Twice as many homes on the market compared to this time last year

Property / news

Ominous sign for spring housing market as the stock of homes for sale grows as prices fall

1st Sep 22, 2:17pm by Greg Ninness

In an ominous sign for the spring housing market the number of homes available for sale has doubled compared to a year ago, even though prices are falling.

Property website Realestate.co.nz had 25,441 residential properties available for sale at the end of August, up 108% compared to the 12,249 it had available for sale at the end of August last year. (See the second chart below for the regional figures).

That means the amount of stock on the market is at a seven year high for the time of year.

New listings are also up but not by as much.

Realestate.co.nz received 7492 new residential listings in August, up 15% compared to August last year, and almost back to pre-pandemic levels when the website received 7729 new listings in August 2019.

The surge in the amount of stock on the market is due to new listings coming back to pre-pandemic levels but sales numbers falling.

That means buyers have more choice and prices are declining accordingly.

The latest figures from Realestate.co.nz suggest buyers will have as many properties to choose from over spring as they did over the usually slower winter months, which combined with higher interest rates is likely to lead to continuing falls in prices.

However there are signs vendors are biting the bullet when it comes to asking prices, with the national average (non-seasonally adjusted) asking price of properties listed for sale on Realestate.co.nz dropping $80,700 between its January 2022 peak and August. Over the same period the average asking price for Auckland properties declined by $141,352.

"In August last year our data showed the lowest housing stock in our 15 year history. Fast forward to today and we've seen stock double year on year, which is starting to be reflected in asking prices," Realestate.co.nz spokesperson Vanessa Williams said.

The comment stream on this story is now closed.

You can have articles like this delivered directly to your inbox via our free Property Newsletter. We send it out 3-5 times a week with all of our property-related news, including auction results, interest rate movements and market commentary and analysis. To start receiving them, register here (it's free) and when approved you can select any of our free email newsletters.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

104 Comments

by Kjeldorian | 1st Sep 22, 2:41pm 1662000073

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't we in lockdown August last year?

by CourtJester | 1st Sep 22, 3:06pm 1662001586

Inventory was 18000 in August 2020 and 20700 in August 2019.

It does look bad (from a seller's viewpoint), no matter how you look at it.

by Kjeldorian | 1st Sep 22, 3:33pm 1662003219

We were also in lockdown (levels 2/3 respectively) in August 2020.

I agree that it looks bad but claiming:

Property website Realestate.co.nz had 25,441 residential properties available for sale at the end of August, up 108% compared to the 12,249 it had available for sale at the end of August last year.

Without mentioning lockdowns is pretty misleading.

Property website Realestate.co.nz had 25,441 residential properties available for sale at the end of August, up 23% compared to the 20,700 it had available for sale in the last August where there were no lockdowns (August 2019).

by quality guy | 1st Sep 22, 10:08pm 1662026891

To look into the future you need to look at the past. This is an inflation story and the comparable period is 1986-1990. Inflation skyrocketed, RBNZ raised rates, at a time of low unemployment. Unemployment rose and people defaulted on their mortgages.

Now, in the present time, we are just at the beginning. RBNZ mandate is inflation and employment. Low unemployment puts pressure on inflation in addition to looney labour money printing.

RBNZ can and will continue to raise interest rates if inflation does not fall, even in a recession. This is actually stagflation.

They want you to think inflation had peaked, but it has not. The spiral will continue since the average person has received 8.8% increase in the last 12months.

The job of the RBNZ is to raise rates, destroy asset wealth, destroy employment, and kill economic growth, only then after many mortgagee sales will demand and subsequent inflation be dampened

Watching the NZD right now too. A falling NZD is inflationary. Beware the rush to safety of the USD and the FED.

There's 2 more years of downward price pressure for assets. Save your money buy USD.

And remember, this equation:

If interest rates halve, house prices will double.

If interest rates double, house prices will halve

It's not an exact science because falls take longer as people are still employed and able to service the interest cost on their fall asset and in a sense survive negative equity but some will lose their jobs and then it's game over.

by Tin Pot Tony | 2nd Sep 22, 7:13am 1662059609

Great comment

by linklater01 | 2nd Sep 22, 8:05am 1662062736

Quality Guy,

"If interest rates double, house prices will halve". What evidence do you have for this 'equation'. As of now, the OCR has gone from 0.25% to 3%. Now, I think that's a little more than double,would you agree? And by how much have house prices fallen?

Based on your 'equation', they should soon be almost worthless.

by Nzdan | 2nd Sep 22, 8:44am 1662065086

Purely on numbers, if interest rates double, then house prices should fall roughly 20 - 25% based on servicing costs.

The below is 26%, but a shorter term such as 25 year will lessen the impact to 23%. Also if someone has a 20% deposit on $1m ($800k mortgage) and they find they only need a $590k mortgage for the same house, then they can in theory pay $790k which is a 21% drop.

$800k mortgage @ 2.5% = $729 per week on a 30 year payment
$590k mortgage @ 5% = $730 per week on a 30 year payment

by mfd | 2nd Sep 22, 8:57am 1662065869

Mortgage rates are more relevant here than the OCR itself. 0.5% to 1% OCR is a doubling, but that might take mortgage rates from 2.5% -> 3% which is only a 20% rise.

Even so, I think the equation could only really be seen as a rough guide, and at low interest rates the principal repayments start to become more significant and cloud the picture further. There's also likely to be quite a lag (OCR flowing to mortgage rates, buyers may have pre-approval at earlier rates, buyers/sellers taking time to adjust to the new reality etc).

by company of heroes | 2nd Sep 22, 11:01am 1662073318

If that's the case, just look at the past months data, see how stock level increased dramatically. What point are you trying to make here? The down trend of housing price is undeniable and it's just the beginning, the housing price will continue to drop. You know it, we know it! There is no need to find just one month data and look for some excuses like "oh but there was lock down last year, it's misleading" to justify and push your own narrative. It doesn't change the fact that "the number of homes available for sale has doubled compared to a year ago".

by Kjeldorian | 2nd Sep 22, 12:53pm 1662080001

If that's the case

It is the case.

just look at the past months data, see how stock level increased dramatically.

Stock levels are increasing, undeniable. But it's pretty disgusting to misinterpret the data like that.

What point are you trying to make here?

My point is that the claim that stock levels are up 108% without mentioning that we were in lockdown last year is misleading.

The down trend of housing price is undeniable and it's just the beginning, the housing price will continue to drop. You know it, we know it!

Yes. Never said it wasn't

There is no need to find just one month data

Correct, that is what was done in the article

"oh but there was lock down last year, it's misleading" to justify and push your own narrative.

I'm not pushing a narrative. Unless that narrative is "use compelling arguments and use complete data to justify your argument"

It doesn't change the fact that "the number of homes available for sale has doubled compared to a year ago".

It has, but without the caveat we were in lockdown last year the conclusions you can draw from that point are meaningless. A comparison; "Dine in at restaurants are up 100,000% from this time last year." what can conclusions can you draw from that?

by company of heroes | 2nd Sep 22, 2:24pm 1662085488

Thanks for the long reply to my comment. But I think you still missed my point. Also, to me, just simply reporting facts and data is not misleading. In fact, that's what an unbiased news report should be like, just simply reporting facts and data and leaving interpretation to another article so people can form their own opinions. But anyway, what's difference will it make between having "stock levels are up 50%" and "stock levels are up 108%" if we know there are more housing stock coming to the market, more people are selling and less people are buying? That is the point I was trying to make.

by Kjeldorian | 2nd Sep 22, 2:48pm 1662086884

Do half truths count as whole truths?

"I bought this mince and cheese pie on sale" and "I bought this mince and cheese pie on sale for $20" are quite different.

There are more houses coming onto the market, there is less demand for those houses. We all know it, so why cherry pick data to make it look worse than it is? For extra clicks maybe?

by Averageman | 1st Sep 22, 2:41pm 1662000095

But half as many buyers due to youth exit to Aussie for a better deal, and new banking rules restricting finance. #dothemath

by Pa1nter | 1st Sep 22, 4:04pm 1662005056

Sounds like the points are made up and the score doesn't matter.

by quality guy | 1st Sep 22, 10:17pm 1662027423

And if half the buyers have exited to Aussie there will be less demand for houses They take their money with them. I think there's quite alot of true white racist kiwis that realize NZ is now no longer the place they want to call home. I say white racist because let's be honest here, the white male is the target and he must give up everything he has worked for in the New New Zealand. Well many of them are hard working tax payers with good qualifications and Australia will gladly take them and embrace them.

by tuisbest | 2nd Sep 22, 7:21am 1662060113

I say white racist because let's be honest here, the white male is the target and he must give up everything he has worked for in the New New Zealand. Well many of them are hard working tax payers with good qualifications and Australia will gladly take them

Interesting to see that you consider racism to be the root cause of men being unhappy about "having to give up everything they've worked for"? Let's applaud those non-racists who are apparently all happy "to give up everything they've worked for".

by Dgm | 1st Sep 22, 2:43pm 1662000238

News keeps getting better for those that specuvested in property

by fortunr | 1st Sep 22, 3:31pm 1662003117

They are all going to be found with their pants down.

by Zack Brando | 1st Sep 22, 2:48pm 1662000509

People will see out the Spring and Summer then jump ship to Oz. People won't be looking to buy in NZ, especially those under 40. Those whom already own are starting to rent out their properties here and head overseas.

Nothing much is happening in NZ - it's seriously a retirement village. People will be thinking very hard before signing new tenancies.

The aim of the game is not getting suck in NZ or NZ Dollars.

by Pa1nter | 1st Sep 22, 4:10pm 1662005437

Nothing much is happening in NZ - it's seriously a retirement village.

*Looks up NZs relative birth rate and average age*

If Aussie are needing more statisticians they could be in for some trouble.

by OldSkoolEconomics | 1st Sep 22, 4:32pm 1662006762

Nothing much is happening in NZ - it's seriously a retirement village.

Perfectly put :)

by Rex Pat | 2nd Sep 22, 7:02am 1662058934

Nothing wrong with that as long as the Super gets paid. It’s hard to see why any ambitious young person would stay here with a richer country with five times the opportunity, only a 3 hour flight away. Our children have iwi affiliation but are not going to benefit from co-governance. We waved them off at the airport and wished them well. Aotearoa and Labour - yeah nah.

by Alec | 2nd Sep 22, 8:01am 1662062499

That’s nothing new.

it’s always been that way. I left 20 years ago (Europe, US, Oz) and have come back. I loved living in other countries but also glad to be back in NZ. It is a fantastic place.

When my kids are old enough I will encourage them to go to Uni in Europe. I will also encourage them to return to raise a family.

It’s healthy to experience the world and different cultures you also gain an appreciation of what NZ offers. Sure I don’t earn as much as I could elsewhere but NZ offers a great lifestyle and family environment.

by npc | 2nd Sep 22, 8:51am 1662065467

NZ was a fantastic place.

It's still a good place to raise children. However, I've observed a precipitous decline in the last five years. I think a lot of this stems from housing affordability, which is a problem created (deliberately or otherwise) by the government. We also have a government determined to create division, whether between Maori and non-Maori, those that want a medical treatment and those that don't or the rich and the poor.

I hadn't even contemplated a return to the UK (after 15 years) until the last few months. They have their problems (notably power costs), but they'll spring back. We've got some pretty endemic cultural issues, rooted in the politics of envy - the political manifestation of tall poppy syndrome.

by RickStrauss | 2nd Sep 22, 9:18am 1662067098

The decline has been longer than the last five years. The problem in the last five is they've largely kept the same policy reliance on feeling rich by passing massive debt to following generations, as we've been reliant on for the last 15-20 years.

It's all coming to a head. Doesn't make sense for young Kiwis to stick around and fund their exploiters' rental yields *and* their pension payments.

by Nzdan | 2nd Sep 22, 9:51am 1662069074

Not to mention the push back of entitlement you get whenever you suggest that $16b+ per year of non-means tested pension payments is unsustainable and actually a waste of taxpayer money.

"We paid taxes all our lives!!". Hah, sorry, I didn't realize it was a loyalty scheme.

by RickStrauss | 2nd Sep 22, 10:14am 1662070464

The universal pension was put in when tax rates were a lot higher and the older generations were providing affordable housing supply, more generous wider welfare, and debt-free entry to the workforce. Constant voting for tax cuts and eroding those provisions while retaining the universal pension has made things a wee bit unbalanced and lacking in the reciprocity under which the pension was instituted.

by Dale Smith | 2nd Sep 22, 10:49am 1662072555

Yes, there is an interesting parallel with what Labour has just tried to do with the Kiwisaver tax.

When taxes were much higher eg 50c in the dollar, the reasoning was that a proportion of that was being invested on your behalf by the Govt so when you retired the money was there to pay you Super, IE the understanding was it was YOUR MONEY but the fund manager was the Govt.

But of course, the money wasn't invested to provide the funds and wasn't on your behalf. Once the implications of this were realized, then in exchange for lower taxes, people could invest in Kiwisaver under their own name and with private fund managers, and we would expect the Govt. super payments to decrease in time and of course, the money was yours and it came directly to you.

However two big problems with this.

1)The assumption in either scheme was that it was going to be enough to have a comfortable retirement without other Govt. subsidy. And it is obvious for most people that their Kiwisaver fund's contribution as a % of their income is not great enough because their incomes are not keeping pace with the cost of living, mainly due until just recently the price of housing.

2) Govts. lie, or as they would put it, they just don't tell the truth, or just change their mind.

Thus we get National allowing people to withdraw their Kiwisaver 'rainy day'/retirement money to buy houses, and Labour trying to tax it.

by RickStrauss | 2nd Sep 22, 5:22pm 1662096167

National hit Kiwisaver with a tax increase last time they were in, rather mean-spiritedly choosing to tax the employer contribution. Never miss a chance to profit off the younger generations.

by interesting1234 | 2nd Sep 22, 3:10pm 1662088257

What we are seeing and will continue to see over the next 2 decades is increasing youth voting and engagement with politics fuelled initially by the pandemic, cost of living and exorbitant housing prices halting FHB's from the market, and living out the life their parents did as an example of how to accrue wealth in assets. Eventually they will become a greater voting pool than the baby-boomer generation, who have been the dominant voting pool in NZ for decades, and have voted for what has benefitted them across their lifespan, who can fault them, as a collective this is sensible for the dominant age group. Unfortunately as the birth rate lowers and the available workforce cannot sustain the mass drain of NZ super there will have to be either a raised age of eligibility for NZ super or further tax changes to fund this, which will again only make matters worse for Millenials, Gen Z and the following generations. You can't keep lowering taxes with an existential rise in super payments hitting home around now.

Either way, as Milleneals etc become the majority voting pool after getting lumped with barriers to the housing market, high costs of living (as much as the job market may be hot, there must be large discrepancies when looking in larger cities vs rural areas for this point), there will be monumental changes when they vote for what suits them. I can't say what these changes will be for sure, but grab some popcorn, because when the tipping point comes it will get interesting. My only hope is that Millenials, Gen Z etc educate themselves enough to vote practically on policy, and not just based on people they see in a TV debate.

by Joe Smith | 1st Sep 22, 2:45pm 1662000325

A huge increase in stock against the background of falling prices. Very unlikely that prices have reached their bottom yet, particularly with more interest rate hikes to come.

by Squibbly | 1st Sep 22, 3:31pm 1662003099

But but but .....Tony Alexander said that We’re now in the endgame for falling house prices according to One Roof ;)

by fortunr | 1st Sep 22, 3:32pm 1662003153

LOL

by stefanblaise | 1st Sep 22, 6:09pm 1662012545

Lol, hardly off the bench, still running up and down the touchline.

by Retired-Poppy | 1st Sep 22, 2:55pm 1662000949

There are still buyers for sellers who price realistically. Sellers who fail to meet the market in a timely fashion will only be presented with further losses ⏬🏠

by Rob Reid | 1st Sep 22, 3:04pm 1662001454

And in the background I hear the squealing graunch of the immigration floodgates being cranked open. But are there enough punters to pump up those rentals?

by Zack Brando | 1st Sep 22, 3:33pm 1662003235

The world has moved on from Covid. Labour have been ruthless, like a dog with a bone - probably only second to China. It will be Labour's and PM Ardern's downfall.

I don't think there are many punters out there looking to come here. Our government is beyond-the-pale in sooOoo many regards.

by quality guy | 1st Sep 22, 10:27pm 1662028044

Why would you want to come here? It's expensive to live, wages are crap, the weather is shit. Let the mass exodus begin. Nothing in NZ for the white man anymore.

Hey there's a new book out: "how to ruin a country by installing a left leaning labour government".

This government should be ashamed of itself. It doesn't act in the best interest of it's citizens so it's citizens are leaving.

by Pa1nter | 1st Sep 22, 10:31pm 1662028289

Hah, so the white man turns up, upends the existing culture, then throws his toys out of the cot when the same happens to him?

Poor bubba.

by Rex Pat | 2nd Sep 22, 7:07am 1662059228

Racist much? My children have iwi affiliation and see no benefit from co-governance as we don’t have any Mahuta blood. Off they have gone to a world where meritocracy is more likely to exist. Hopefully whoever is left will pay my Super for the next 35 years.

by npc | 2nd Sep 22, 9:00am 1662066034

Where does skin color come into it? Britain was conquered and colonised over and over. The British don't hold a grudge against the Romans or Vikings or Saxons. It was a long time ago. Life goes on.

by Nzdan | 2nd Sep 22, 9:54am 1662069282

Maybe people of certain skin colours have a greater propensity to hold grudges?

by mfd | 2nd Sep 22, 10:47am 1662072435

Seems unlikely. More likely - there probably was significant upset among the local Britons, and later Angles and Saxons, after each wave of invasions. Once the generations who were actually affected directly have died off the animosity likely fades.

Here in NZ, there are still people alive who were beaten at school for speaking their language, or had their land stolen by the state, so I'm not surprised there is still some ill-feeling.

by sparrow | 2nd Sep 22, 10:58am 1662073111

Considering Maori owned 80% of the land in the North Island in 1860 and only 4% by 2000, and much was either forcibly taken or taken by stealth and trickery through the land courts, many Maori are a long way away from forgetting and forgiving.

by mfd | 2nd Sep 22, 11:09am 1662073758

Yes, time may heal all wounds but it takes generations to recover from that kind of trauma.

As a thought experiment for those who are surprised there is still a grudge, imagine a Chinese invasion which kills half the people you know (directly or indirectly through disease), imports 10 million people from the Motherland and portions out the majority of the country to them. Mandarin becomes the language of the land and your children will be beaten for speaking English at school.

On the plus side, the newcomers bring improvements in technology, high-speed trains between major cities, cheaper and higher quality electronics etc.

How long before you stop holding a grudge, and does the improvement in quality of life (for the survivors) make any difference to that? Do you think your children and grandchildren would happily adapt to the new culture?

by Dale Smith | 2nd Sep 22, 11:37am 1662075459

Here is another thought experiment. No one else arrived. And therefore none of us exist at this future date to ponder parallel universes.

by Nzdan | 2nd Sep 22, 11:34am 1662075252

Speaking Maori was banned at schools in response to a petition put forward to the Government by prominent Maori in 1867. The animosity appears to be misdirected in this regard, as breaking rules in school often resulted in the cane. As for the land, I'll gladly protest next to anyone who has had their land stolen by the state and not yet been compensated for it.

There should also be a general play-ground for the European and Maori children together. There should not be a word of Maori allowed to be spoken in the school, and the master, his wife and children should be persons altogether ignorant of the Maori language.

https://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-BIM873TeHa-t1-g1-t2.html

by Dale Smith | 2nd Sep 22, 2:57pm 1662087470

At the start of the state school system, NZ was a mixture of children who came from households where English was not the first language, eg Maori, Dutch, German, Gaelic, and there were many different English accents.

And the school system didn't just want you to speak any old English. The NZ accent as we know it today did not exist. You only have to listen to old recordings, radio or TV to hear the difference.

As you point out, psychical punishment was normal for all rule-breaking, right up to the 1980s. I know of new Durch immigrants in the 1950s who got strapped for speaking Dutch, and you also got the same for speaking English out of turn.

by tuisbest | 2nd Sep 22, 4:22pm 1662092568

Meanwhile, in South Africa in the 1700's, French immigrants were strapped by the Dutch government for speaking French and everyone had to speak Dutch in schools, churches, etc. Fast-forward to the 1800's, when Dutch immigrants were strapped by the English government for speaking Dutch.

Happened all over the world in many colonies. Not that I'm saying any of that was OK.

by Nzdan | 2nd Sep 22, 5:34pm 1662096860

It was definitely not okay, but we're looking at historic events with a modern day moral compass.

In the 1800's Dutch Immigrants were strapped by the English, also in the 1800's Ngāpuhi was roaming around Northland/Waikato/Bay of Plenty slaughtering other tribes. How much land did other tribes lose to Ngāpuhi?

by tuisbest | 4th Sep 22, 8:47pm 1662281228

It was definitely not okay, but we're looking at historic events with a modern day moral compass.

I totally agree. Besides, many people seem to love looking at historic events through whatever lens suits them.

Some of my ancestors were French Huguenots who fled France in 1688. The French Huguenots were the group for which the term 'refugee' was initially coined. Other ancestors were persecuted or discriminated against in various ways, but they were from what I can gather from old documents and accounts proud people who weren't afraid of hard work. The survivors ended up bettering themselves wherever they ended up over the next centuries.

But yeah, some will always prefer to claim victimhood, blame others and then wait for handouts.

by tuisbest | 3rd Sep 22, 9:52am 1662155521

Thanks for posting this, Nzdan. I've just read Wi Te Hakiro's petition and I am absolutely, completely astounded. Mind blown. How the heck should I in future take the grudge seriously of "we were not allowed to speak Maori in schools" having seen this petition?!

by Nzdan | 3rd Sep 22, 3:31pm 1662175880

It was a petition that was put forward by Takamoana, Ngāti Kahungunu leader and politician.

By the time the Act was amended in 1871, four Maori members had entered Parliament. Three spoke in support of the 1871 Bill, and also expressed their general support for the Native Schools Act. Karaitiana Takamoana, the member for Eastern Maori, wanted to ensure that ‘English’ children also attended native schools to better enable Maori children to learn the language. He later unsuccessfully sought legislation to try and ensure that Maori children were taught only in English. (p. 114 & 115)

https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/WT/wt_DOC_806600/Wai%208…

by tuisbest | 3rd Sep 22, 11:28pm 1662204524

Wow, I don't suppose any of this has made it into NZ's school curriculum, am I right?

by ibas | 4th Sep 22, 4:05pm 1662264340

Thanks for that link Nzdan. Reminds me of my maori grandparents, they did not want us to learn te reo maori.

by swapacrate | 3rd Sep 22, 6:30am 1662143426

My mother and her brothers were beaten.

by swapacrate | 3rd Sep 22, 6:49am 1662144557

Definitely not skin colour, look all over the world probably to many to name, Russia Ukraine not to mention countries like Sweden , Norway with Russia. Then Croatia, Bosnia, the Spainish with the Basque country. Ireland and UK. Underlying tensions with Wales and Scotland with English. Then you have Asia, tribal affiliations, North America list goes on and on and its certainly not colour.

The world all over, there has been greedy people who want more. You can tell from. Conversations on here the empathy people have for fellow NZers and future generations. Imagine what it was like when you had people crossing an ocean looking for their fortune who come from nothing.

I'm all for settling grievances, but I'm also for recognition of what went wrong. You can wipe stuff out by accusing Maoris of fighting each other, which is likely. But it doesn't make things right. This doesn't just go for Maoris, it goes towards all wars in all countries. People can easily forget injustice for the sake of greed. Look at Saudi golf tour and people on here with property.

by Rob Reid | 2nd Sep 22, 8:50pm 1662108657

I'm British and quite pleased the Romans invaded - it was a good colonisation that one - dragged Britain forward no-end.

by swapacrate | 3rd Sep 22, 6:57am 1662145073

I think something that happened 2000 years ago really does show some resolution skills you have, well done for seeing past your grievances and getting through what must have been a traumatic upbringing. Especially since most of the Roman's hold corporate jobs, go to private schools and the poor British are trying to change educational values that will mostly take generations to create change. But well done 2000 years and you are over it.

by swapacrate | 3rd Sep 22, 6:26am 1662143194

Actually they do hold a grudge, my other half is Welsh and I have a Scottish friend and Irish, there is as much grudginess there for want of a better word with English.

by Normac | 1st Sep 22, 11:17pm 1662031069

What’s someone’s sex and skin colour got to do with house sale availability?

by Kunsgnos | 3rd Sep 22, 11:19am 1662160762

It’s because our leaders use a divide and conquer strategy and many of the sheep fall for it. However, you can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.

by lucenera | 1st Sep 22, 3:22pm 1662002530

Is going to be fun to make/save 3-4k a week just by keep renting, best deal ever

by Final Account | 2nd Sep 22, 10:43am 1662072191

Depends on your time horizon

by lucenera | 2nd Sep 22, 11:29am 1662074955

1 year, at least.

Right now houses are radioactive, better wait them to "decay" :D

by Averageman | 1st Sep 22, 3:25pm 1662002745

Have we gone from the perfect storm of price speculation, to the perfect storm of price depreciation in less than 12 months?

by Zaphod The Flatulant | 1st Sep 22, 3:42pm 1662003774

This is just a return to pre-COVID inventory levels - just sounds dramatic because you're comparing it to a period when inventory was low because the market was red hot (and the market was red hot because the inventory was low). Remember FOMO anyone?

by HW2 | 1st Sep 22, 9:04pm 1662023086

Well said Zap

by Carlos67 | 1st Sep 22, 4:12pm 1662005559

Could be me but everything has sold stickers on it down in Tauranga including a house in my street that must have been on the market for 6 months. Currently nothing for sale near me the place closest sold in 2 weeks. Total TM property down here is 1129 that is a record however.

by HouseMouse | 1st Sep 22, 4:21pm 1662006110

Hamilton by the Sea is diffrunt and spushul?

by HW2 | 1st Sep 22, 9:06pm 1662023166

Envy on display

by Ngrrk | 2nd Sep 22, 5:16pm 1662095765

Envy? Of living in Tauranga? Please.

by OldSkoolEconomics | 1st Sep 22, 4:34pm 1662006879

Ask the real estate agents down here. I dont think there is that much action unless sellers are willing to meet the 'new' market prices

by Pa1nter | 1st Sep 22, 4:39pm 1662007168

Try filtering out sections though. Seems to be bucketloads of those hitting the market.

by Thats All Folks | 1st Sep 22, 5:44pm 1662011075

TGA still defying the laws of gravity I see!

by Gummy Bear Hero | 2nd Sep 22, 11:04am 1662073486

TGA is Looney Tunes ... but even Wyllie Coyote could only defy gravity for so long ...

by Averageman | 1st Sep 22, 8:23pm 1662020614

TGa is increasingly a giant retirement village. Something about being flat and warm by the beach. Plenty yet to head that way, at the expense of elsewhere.

by Nellbell | 2nd Sep 22, 7:26am 1662060416

Residential Auction results looked grim in Tauranga this week

by Final Account | 2nd Sep 22, 10:45am 1662072317

Went to an open home in TGA the other weekend, we were the only ones who attended.

by Nzdan | 1st Sep 22, 5:04pm 1662008698

Here's a 2017 report for context. Housing Stock September 2017 = 21,727 vs 25,441 now which is 14.5%. The August 2017 report did not contain a housing stock graphic. June 2017 = 23,507.

Auckland and Wellington appear to be the 2 areas with a huge leap (7,429 to 10,245 & 984 to 1,856 respectively).

https://news.realestate.co.nz/blog/news/nz-property-report-september-20…

https://news.realestate.co.nz/blog/news/nz-property-report-june-2017-ap…

by Toye | 1st Sep 22, 5:50pm 1662011441

Everything is fine.

-TTP

by stefanblaise | 2nd Sep 22, 7:40am 1662061250

Good time to be a renter. I'm paying about -$4000 a week. It's a bit like the renters version of negative interest rates.

by Nzdan | 2nd Sep 22, 8:48am 1662065306

Definitely seen a fall in value on my ANZ banking APP last month, dropped $50k. Thankfully the bulk of our equity was gifted to us by the FHB that bought our previous home.

by nktokyo | 2nd Sep 22, 7:39am 1662061160

The bloodbath will be in speculative townhouse developments.

by Gummy Bear Hero | 2nd Sep 22, 10:39am 1662071971

The bloodbath will be across the board ... ... NZ has detached from reality ... only sharply rising interest rates will return sanity to our property market ...

by Zen20 | 2nd Sep 22, 9:14am 1662066856

Meanwhile over the deetch ...

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-09-01/house-price-plunge-continues-cor…

by Dale Smith | 2nd Sep 22, 9:15am 1662066919

Stimulus-response and cause-effect are interesting phenomena to observe.

There is always a downside lag relative to the upside.

If you offer an owner more than they think their property is worth, they can give you an immediate acceptance.

But they are much slower on the response if you offer them less than they think it is worth.

Watch and wait.

by Gummy Bear Hero | 2nd Sep 22, 10:35am 1662071726

... the average house price in NZ grew 43 % during 2 years of Covid19 ... if that doesn't flash an almighty red warning light that the government & the reserve bank have utterly stuffed up , then I can't imagine what will ...

by RickStrauss | 3rd Sep 22, 7:56am 1662148578

The ridiculous growth and reliance on a "wealth effect" of living off debt we expect the next generations to pay suggests criminally negligent governance over the last two decades. Atrocious policy steeped in a mentality of entitlement to others' wealth.

by Final Account | 2nd Sep 22, 10:50am 1662072634

Is it too early to be offering 2015 prices yet?

by Zen20 | 2nd Sep 22, 11:15am 1662074101

by Averageman | 2nd Sep 22, 3:04pm 1662087840

No. But its to early for agents to accept it as reality. Ok then...no commission, hows that working for ya...?

by common cents | 2nd Sep 22, 12:34pm 1662078863

Q: since Stalinda has rooted our economy, under the guise of Covid, my question is.... Where would you invest $1 million, for 12 months, for maximum return ( & safely)...

Term deposit with Aussie bank @4%

Take a punt with 5% with B,BB+ investment?

by Carlos67 | 2nd Sep 22, 2:42pm 1662086523

Personally I would only be going 6 to 9 months at the moment, TD's are going to the moon early 2023.

We are going to be in the mother of all recessions in a matter of months, potentially the worlds worst ever depression is coming next year.

There simply is going to be no 100% safe haven for anything, its all a measured risk.

by common cents | 2nd Sep 22, 3:18pm 1662088712

Aussie/NZ banks are the safest bet? To try and keep up with inflation

Or what.. govt bonds ?

Property,and shares are to long term and risky with the bottom still far off

by stefanblaise | 2nd Sep 22, 4:22pm 1662092579

What WOULD be a fair rate of return to invest in a solid smaller NZ company? Asking for a friend who is about to issue a debt security in one and can't decide what rate to offer. Let the free market speak.

by EdwardD | 2nd Sep 22, 3:57pm 1662091057

I agree. Go short term as the FLP money stops in 90 days. Until then, banks can get cheaper money from the Reserve Bank than term depositors.

by swapacrate | 3rd Sep 22, 7:11am 1662145907

On Jacinders watch house prices are dropping most likely save me a couple hundred grand., might not vote labour but definitely not National. Didn't Stalin murder millions of his people. I try and teach my children not to name call.

by common cents | 2nd Sep 22, 3:52pm 1662090777

FFS!!!!!.. anybody else here pi$$ed off with the amount of advertising being forced into your screen by Google....

FArk!! There are " pop ups", " pop downs" pop every where ads are appearing over 85%of my screen and the dialogue boxes .

I RECKON I / WE HAVE ABOUT 15% OF OUR OWN ( YES OUR FREAKEN SCREEN) SCREEN LEFT TO USE!

This over bearing CONTROL is crazy.

the constant barrage of Subway, Virgin..., adds just makes me NOT want to support them.

common site Admin!!.. buy back your moral compass and stick the middle one to Google$$$

by Nzdan | 2nd Sep 22, 5:36pm 1662096972

You could always either become a supporter, or bugger off to another site? Given the amount of tripe you have posted in the past 3 days, you won't be missed.

by mfd | 2nd Sep 22, 5:55pm 1662098156

Yep, looks great here with a supporters account. Can't blame them for trying to make a few cents from people unwilling to support their work.

by common cents | 2nd Sep 22, 8:27pm 1662107228

Yip your 100/% correct. It's a leftie dumb ass echo chamber frequented by the same people repeating the same thing .. life's to short to support lost causes and insular morons .

Thanks for the heads up👍🤙.

Please do carry on Paying for the privilege to sound important😂😂😂😂🙄🙄🙄... To yourself!

A fool and his money soon grow apart!!

by swapacrate | 3rd Sep 22, 7:20am 1662146442

Never understood name calling. Does it make the person who name calls feel superior. It certainly doesn't work on other end, as it instantly null and voids a conversation and makes the name caller look uneducated because they cannot articulate a robust rebuttal. I'm happy to listen to most arguments if well written, I actually take a lot of opposing views on this site on board. Some hard core people I obviously gloss over.

by Nzdan | 3rd Sep 22, 8:48am 1662151732

For the record I don't pay for supporters, I don't mind the ads. They don't take up 85% of my screen because I don't have a poverty PC.

Life's too short to keep visiting a site if it makes you so irate, but you continue to do so?