There wasn't a lot to choose from but just over half the properties sold at Bayleys' and Eves' latest residential property auctions

There wasn't a lot to choose from but just over half the properties sold at Bayleys' and Eves' latest residential property auctions
This three bedroom brick house in Tauranga sold for $510,000.

With winter weather setting in Bayleys Real Estate had fewer properties on offer at their latest residential property auctions, but achieved sales on more than half of them.

In Auckland Bayleys had just 12 residential properties up for auction and achieved sales on seven of them, giving a sales clearance rate of 58%.

Prices ranged from $615,000 for a two bedroom loft apartment in the CBD, to $2.01 million for a three bedroom villa on a large section in Greenlane.

At the same auction a 354 hectare coastal dairy and beef farm at Awhitu, near the Manukau Heads, sold for $4 million.

At Bayleys' Hamilton auction just two properties were offered and one was sold, giving a clearance rate of 50%.

And in Tauranga, local agency Eves auctioned 11 properties and achieved sales on five, giving a clearance rate of 45% with prices ranging from $510,000 to $960,000. 

The details of all the properties offered with photographs and descriptions and the selling prices of those that sold, are available on our Residential Auction Results page.    

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 help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

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.


Comment Filter

Highlight new comments in the last hr(s).

The Great South Road property returned a great result for the seller, selling way above RV. I don't think the buyer will lose either. A win/win? Time will tell.

Great South rd Greenlane Zachary? On the face of it this seems high price 2m for large section with villa. However the potential seems enormous due to its zoning of residential mixed housing which is higher intensity up to 3 stories. Increased densification of central suburbs is the way to go in my opinion although is slow arriving. Council planners of the 60s and 70s allowed the construction of blocks of flats throughout the city to cope with the influx. The 90s and 2000s seemed to pull back from that to larger homes on half sections. There are now central suburbs like mt roskill and others you need min 1200 sqm before you can have an extra house so an 1150 section can only have one home. This is almost criminal, roughly 7 or 8 homes per hectare after you allow for roads

Yes, the buyer has faith in the future of Auckland's real estate market which means faith in the future of Auckland. This is more of a positive thing than a negative thing. One day quite a few people may have nice living quarters on that property with employment in the offices just across the road.

Exactly. Adding value to property is great by itself as well as providing for homeowners and investors. These future homes will not be classed as affordable but Auckland council and the government needs to be creative to encourage affordable developments with more support to budding developers such as working alongside mentorship of potential developers

Yeah agree. I think properties that have subdivision possibilities will get greater longer term returns and achieving good prices still. No more land being created so scarce resource will keep going up in value. Go for anything close to city that can be subdivided is way to go. The govt needs to do something to regulate building material costs. It's out of control and a complete monopoly.

I might have missed it being busy last week but how are the usual Barfoots auctions going?

Yesterday they sold 3 out of 10

Here's a list of recently sold properties in an email sent to me by a local RE agent. I will let you work out the CV's etc.
19A Westbourne Rd, $3,670,000
5 King St, Northcote, $1,475,000
142 Victoria Ave, $2,950,000
34 Sonia Ave, $2,800,000
16 Ada St, $2,000,000
14C Ventnor Rd, $4,200,000
5B Glenbrook St, $1,475,000
23 Ridings Rd, $4,150,000

I just spot checked the 34 Sonia Ave property and noticed it sold well above RV, like 500k above which is unusual for a cross lease property.

However it looks very special:

Very high quality houses with highly motivated sellers are getting the good prices.

This is not far from where I am. This 'Mid-Century Stunner' was freshened up after the 2017 CV release. Didn't sell when it was listed a couple of years ago as a dated house.

Ahh, that explains it. A fortune was most likely spent on this place.

yes, a classic but needed a lot of work & awkward driveway.

23 Ridings Rd has a CV of $3,025,000 and sold for $4,150,000 this week after only a few days in the market.

Over 4M and just a carport?

It's all about location, location, location Zach.

I thought no way they were going to get anywhere near that. Didn't stay on market for even 2 weeks I think. So much for properties going down, central Auckland grammar zone properties just continues to do well.

Ridings Rd is one of the top streets in Remmers bro, most properties have sea and Rangitoto views. I guess the DGZ factor is the icing on top ;-)

Yeah I know. That one had no views, no garage. Done up Bungalow, suppose solid old build but still seemed a lot. Would have loved to pick it up at CV haha. Bloody CV garbage guideline. :-)

Would make a nice family home.

Mate, that's good work. How do you get those. Cheers

Weekly update from a local RE agent bro. I subscribe to the email newsletter.

There could be opportunities around for FHBs who are brave enough.

Many Landlords are slightly negative with their gearing. Many will have properties in their portfolios they bought long ago that have considerable equity.

They are likely quite willing to sell these properties at a discounted price and will still come out on top. With the money they get from these sales they will reduce the mortgages on their other holdings to put them into cashflow positive territory. They will reduce their overall mortgage and negate the loss of their tax returns for a fairly minimal effort. A win/win possibly.

The government have been quite wise in not starting the new rules immediately. Two years is about enough time for people to arrange their affairs.

OMG, has the sun risen from the west. .. right wing stating the government is wise

Yes, I am not one of those who criticize the government for not having done enough. The approach should be slow and cautious. The pace is about right. This is not the time to be reckless.

Quite right Zach. I am quite happy to let go one of my properties in postcode 1050 around the 2017 CV hahaha LOL!!

It would be a good move. Eliminate one mortgage and feed the equity into the other mortgages, making you cash flow positive.


Wicked. I'm only happy to sell to help out FHBs who'd like to get into 1050 at a discounted price. I'm also quite happy to hold it out for another 20 years ;-)

I see the tide gradually receding, wise for some to acquire a life jacket

Hi Overpriced,

For a long time, you and your mates were talking about a "crash".......

Now you're talking about, "the tide gradually receding".

This begs the question.......

What happened to the "crash"?

Further, if the tide is, "gradually receding", what's the point of a life jacket?!

Or are you just scaremongering?


Maybe you're spending too much time with your device.. get out more and you'll understand what I mean..


Something tells me you are not happy with your purchase. Mind sharing your yield and debt levels on this property? I see a train wreck with this postcode

@John2 I am neither happy nor unhappy with my purchase. To be honest I have forgotten how much I paid for it in the early 90's, probably around 10% of the current value. Train wreck or not, I am happy to hold for another 20 years. The reason I'm offering it to a FHB is because I'm having my 'blinkers off' won't last for too long though ;-)

Ahh. Well cant argue with that one if you purchased it back then. Well done.
i made an assumption which was not good on my part. Although have seen some buying in the last couple of years hoping for a capital gain not fundamentals like yield.

Too many contradictory stories, DGZ. Previously you claimed to be 40 years old or so. Now you're saying you bought your first house in 1050 in the early 1990s - so, when you were probably 15 years old.

You've also claimed to have bought in Puhoi recently, while at other times claimed to have only houses you bought much earlier. At yet another time you said "Even if I have to sell one or two rentals to keep my equity up in my portfolio I'll be fine".

How is it you have no mortgages but have an equity equation you need to pay attention to in a downturn, and own 5 Prebble Place, Orakei yet also not own it.

This may be why people doubt your credibility here.

Aww Rick !
You’re way too smart for Auckland
Don’t unmask the DubleD Con it’s so funny reading
Laughed out loud at the “Bro” word used by the supposed “leafy burb imposter Sorry inVestor” !
Meanwhile in ZackLand he missed the boat in 2016 peak to offload his junk !
Got to keep the spruiks alive for 2018
However it’s not all bad these guys are now thinking like the Chinese government
40 Years Out minimum
Don’t neglect the fact this was a 50% sold article ! The trend has indeed turned downward & we all know what follows

isn't it starting end of 2018?

I thought I read that it wasn't starting until 2020. Does anyone know for sure? A quick Google didn't turn anything up for me.

Effective tax year 2019

So no tax return in 2020?

Losses will then need to be carried forward from that period.

I need to find a return better then banks to put the equity and buffer to good use and still claim against income for one last time.

Top 20 Suburbs - QV Median Home Value (May 2018)
1 Herne Bay $2,703,950
2 St Marys Bay $2,333,350
3 Remuera $2,128,150
4 Campbells Bay $2,017,300
5 Stanley Point $2,011,850
6 Orakei $1,947,150
7 Epsom $1,926,200
8 Westmere $1,897,900
9 Mission Bay $1,868,100
10 Ponsonby $1,846,800
11 St Heliers $1,765,200
12 Takapuna $1,741,100
13 Kohimarama $1,740,100
14 Devonport $1,714,400
15 Glendowie $1,695,150
16 Castor Bay $1,692,150
17 Parnell $1,675,150
18 Mellons Bay $1,660,500
19 Narrow Neck $1,579,000
20 Murrays Bay $1,540,200


Yep thanks for that DGZ just goes to show that there's still nothing been done to stop money laundering in NZ. Still I think the latest census results are going to raise a few eye brows when we discover just how many empty homes there are out there especially in Auckland.

It’s estimated about $1.35 billion from fraud and illegal drugs is laundered through legitimate businesses in New Zealand each year. And most of that ends up in the more expensive property markets.

Will be interesting once the foreign buyer ban is imposed

I would like to hope that still might happen HO but I'm inclined to think that NZ is already in too much hock and the Government is too worried about rocking the boat on this one.

Though I would like to think that they could look to introduce a Foreign Buyers Tax which at least allows us to collect some revenue that we need. Look at Canada as an example Toronto's prices are certainly declining since their Foreign Buyers Tax was introduced, take a look at the numbers.

BetterDwelling article:

I'm sure it will happen, but in a more pragmatic way. What was proposed in the first round was too radical

Don't foreigners who invest NZ$10m in NZ, get a residency. If there is serious laundering going on, then wouldnt that be loose change for them and they get around the rules that way. Don't get me wrong, im fully supporting a foreign buyer ban even though I'm convinced that that is a small part of the market now.

Even I'm not against foreign buyers, just that they should build new

Yes same as Aussie. Doesnt stop house price inflation though

Yes, when the money taps were open, don't convince yourself that you're not aware of the changing landscape

Your assuming the census is filled out accurately and correctly.

NZers don’t earn enough to support those prices. The only way it works is most people appreciated to that figure, if they’d had to pay it they never could have bought. Hence, it is unsustainable.

"The only way it works is most people appreciated to that figure, if they’d had to pay it they never could have bought."

That same thing applies not just to topline remuera, herne bay type homes but probably across the board. I know people who because they got on the property ladder on the first rung they are a lot better off than otherwise.


@ Hardly

It's actually only "unsustainable" if it becomes "unsustainable". Not sure where you have been Hardly but rental property overcrowding is real. Once the house is full, rent the garage. Once the garage is full, rent lawn space for tents. The mortgages will be paid, even if it means shipping in more migrants to overcrowd.

The living standards aren't pretty, the wages are low - but it's sustainable! So yeah, reality Hardly, face it!

Sounds like ground zero for a nasty infectious outbreak to me.

The conditions are already putting a major strain on the healthcare system. The government picks up the tab though, so it's kind of a subsidy to landlords who don't offer a 'product fit for purpose' and a hidden tax on tenants.

And no, an 'infectious outbreak' would not surprise me.


Thanks for reproducing the latest price statistics for Auckland's 20 most expensive suburbs.

Ponsonby comes in at 10th place - at $1,846,800. Yet most houses there are little 2/3 bedroom villas without drive-on - and many in need of renovating........ They are not Remuera mansions!

It's a fascinating story about the importance of location. (A top location, close to the CBD, compensates for a multitude of drawbacks.)


TTP I'm just reporting the figures from QV website, not saying Remuera is better than Ponsonby as a suburb. While there are many mansions in Remmers there're also plenty of apartments and sausage flats, so things even out. While Ponsonby is closer to the CBD, many of the properties lack spaces for kids to run around e.g. lawn area. Remmers has the balance of both, not to mention an excellent school zone, both public and private.
P.s. we also have the latest addition of Auckland Night Market - every Wednesday night from 7pm to 11pm at New World covered carpark, Clonbern Rd ;-)


Am not disagreeing with anything you say.

Both Ponsonby and Remuera are great places to live and own property. Both are top locations - relatively close to the CBD, with great public transport!

If one has the $$$, it boils down to being a personal choice.

Keep up with your excellent posts - always good to read!


Thanks TTP. I'm not disagreeing with you either mate. I love the place I live regardless of what the DGMs say. Whether you’re a local or visitor, we look forward to welcoming you in Remuera ;-)

I'm really wondering about the motivations of a FHB in Auckland. The only way I could possibly rationalise it is if you had friends or family there, a lot of connections, or you're just very wealthy. If you don't fit into those categories it seems like economic suicide.

All those high end properties, well that's just money laundering really when you look at what's going on.
There's no way that someone on an average Auckland salary can afford million dollar homes it just doesn't add up.

Hey Zach are you keen to attend this auction tomorrow on site at 3:30pm? It's a great opportunity to see and experience it for yourself what's happening in the market mate ;-)

Looks interesting. I have been to a few auctions lately so still keeping my finger on the pulse.

@Zach did you attend the auction at 17 Belmont Tce yesterday afternoon? I was there mate and was surprised to see multiple bidders fighting for it with bid started at $2.3mil (2017 CV $2.35mil). Guess what it was sold under the hammer for $2,950,000 WOOHOO!!

It's good for the area and an excellent result for DGZ I have to say ;-)

What a narrow minded bunch of idiots. You cannot see any further than the cost of houses. There are enormously bigger issues in this world of ours. Not that housing is not a problem here.

It's called 'blinkers on'. We all have our blinkers on from time to time. Is that wrong? Surely we're not all perfect. Some people even think homeowners deserve tax relief hahaha!

Didge, do you need cataract surgery? I ask as DGZ’s post is on topic, where as yours is not. If you want to be an eco warrior why not post on threads where that is the topic, or is it a bit lonely on those?

Despite the onset of winter, the Auckland housing market is alive and well.

It's holding it's own - in a way that a number of people here hadn't anticipated.

Talk of "money laundering" is clutching at straws: a desperate but unconvincing attempt to explain the consistent growth in property values. (It's highly emotive stuff.)

The vast majority of property deals in New Zealand are well-considered and ethical. To suggest otherwise is irresponsible.


Yeah the foreign buyers ban may contradict your point

190 sales in 1071 for the first four months of 2018. $331 million changed hands. How many of those are you assuming were money launderers?

Dumb question, if it was only that easy to trace

The interactions between vendors, buyers and sales people may be lawful, but I would NOT consider the resulting outcomes for tenants to be overwhelmingly ethical .. granted you weren't suggesting they were.
Cause and effect. Cause and effect.


But of course it is money laundering, what else could it be?..:) must be !!

I thought some simple minded people who missed the boat could think beyond their poor / loser mentality in explaining the world around them. Some of these clever dudes think that everyone works for the average wage !!

Lol, if everything else fails, blame it on a ghost ( Money laundering!) and wait for a ban, or some other stupid miracle to justify hiding behind their thumbs.

I am a bit surprised that the tide started early this winter ( usually prices tend to rise between now and October). I think there is more disappointment in how this CoL is performing and the noise about negating promises is getting louder ....let alone the blunders and tell offs.

I guess many believe that putting their money in brick and mortar is still the best place to park it. Add more difficulties and higher building costs of new houses to the mix and you'll certainly get existing property appreciation.

This piece in the herald was interesting, I know Peter lochore well and he is an undismissable authority on RE :

So, Why would expensive property prices go down? what is the replacement cost or the alternative when you have such a fiasco in Auckland ??

Birdy see no evil hear no evil. But you let all the young Kiwi's pay the price for your evil money grubbing. You're an RE make the most of it because it can't last!

You should write a book called - Memoirs of a narcissistic Auckland property investor who benefited from the most reckless central banking policy in the history of mankind. Young people could study it in schools, so they can understand why they are "losers", why they are "small minded" and why they have "missed the boat".

Or another name for the book could be 'The Fat Cat who drank the cream and declared it to be good'.

Sense of humour haha. Perhaps if you got off the couch and loosened your blinkers you would find there is enough cream to go around for those who want it. You will probably have a rant how you don't feel you should have to make any changes to your lifestyle.

lol, don't get offended guys ! ... after all, you surely are neither simple minded, nor losers eh? .. or are you?

My comment was about those fools who like to hang their justifications on Ghosts like money laundering (which are difficult or impossible to prove) and those who think foreign ban will make a difference ... or those who think a one salary income would buy them a house in Auckland ! .... That was certainly not aimed at anyone of you - God forbid !

I also mentioned that not everyone lives on the average wage hence these unlucky people will never buy their first homes in Remuera, My Eden, or St Heliers ...get real! ... FHBs are only 20 something % of buyers and the discussion here today was about the Other 80 something % who could afford buying $1 or 2M + houses - do not mix chalk and cheese ... the topic was NOT KB or FHBs ..

Zachary, DGZ, Rex Pat, TTP and of course Houseworks, here's something way more interesting that will quench your thirst - enjoy;

Hi Retired-Poppy,

You + the tap = a couple of drips.


ha-ha-ha:) pleased you enjoyed it! Mark this moment as the highlight of what would otherwise have been a boring TTP weekend!

Retired, can I just say you qualify as an expert!
Where X is the unknown quantity and Spurt is a drip under pressure

Houseworks, apologies for leaving you out, how remiss of me! Edited you in now. Enough said aye ;-)

Hi mate thank you, to me it's an honour to be in your list of property people. I have edited my previous comment, I am sure you aim to get the best return on your bank investments based on your perception of the future. Although I happen to disagree with your view because I know that property works and there are many varied opportunities for all types of people.

Indeed, bank deposits are a good way of watching money deflate over time. And one has to pay tax on the meagre returns........

Deposit rates are so abysmal these days that the banks have all but stopped promoting them.


"Pay tax on the returns " explains why you'll hate the COL..

Agreed TTP, I think National currencies are more a vehicle for exchange atm, rather than a store of value. Even gold is doing better than bank deposits - returning 5.12% NZ (year-to-date).

This Nov 2012 article is amazing in that right as the property market started to go well and fhb could get an easy leg up on the property ladder there were actually DGMs and other commenters who just got the wrong end of the stick.

lol, it is funny that all the DGM commenting on the article have disappeared and they were all wrong !!

I am sure BH wrote this as a tease, he has been advocating for market fall only few months prior to this ...

However, shows you how much property investment is misunderstood .

I know that Matt In Auck moved to Adelaide not long after that.

You guys are pretty funny.

There are numerous people that are clearly wrong in their predictions. Some are only proved wrong in hindsight... I was labelled at the time as being stupid and short sighted when I sold my house in the US in 2006. More than a few people told me at the time that all indications pointed towards continued gains. The data that I referenced in support of my decision to sell was laughed at. The cute part is that the house that I sold for a rather good price in 2006 is just now regaining the price that I sold the house for twelve years ago (the value is still considerably lower as cost of money has seriously eroded the value).

There are always people that are deluded in their views of the future. So far, I've been fairly good in being "lucky"... sold at the right time, rented for a decade of declining or static prices whilst it was cheaper to rent than own, and bought again just at the start of increasing prices (Hawkes Bay about 2.5 years ago). I've been doubly lucky in market-timing the last two major share market dips (2000, 2007). (BTW, I'd suggest caution if highly vested at this point)

Just because some are going for the "stopped clock is still right twice a day" style predictions doesn't mean that every contrarian is by definition wrong. I've been rather strident on my view that about a year ago was the end of profitable property speculation in Auckland for a while. To date this is still an accurate assessment. Of course, predicting early, is still predicting wrongly, witness Bernards premature predictions. I was expecting a bit more decline by now than has happened to date, so that aspect of my prediction was incorrect. So far, my predicted sale point for maximum profit is still correct.

Hi Yankiwi, You are aiming your comments at speculators and flippers, not rental investors and first home buyers, and I agree you are partly right on that. There are still opportunities and some good ones no matter what the market conditions, going up or down. For us long term rental investors, once we have bought a property, the state of the market and the colour of the government is totally irrelevant, the focus becomes about the property itself. We know we have bought a property for a fair or even good price and that there is upside potential to make improvements and therefore make the property more liveable and in demand from tenants. And by definition to increase the rents thereby making the property cashflow positive after mortgage and overheads.

Some good comments Houseworks.

I do think that anyone that is in the market for buying a house (including FHB), or owns housing for investment (whether investors, speculators, or flippers) need to factor in the state of the market when making the decision as to whether it is a prudent time to purchase, or to sell.

If the property is cash flow positive, and generates a fully burdened ROI greater than a low risk investment such as bonds or term deposits, then it could make a good investment property. This criteria precludes just about all of the current housing in Auckland. Almost all current speculators/investors holding property in Auckland are doing so for the benefits of capital gains instead of the returns generated from tenancy. Occasionally I read here about the low current carrying cost of an investor that has owned a property for a long time and has a small mortgage. The return should not be calculated based on the original purchase price but instead the current value of the property. This is because the comparison should be based on the return after selling the property and investing the net worth of the property in another investment.

For quite some time, the primary return on a housing investment wasn't rental return, but instead capital gain. The rental returns are currently quite low, and pushing negative in real terms if one assumes zero capital gain in the future. I've seen this in action in that for a decade, I made more money by renting and investing the value of the homes I rented in TDs than my landlords made from my rental payments and the capital gains. Yes, I didn't live in Auckland! :)

I agree, there are always opportunities in the market as some homes do sell below fair market value for whatever reason. These opportunities start getting a bit harder to find in a flat or declining market.

A bit over a year ago I sold a classic car to an investor. It turned out that he has some investment properties, and also a couple dozen classic cars, also held as investments. He was an interesting person to talk to in regards to market cycles. He went to mostly cash a bit over a decade ago, including selling most of his car collection at the time. He rebuilt his car collection starting in 2009.

Yankiwi, I think it is reasonable to assume that house prices will keep up with inflation. If you had a 600k house with a 400k mortgage rented for $500 a week the rent would cover all expenses.

If you put the 200k equity in a term deposit returning 3.45% you would get about $5,000 after tax. With the house you would be getting something like $12,000 return assuming 2% inflation on 600k. I know not much but it adds up over the years and things just seem to work out if you are lucky.

But isn't it good how renters can be in a nice financial position? Their lot is not as dire as commenters make out, after all, you managed to outsmart the landlords.
Also many landlords are accidental. They have found themselves with two houses because it was the only way to move up to a better house. Or they have secured a retirement home or a home for the kids or even a unit for their aged parents. It's not always a purely financial equation.

The assumption of house price appreciation keeping up with inflation is certainly accurate over a long enough time period. Over short periods, this assumption is frequently incorrect, even in property appreciation centric New Zealand. BTW, I'm calling a decade a short time period. The past decade was exceptionally good in Auckland, and maybe not so good in other regions. The 2006 to 2016 decade in Hawkes Bay saw house prices declining considerably in real values (after inflation is taken into account). The net appreciation on housing before inflation is factored into the numbers over that decade was around 10% in total. The average long term TD return ended up being about 7% or so per annum which resulted in about 100% return on TDs before taxes. I liked getting the 100% return as compared to the 10% return. YMMV

Are you a property valuer yankiwi? Just wondering if YMMV stands for Yankiwi M.. M.. valuers? You are certainly clued up to property cycles

I work as an aircraft design engineer, and have not ever had any jobs related to real estate in any manner.

As to financial acumen, I find that at my stage in life it pays higher wages to spend time learning about financial matters so as to hopefully be knowledgeable about investment than spending time in my primary vocation. I did spend a lot of effort in tracking the housing market prior to our purchase a few years ago, I continue to follow housing based on more curiosity now, whereas my tracking the share market and bank health is still quite pertinent to my personal needs.

Hi Houseworks,

First home buyers will be baying for the blood of the DGM.......

How would you feel if you'd forgone the opportunity to buy a first home - based on the advice of a bunch of arrogant and short-sighted DGM - and now find you've been left far behind?

A tale of woe if ever there was.........


And this cycle will carry on. US debt ceiling, China trade ban, Brexit, money laundering, etc etc. People are so stupid to listen to all this shit and delay the decision to buy a family home. Now they have been absolutely priced out. I do feel sorry for the young lot that haven't had the chance to get on that ladder yet but no sympathy for anyone who was/is in a position to buy and is hoping for the sky to fall down and property prices to crash. Just stand on the shore and waving while it keeps moving away.

TTP I'm kind of getting tired of your name calling, DGM and arrogant.

Back up your assertions with good arguments and stop name calling. The simple facts are houses are unaffordable on average wage for a single person which was not the case 15 years ago. I don't dispute that houses may be a vehicle for future gains. But as along with all investment classes they have peaks and troughs. But to maximise returns you look at fundamentals.. Prove your fundamentals.

The whole country knows houses are unaffordables, economists, newspapers IMF, Westpac CEO.

The housing market has been pumped up recently by low interest rates fact, foreign money has pumped up economy fact. Banks have been lending at 8 times income., banks lending criteria are tightening, now LVRs are in place, immigration is dropping, foreign buyers are being banned. These measures point towards things. So you draw conclusions.

Other then calling people names what are your assertions to say house prices will rise to more unaffordable levels, who are these buyers, will banks lend to these people, will interest rates stay this low forever, will the world never see a global correction, will lending costs stay low, will banks compete for market share and have thin margins, the list goes on.

Or is name calling the best you have.

@ swapacrate

I agree calling people 'doom and gloom merchants' is unhelpful, ones person's market crash is another person's buying opportunity. Also, as we know, before a bubble pops many say, "this time it's different" - it never is.

Now, let us look at housing as a consumer product, as arguably we consume a house by living in it. In these terms housing is indeed over-priced because people can't afford to buy this essential, consumptive good. There is also a massive shortage of this consumer product (houses), which has led to inflated rents and house prices.

Now, just because on the consumer product level something appears to be overpriced, doesn't mean it is. Economics 101 tells us something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. In this regard saying housing is overpriced, is equivalent to believing the majority of current homes listed in NZ won't sell at their current asking price.

Unfortunately and fortunately for some, housing in NZ has become a speculative investment with investors chasing capital gains and banks chasing mortgage interest. Rental yields use to be the metric to measure a properties worth - yet we have long since moved away from that thinking. A few years back tenants were not even necessary for investors.

Saying that, there are still rental yields to be had, often higher than rates paid on bank deposits. High immigration numbers coupled with a housing shortage is equivalent to throwing petrol on the flames. NZ feels a little like the feudal system in the middle ages where land owners ruled and everybody else was a peasant, locked into their lot in life.

You can talk about rising interest rates, bond markets, the foreign buyers ban, etc but if property owners are able to extract enough rent to cover their mortgage payments, there is no downward price pressure. As long as the governments allows migrants to en-mass flow in and homelessness stays high .. well, there is a huge available and desperate pool of battery-tenants to pack in like sardines to extract rent from. Pack and Extract!

'Feudalism' is very similar to the word 'futile' .. if you catch my drift. House prices in NZ could double, but at that stage I imagine a huge brain-drain will be happening, NZ will only be able to attract low skilled migrants, social issues/violence will be wide spread, unemployment benefits will be restricted to the remaining Kiwi workforce to ensure migrant neo-slaves keep working hard. This will only be the beginning, next stop third world status - then maybe house prices will come down.

I know the above sounds hyperbolic, but there is some truth to it.

Hi swapacrate,

It's time you got a grip on yourself.

I have made my position quite clear on numerous occasions over the last 18 months: Auckland house prices will remain at much the same level in the foreseeable future. And that is EXACTLY what has transpired. Thus, I have NOTHING to prove.

I don't know who came up with the name "Doom and Gloom Merchant (DGM)" but it is an apt description of a certain group of people here - and that's why it has come into common usage on this blog.

The DGM have arrogantly talked of an "imminent crash in house prices" for at least the last 3-4 years. But no crash in house prices has ever transpired - much to their dismay and embarrassment........

Unsurprisingly, the DGM are now veering away from talking about a crash - in increasing numbers.

As for you however, a better name may be BS Merchant (BSM), given the insinuations you have concocted about me in your post above.


The earliest instance I can recall of someone using DGM is by you. You may not have come up with the label but you are the person that introduced it to this site, and you are by far the person using it most often.

If Auckland house prices remain at the same level for the foreseeable future, then they are a very poor investment choice and I would counsel people to not buy in Auckland if they are considering purchasing as an investment as they would get better returns via many other choices (some of which include buying property in other locations that have a reasonable price appreciation potential in the foreseeable future).

edit: a quick search of this site has the first "doom and gloom merchant" phrase being uttered by TTP. Nymad is the first to use the abbreviation DGM immediately after TTP coined the phrase. So TTP is correct that he didn't make the acronym, but he is the originator of the phrase on this site, and is also one of the most frequent users of the acronym.

Hi TTP, that certainly got a reaction!
When I read your description of "arrogant" I initially winced. But then I thought actually you are right, many of these commenters have a personal agenda and ulterior motivation behind what they say.

This personal agenda/ulterior motive aspect shows up quite highly in several camps, the "landed gentry", as well as the "resigned to rent for lifers", not to mention the spruikers that want to see more market sales in order to get commissions. There are a few commenters that do not have agendas, but one has to search a bit in order to find them. My personal agenda... I do not consider property as being a suitable investment due to the relatively lackluster return as compared to more productive investment, as well as the lack of fungibility during the times at which one may really want to be selling. I've never owned an investment property. I have however, made decisions regarding the purchase or sale of my personal home as based on the likely future market direction. To date, these market timing decisions have been highly successful. Again, YMMV.

Wow 27 Long drive St Heliers just went for 1.4 mil. That's lower than the lowest estimate on Just over a year ago I reckon that would have fetched close to 2 million.

Same agent, Same property, upload date of early October 2017 looks like its taken 8 months for the vendor to get rid of it.

Was it exactly 1.4M?
There are some factors about this property that could explain the price. It's not exactly "executive". It is cross-lease. It has a pool which can be a minus. It is opposite a school which is a known minus as well. It has no garage and it has four units bolted onto the side of it. Almost like it was a motel once. It is in need of a bit of a makeover. Check out the kitchen and bathroom.

I think 1.4M is a good price for this for both seller and buyer if the seller has owned this for a while. The 2014 RV is 1060K which makes it 32% above. This is why it would be good to know the exact price.

Interesting how the advert list one of its features as "dated interior".

Also This vacant home offers amazing opportunity to enter the Bays and is SO close to the St Heliers waterfront - but it has suffered the effects of a downturn and now the vendor is just wanting it moved on.

I very much suspect that this home was not lived in by the owner. Probably bought it for a fraction of the price years ago. 1.4M is still a considerable sum of money. Probably just taking the opportunity to cash in a high equity investment and had plenty of time to find the price someone was willing to pay.

Yes it was sold for $1,400,000 in last weeks Barfoot auction. The previous owner probably lost a pretty penny on the exchange rate too. At least they wont have to pay tax under the bright line. cf. Monty Python's "Always look on the bright side of life".

Long drive St Heliers 1.4 that's a very very good price in this market, is this the first of many.

My advice sell now like these people before the price returns to NZ market average. The cracks are appearing. The pressure is building.

It's a cross lease, 152sqm tiny house, crappy condition and in St Heliers. Why would you think $2m!!! That's a good price they got for it

We have yet to see an inexplicable bargain presented in these pages.

Why would you think $2m!! Firstly because the upper estimate on is 1.7 M and not so long ago houses in that area were exceeding those estimates. Most importantly because that's the sort of crazy money that the marginal Chinese buyers were paying for upper quartile Auckland houses before Xi initiated capital controls in late 2016.

I don't think that place was ever worth anything near 2M. I also think it is a bit of a myth about the Chinese buyer willing to pay way over the odds. I always found they were a bit cautious at auctions.

I can't see any sales history on that property. The owner probably made many hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I don't think this is a stand-alone house either. $1.5mil max during peak.

Sounds about right. We need Rex/Ex Pat to weigh in

I don’t know the property so I’ll have to check with my agent friend. To me there seem to be three sought after types of properties in the Eastern Bays:

1. New homes on 400m2 sections
2. Old houses on 800m2 sections that can be turned into two new homes on 400m2 sections
3. Smaller properties that approximate 50% of the value of a stand-alone home (divorced buyers)

This doesn’t seem to meet any of those criteria.

In Epsom it would be the same. I would add - 4. very well presented villas on freehold 400m2 sections.

Not particularly attractive houses on cross-lease sections are taking longer to sell and selling below RV.

Hi Zachary,

I agree with you: well-presented villas on freehold 400m2 sections have huge appeal in Auckland.

If they are 3/4 bedrooms, face north, drive-on and close to a bus route, then they're like gold. It's a magic formula.


Rating value was $1.72m and homes estimate must be of that. I find cross lease CVs very unreliable.

Cross leases can lead to big trouble. (Ask any property lawyer.)

Sensible to stay away from cross leases.

Sadly, there are lots of cross lease properties in Auckland. Apparently, they're not nearly so common in Wellington??

But maybe if you really like a cross lease property, you can use it as ammunition to beat the vendor (and real estate agent) down - and purchase cheaply??

If I had cross lease property, I'd been keen to sell - and realistic about what it's really worth.


I owned a cross lease property. It was realistically the only way I could buy into the suburb with a stand alone house. They are a product of prior council rules and have their pluses and minuses e.g. it gives you a say over the other properties on the cross lease, but also gives others the right to have a say over yours as well. The only problem we had with ours was an attempted land grab over common areas. We were the front house with our own access and the house behind us wanted to put a gate on the common driveway to the side. There was approximately 115m2 in question. After that my wife said that she never wanted another cross lease. However, better a cross lease than no house at all.

Fat pat I see you have been circled. My poor logic. If you can buy a house on long drive for 1.4 mill a great area, I would be keen on this price and this area. Where as, some houses I have seen sold in areas I would not like to live, have been sold for 1.2 million plus. Simple logic but works for me.

Very nice run, coffee down the beach, and the odd beer over looking water with the kids playing in sand.

You're not really comparing the same sort of houses. Sounds like you are opting for location over quality. Something I would do too although many don't. Some prefer a really nice house in Hobsonville over an average one in Epsom.

You of all people should be fully aware of the mantra "worst house, best street".

I think it should be me first, then Zach.

I saw a golden home go for 3 mill in Remuera. Give me that house in St Heliers for 1.4 any day. Buy a Bach in coromandels as well, nice. Plus a few toys to boot. Personally though for 3 mill golden home I would buy a Bach coromandels for 600k, chuck the rest in investment's and go surfing and fishing. I just want to be outside experiencing life.

I agree swapcrate, it's not a totally repulsive area to live in. However, I can imagine the price declining by a further 300 K over the next 2 years if current trends (involving domestic credit & foreign capital flow) continue. I can also imagine the market flipping on a dime & hyperinflating at 10+% pa again. It all depends on what the Chinese Communist Party decides to do IMHO.

I have a strange feeling there is astroturfing going on.

Yup.....they're doing what helps them feel whole in times when risks are "highest they've ever been in history" of it all going belly up.

Astroturfing. What a world to live in!


mutual manual pleasuring at a fixed distance around a central axis more like it.

Seems unfair. In this thread I have been attempting to advise investors how to painlessly improve their financial security while at the same time pointing out that this may present FHB's with opportunities. The ZS win/win situation.

We have also been particularly on topic discussing auction results and factors that define a good property in the current environment. Detractors have been generally childish and unhelpful on this thread except fat pat who has offered an example for discussion.

And detractors ignore the data that doesn’t support their position e.g. the figures I gave in 1071 sales. If you figure that houses are an even mix of single and double ownership, then in the first four months of this year, 570 people made a decision to exchange $331 million dollars for 190 properties in the Eastern Bays, and that exchange averaged out at a price equating to 99% of the 2017 CV. The only AstroTurf I’ve seen around here is in sports grounds. I’m also wondering how many regular posters here have made a property transaction in the last few years. It doesn’t seem like many apart from Kate and NZ Dan.

Hi Rex, we have put our money .... and bought in the last 12 months and done extra well from a former ugly duckling as I mentioned here previously but the dgms took issue not believing it is possible. We just found something with potential we liked and made sure not overpriced. Been hard work, now turning a good rental profit and paying tax. From my point of view there are possibilities and opportunities still and actually easier to secure when there are fewer other buyers although it's never easy as
Have you made a property transaction yourself?

No, I’m part of the peanut gallery. I bought my home 9 years ago and that’s it. I have cash savings in TDs, but have just been made redundant so need to ensure that they see me out. I can’t see myself as a landlord given this governments antipathy towards that activity and I’m not seeing property development opportunities. I’m not looking to spruik property, just put up the facts as opposed to some others who are trying to talk the market down. In some ways I do that because I was almost wrong footed by BH’s doom and gloom merchant predictions in 2008. If I’d listened then I wouldn’t be in the home I have now.

Good move buying when you did.

Houseworks, your "success" story is bipolar. Not that it matters being a "johnny come lately" but you did previously comment to me you accumulated a portfolio in the 1990s and had done massively well. Anyway, don't listen to those RBNZ, Westpac and ANZ DGMs warnings about the mounting risks. What would they know? You'll do just fine - (sarcasm)

Aah my good old friend (also sarcasm) I related the story not to boast or prove a point but to inspire others that they too can make a living from a rental property which we have done for a while now. It would not inspire yourself retired poppy because you disagree with the whole premise of providing accommodation to others for money.

Houseworks, you're a "Ron Fong" puppets guide to property investment. Constant porky's just expose the shaky foundations of this ponzi. Well done you!

Zach/DGZ or whoever you are, personally I love Remuera and the leafy suburbs of Auckland. It is however irrelevant to 99.9 percent of New Zealanders. You continue to prattle on about a subject that is totally irrelevant to so many people. They just want a basic home they can call their own.

But this thread is about auction results primarily in Auckland and Tauranga. I would love to discuss the environment and opportunities in other places too. A Tauranga correspondent would be good to have here.

Auckland does have a large area of leafy suburbs. We would like to expand this area to cover all of Auckland or even all of New Zealand. I think our general philosophy can be applied to all places in NZ and I offer useful tips for all people interested in buying or selling houses.

DGZ you always go on about the high values in the leafy suburbs and in a very smug manner. You are lucky through date of birth like myself but unlike myself you have forgotten that fact.

@gordon high values or low values I am just reporting and sharing what's going on in my area at this point in time. Humans of Remuera are still part of Auckland you know, so it is relevant to this article.

Here's another one with CV $3,375,000 - the vendors are relocating overseas and your early inspection is highly recommended LOL!!

Zach I love Remuera and would live there if we lived in Auckland but as I said your reports about it are totally irrelevant to 99.9 per cent of the population. Get in the real world.

Hi Gordon,

It's first home buyers that generally "want a basic home they can call their own".

But plenty of people aspire to more than that when they're looking for a 2nd, 3rd or 4th home.

Trading up to a home in a better location has been a pre-occupation for many NZers over a very long time.


Come straight from the horses mouth. . You'll have been too preoccupied with accumulating houses, that you'll are miles away from reality

Haha, that's what we do ... we accumulate houses ... and that is Reality, so get REAL and accept that there is another world out there much brighter than yours ! ... IF you wanted to join that world , then open your mind and learn !! ... you might end up being a Horse too, and we can all appreciate what you have to say ...

So you have accepted that you're a horse. Keep horsing around, but don't end up kicking each other.

Mr. horse, you will end up learning from humans some day

So bludging money off hard working kiwis who will never be able to afford a home because people like you keep bludging their money Echo Bird and that is somehow the ‘bright side?’ Heaven forbid that the aspirations of young kiwis are to thieve money from vulnerable people. Lol... you have wee bit of soul searching to do...

All these people patting themselves on the back, about how wonderful these prices are for the demand of the housing market, forget one undeniable truth.... the average family cannot afford a house in NZ. I have taken my family back to Perth because of the absolute struggle I had trying to survive with my family ...let alone trying to think about buying a house. I now have a wage of $45k more and have just passed a sign on a state of art train system, advertising land and home packages of $300k. Rent gas and food is significantly lower. And more importantly my children are no longer subjected to racial profiling and racism... seems Im not the only one ...looking at latest migration trends, kiwis are starting to flock to Aussie again.. keep your 'higest prices in the world'...

The DGZ is an extremely over priced and boring place I grew up there, much like all of Auckland really dull af. Backtoperth I wouldn't worry they can keep AKL, things are going to get even more ugly there. Perth is a way better place than AKL.

There's still a bit of money floating around at the high end.