? Time will tell.

Up
0

Quotes from the Irish property bubble. Sobering reading. So few were willing to see any problem I have started my own collection .

Up
0

Let's face it
The Left has lost the popular vote.
They just can't accept the fact much like the whiners in the Brexit vote.
If Labour/greens lose the next election then both parties are toast and a new true middle of the road party is needed as the opposition.
Then and only then can sensible discussion be entered into.
Those who can do.
Those who cannot go on welfare.

Up
0

Democratic involvement does not begin and end with the general election, the population is allowed to have opinions in the interim and to make sure their elected representatives are aware of what they're thinking. Otherwise how can a party formulate policy? How can it represent a silent population? You seem to have a very fatalistic attitude, where is your belief that people can push for improvements in society?

Again, never touched welfare myself, not even the welfare the government provides to landlords in allowing interest deduction from taxable income.

Up
0

What about landlord welfare in the form of accommodation top ups?

Up
0

...I'd say that whoever comes out hardest on property speculators will quite likely win the majority vote next election. Very large numbers of voters out there are realising that excluding the next generation is a dumb idea. The is anger out there like I've never seen. But I guess if you don't get out much, hang around others of same ilk, you might not ever pick up on this.

Up
0

I agree rastus - my blood is starting to boil over this as you can see what's coming, yet those in positions of power are choosing to show a blind eye to it (voters and politicians) all for self preservation (either financial or political), and yet not self preservation because it doesn't end well by ignoring it (bubble pops or economy crumbles as their is too much debt)...It's all round stupidity.

Up
0

What is your background Independent_Observer? Just general info like gender, age-group, marital status, employment status, family history (when they arrived in NZ), ethnicity, religion... I'm formulating a theory and this information would be most helpful. You don't need to be too specific.
Would you regard yourself as belonging in the group, white middle-class?

Up
0

A hit list?..

Up
0

How about just the last question then?

Up
0

What's your theory?

Up
0

Quite right to ask, a good theory needs to be peer reviewed. More so when it comes from someone as dodgy as Zac.

Up
0

Dodgy? Moi?

Submitted for peer review:

My theory is that the young white middle-class are feeling especially aggrieved because they expected property ownership as a right. It has come as a shock to realise that the fate of many is to be second class, renting homes off Landlords, many of them immigrants, who grow wealthier by the day through capital gain.
Naturally they look at the generation before, the Boomers, and ask, how and why did you let this happen? Generations of British folk through toil and struggle built up a vast Empire with a view to bequeathing it to their descendants and it was practically just given away.
But the boomers don't feel it because the world is one. Nobody owes you a home or a job they say, you need to earn it, you need to compete, compete with the whole world.

Meanwhile with the money they made on property they plan their next Fiji holiday where they can have a luxurious week being attended to by the natives - just like in the good old days of Empire....and watch the sun set.

Up
0

So when you were young, Zachary, did you have no expectations of home ownership? In which way are today's young people different in that regard?

Up
0

I think I probably had some sort of expectation. My parents offered to help me buy what was basically a bach in Oratia for 10K when my wages were $36 a week. I turned them down as I never considered buying a house without a partner. The norm then was for a couple to devote one entire income to buying a house. I was also a bit of a punk and we eschewed the idea of a 'white picket fence' future. Unmarried people and singles didn't talk about buying houses much. The ones that did were exceptions.

I believe that today's baby boomers were brought up in quite a different world. They were highly protected and also indoctrinated into believing they were very special and very luck to be born Kiwis. The eighties saw a trend for comedians to mock this attitude and for young people to think about alternative lifestyles.

I think more single people want to buy houses now. Also young people are more materialistic.

Up
0

I think we should all stop making sweeping generalisations about whole generations - we are all guilty of it, young and old. If young people appear hungrier it is probably because we feel locked out of an exclusive club that offers security as well as prosperity but I suspect most of us are just aspiring to security rather than being materialistic.

Up
0

It would be no fun at all without sweeping generalisations. Whatever next? lol.

Up
0

Accommodation top ups go to the tenants who are the beneficiaries not the landlords.
Remove that and the rental market will dry up and rents will sky rocket.

Up
0

Tomayto, tomahto

Up
0

I wanted to reply how stupid this comment was but instead I will just comment under it just to highlight it so hopefully more people will read it and realize how stupid it is.

Up
0

Presumably 'Steal underpants' is in the train of reasoning somewhere between 'stop propping up rents beyond ability to pay with subsidy' and 'rents skyrocket'.

Up
0

The government giving people money for rent, thus increasing the money available for rent, makes rents cheaper? Fascinating.

Up
0

you're showing a basic and fundamental lack of understanding on this one mate

Up
0

Aux armes, citoyens,
Formez vos bataillons,
Marchons, marchons!

We are the many, you the few. The continued existence of the Investor Class is due solely to the good will of the People. Your class is running low on good will. But, sure, kick all the tenants out in a collective Investor fit of pique. See how well that ends on the streets.

Up
0

We can all be relieved we have a highly transparent property market! :)

http://www.jll.com/greti/transparency/asia-pacific

Up
0

The great divide continues between property investors and rentors........when will JK pull his head in and realise that the majority of Auckland voters are getting shafted! ........too late JK

Up
0

Let's do a thought experiment BigDaddy. (You may have heard of a guy called Einstein, who used them a bit.)

We have 2 people, BG & IO, who want to buy a house. They both need a 10% deposit and will use 30% of their net salary to pay said house off. BG earns $30k and wants to buy a $100k house in a 20% interest, 10% CPI country. IO earns a whopping $80k and wants to buy an $800k house in a 4% interest, 2% CPI country.

So, BG's deposit is 44% of his net salary, whilst IO's is 133%. That means IO's EFFECTIVE deposit is 300% of BG's.

After 20 years BG nets a salary of just over $151k and has a $31k mortgage - that's 20% of their salary - on the remaining 5% equity they're paying off. IO meanwhile nets just over $89k and has a $654k mortgage - that's 734% of their mortgage on the remaining 13% equity.

So Mr Financial Genius, in our thought experiment, who's the "smarter investor", "harder worker", "bigger whinger" and who is in a much better position after 20 years?

Up
0

Einstein would be proud...

Up
0

Nuts.

Up
0