Residential property sales at Auckland's largest real estate agency have finished winter on a flat note with sales and prices well down from previous highs.
Barfoot & Thompson sold 777 homes in August, up 30 from the 747 it sold in July, but down 226, or 23%, on the 1003 it sold in August last year.
It was the lowest number of homes the agency has sold in the month of August since 2011.
The median selling price was $820,000. This was up $10,000 on July's median of $810,000, but well below the peak of $900,000 set in March, and $30,000 below the August 2016 median of $850,000.
It was the second month in a row that the median has been lower than it was 12 months earlier.
The average selling price was $918,926 in August compared to $908,319 in July. It was well below the March peak of $968,570, but ahead of the August 2016 average of $906,560.
Barfoot & Thompson managing director Peter Thompson said there was a sense of realism among both buyers and sellers.
"In August both the average sales price at $918,926 and the median price at $820,000 increased over that for July, but both were down on the average for the previous three months," he said.
"Buyers and sellers who accept that reality and are prepared to buy or sell at market are the ones achieving the outcomes they are seeking."
Listings rise
However while sales remain low, there was an increase in the number of new listings Barfoot received in August, with 1260 properties newly listed for sale in August compared to 1173 in July.
But that remained well below the 1706 new listings the agency received in August last year.
Inventory levels, the total number of homes it has available for sale, also remain at elevated levels.
The agency had 3993 homes available for sale at the end of August compared to 4088 at the end of July, and 3151 at the end of August last year.
The total number of homes Barfoot has available for sale remains at its highest level since 2011.
"It means we enter the general election month with the highest number of properties at the start of a September for six years," Thompson said.
"It provides a good platform for the market to operate from once the election is behind us."
Barfoot Auckland
Select chart tabs
110 Comments
Finance is getting tighter so these prices are unsustainable. Banks are now scrutinising 30 year loans that have the last payment being made when the applicant is going to be 65+. This is concerning with people needing 10 or more years to save a deposit from when they decide to save. How many workers are going to be too old to get a mortgage by the time they have a deposit?
hi tothepoint, here is another version of the news
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/article/613dd06e/auckland-house-prices-rise-…
remember the golden wisdoms mate ... :)
Barfoots value sales 12 months August 16, $10868678901,
value of sales 12 months August 17 $ 9148760208
Adjusting for the difference in sale volumes down 22 percent year on year, against the difference in price levels over the year using Barfoots 3.95 % plus GST commission rate on the first 300K,and its own documented scale of commission , down 70 million year on year. Tickets for Palmerston North in the post.
Which are?
I assume he means the commission earned in the 12m ended August 17 is $70m less than the 12m ended August 16. Which sounds right.
For the month itself, there was $196m less in sales value (average x volume = total sales value) so, assuming 3.95% commission (ex GST) it comes to ~$8m. Plus of course all the marketing add ons etc. So $70m seems on point for the full 12m
Hi tothepoint,
You write: "There's no point in us arguing with fools - because, quite clearly, "arguing with a fool only makes you look like one"."
You must be so delusional to have the nerve to accuse everyone here as fools, but in reality you (and your alt account Eco Bird) are the only one who looks like a fool in these comments section.
I've got a tip for you: "If everywhere you go it smells like shit, maybe it's time to check your own shoes". Stop accusing everyone here as fools if you clearly can't see how foolish your own comments are.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! That advice was probably for Double-GZ who shouldn't be calling people fools when he's been caught lying in the past.
And you're not making any sense (not that you ever did) so you should probably go to bed, I'm sure it's way past your bedtime, grandpa. Don't forget to take your meds. Say goodnight to your nurse.
Talk about being wise tothepoint. We all know you and Eco Bird are the same person. So effectively you're having a conversation with yourself. Like this- https://youtu.be/tcsd3DW9pPs
Hi sferris,
That's a good/fair point.
But, just the same, there's a significant number of Auckland suburbs that are still recording price increases be it year-on-year, quarter-on-quarter or month-on-month.
There are also a number of people who comment here but steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that fact. Instead, they resort to diversionary tactics. These people are happy to mislead and deceive others.
The Herald are basically funded by the RE agents so this is not surprising. However, both the Herald and the RE agents will be inadvertently shooting themselves in the foot with this behaviour because if sellers believe that prices are going up, then it will likely increase the inventory. However, FOMO will not return for buyers, on the basis of this kind of manipulation. RE agents are still failing to accept the reality that NZ wages cannot match the current house prices. Maybe they are hoping to lure back the overseas buyers with these misleading headlines?
The percentage of buyers left are tinny and mostly local FHBers. We still have years of this to come. There's only one way to change this and that is full the auction rooms we overseas and local investors. Overseas investors gone changing capital gains which in turn puts off already heavily indebted local investors.. Aucklanders can't leave Auckland with a sale of there property anymore. The large immigration of today can't bring large volumes of cash anymore so will only add to the rental problems. FHBers that can't afford today's prices, prices going down, Auckland adding to the number of rentals needed with high immigration. Do FHBers bring prices down or do local investors see higher rents.? . Of course demand for the more expensive property is a different beast
I think you might be surprised the number of Aucklanders that have moved out of Auckland over the last 2 years. Go speak to people in other cities and towns and look at there price increases. Very large volumes to move the needle that much. These people moved because they got very large sums of money. They can't sell now so aren't moving. A lot of these large volumes of houses changed to investors rentals in the past 2 years . There money came from higher housing prices helped by themselves flipping and overseas investors. The good old gravy train at its best. Auckland should be careful now with immigration high because the population will actually lift fast now with tenants willing to stack themselves into rental property
So ...here is another example of how to play around with uninformed people by reporting selective and BIASED extracts from the same piece of news or report -- this is another title as reported by another fairer reporter on the same bit of news:
AUCKLAND HOUSE PRICES RISE IN AUGUST, MARKET FIRM AHEAD OF ELECTION, BARFOOT SAYS
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/article/613dd06e/auckland-house-prices-rise-…
SO read through and you will get a totally different picture than Greg is promoting ...
Is this fair and unbiased journalism ??
I was reading that and thought it was a joke? But is it real that we have a guy that studied Zoology at uni and failed economics papers balancing the government books?
I guess that having studied zoology, he undertands members of the National circus quite well....
SO read through and you will get a totally different picture than Greg is promoting ...
Is this fair and unbiased journalism
Forget the messenger if your emotional quotient is disrupted and focus on what the data aggregates tell you. If you look at the data, you will know that prices are flat yoy and compared to the previous month, both on much lower volumes. You will also know that the median price is down yoy so that should give you some understanding about the skew.
This data is representative of the market in terms of sentiment. As with any property bubble, the emotional factors are important. Furthermore, the data in a news release is not "predictive", unless you're modeling the data (which I would be pretty sure you're not). And if you were modeling data, you would be sourcing data quite differently.
wow eco bird / to the poiint, you couldnt have dreamed that Jacinda would go ahead in the polls and hosue prices rise from the previous month, and the election hasnt even come yet.
The internal battles you must be having with yourselves, hahaha
Time will tell but Im going to predict that Labour governs and house prices continue down and down :)
For an apples with apples comparison of 3 bedrooms comparing Aug 17 to Aug 16 average prices
Not looking too flash for Howick Pak & West Auckland. (they are effectively already in crash territory)
While the Central & Eastern Suburbs continue on their merry way
2016 2017 up/down change
Central Akld $1,205,000 No Data
Central Suburbs $1,119,000 $1,371,000 up 22.50%
Eastern Suburbs $1,103,000 $1,210,000 up 19.40%
Franklin Manukau $676,000 $684,000 up 1.20%
North Shore $1,000,000 $981,000 down 1.90%
Howick Pakuranga $1,035,000 $893,000 down 13.70%
Rodney $858,000 $809,000 down 5.70%
South Akld $685,000 $655,000 down 4.40%
West Akld $801,000 $721,000 down 10.00%
Hallelujah! Congrats to the Auckland Central Suburbs and Eastern Suburbs. Party time in my backyard this weekend ^^ https://www.barfoot.co.nz/market-reports/2017/august/residential-sales-…
Is a RE agency better of fighting a market down get the odd high sale or talking the market down to get lots of lower sales, RE go to where ever the sales are. RE agents could get flooded with listing soon after the election with people willing to drop there prices but that'll only last for about 6 months if it happens at all. Large lower sales then slow lower market to stagnation for years or slow lower market to stagnation for years. At the end of the day the market and affordability will win
Volume is key for the middleman. I would expect that it's relatively easy to cover B&T's overheads and fixed costs at current volumes and it will likely be business as usual for the their top salespeople, however the easy money of recent times might be more difficult to come by. Where I would think their biggest headache will be is retaining rank and file agents, who are quite possibly hurting. If they leave the industry, that puts added pressure on the business in terms of market coverage.
Trading Economics forecast NZ 2020;
-higher unemployment
-lower GDP growth
-increased inflation
-higher interest rates
-weaker currency
-softer stock market
-decreased business confidence
-increase in household DTI
-lower housing index
https://tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/forecast
But I'm sure this couldn't possibly bear any reflection on the housing market in NZ and clearly the housing bulls of interest.co.nz comments have more information and resources than these guys *scoffs*
Hi Gingerninja,
You're absolutely correct in your conclusion, and I admire your perception. Those variables have much less impact on the housing market in NZ than is commonly believed.
The factors driving house prices in NZ are largely (though not completely) structural - as evidenced in the 2014-16 housing market boom.
You say the weirdest things.
Employment doesn't affect house prices.
Increased inflation and higher interest rates don't affect house prices.
I'd like to see some evidence of how "Those variables have much less impact on the housing market in NZ than is commonly believed."
I remember once asking you what you meant exactly when you say "structural". Unsurprisingly, you couldn't answer.
I'll ask it again, because, well, I don't know of any structural changes that occurred between 2014-2016. Exactly what has changed structurally in the economy?
Did I somehow miss some industrial change? Did our political system change? Did our credit system change? Did everyone just start working?
What is it?
I'm so curious.
Hi nymad,
Sorry - but I'm not going to spoon-feed you.
You have claimed to build models of the economy, to understand the nature of Cobb-Douglas production functions etc etc, so you must surely understand the difference between the structural and cyclical factors that impact on housing markets (in this country and abroad). Or how else would you build credible (econometric) models of the economy? You're a mystery to me....... Are you for real?
In any case, the various cyclical and structural phenomena relevant to NZ's circumstances have been discussed here (and elsewhere) ad infinitum, by myself and various others.
Finally, (and Gingerninja please also take note) I have never said cyclical factors are unimportant, or that they can be ignored in housing markets - that would be utter nonsense!
But structural considerations have clearly been increasingly to the fore in recent times. The arguments are well-known and well-documented.
As earlier, nymad, if you're really not aware of these things, I suggest you familiarise yourself with the literature - both theoretical and applied - of which there is ample.
Tothepoint
"Bluntly, the “capital gain” that some (many?) home-owners are currently sitting pretty on is at the expense of a debt to foreigners. This debt has been wracked up by ourselves, as we buy and sell houses between ourselves at ever-inflated (and, arguably, unsustainable) values.
This buying and selling of existing houses between ourselves does not create any new wealth (in an economic sense), as the existing houses provide the same benefits – keeping us warm and dry, with a place to live, eat, sleep, and play. But, the inflated values are facilitated by New Zealand households accessing foreign borrowers, albeit via New Zealand banks"
http://www.berl.co.nz/economic-insights/global/issues/understanding-deb…
Net external debt currently stands at 64% of GDP (and that's without the forecast slowdown in NZ GDP over the upcoming years which would worsen that statistic).
The structural elements you refer to (which I assume you mean high migration and slow house building rate) would also be affected by a slower economy and higher unemployment. Firstly, lower migration follows reduced opportunity. But also because such a huge percentage of the housing stock is held by investors, who have not anticipated a decent rental yield, this demographic are more likely to sell in a downturn (especially if heavily negatively geared), this becomes a natural part of a market correction. More NZ investment properties flood the market in a downturn, which would help resolve some of the structural problems.
I have heard you say so many times that "a real investor doesn't sell in a downturn" and you are undoubtedly right.... if by "real" you mean and investor who maintains a respectable yield on their investment and this sustainable over the long term. However, it would appear that this is NOT the case for a vast number of the investor house purchases in recent years. They are highly leveraged, many are negatively geared, their debt is mostly and ultimately owned by foreign bodies (via the mortgage debt) and some have spent equity from their houses on luxury items. All of this will leave these investors extremely exposed to financial risk in the coming economic downturn.
So for instance, I own a property in the UK that gives me a healthy 7.8% yield after absolutely all expenses and taxes. The UK housing market is looking very likely to go into a correction, possibly a severe correction. HOWEVER, the structure of the UK housing market points to the housing market continuing to grow not correct.... Not enough houses have been built, there is huge underlying pent up housing demand. Also the UK government has been discentivising property investment for several years (there is even tax punishment now) and because of DTI ratios of a maximum 4.5 in the UK, none of the investors are in anywhere near as an unhealthy state as NZ property investors and yet.... the housing market is still cooling. If structure is everything how could this be? Well clearly there are other substantive factors at play. Just as there are facing NZ.
Now a housing market correction, even a severe one is NOT an issue for me, because my mortgage is about to be re-fixed at 2.95% for 5 years, I have great long term tenants and I can wait out any market correction comfortably. There may well be plenty of long term investors in NZ in my situation (although not with as high yield) but you can't deny the high proportion of specuvestors who will struggle and likely sell if they can't pay all their debt.
The rest of nz is just as stuffed. There house increases came directly from Aucklanders over priced sales. Check the timing over the last 3 years and where the increases went. Easy to follow. Tauranga and Queenstown were hit the hardest so got most of the interest so might fall of last but in 6 months It'll be pretty clear over the hole country. John key and bill English would of thought when he gave notice they timed things perfectly. There were signs the overseas investors were under pressure and the first lot of LVRs before key left . They new what was coming round the corner don't you worry about that. But the bad news just keeps flowing . Each day there's a new result out about housing dropping . By election day national might be lucky if they don't get hang
A change in govt equals a change in investment landscape. Taxinda (love that name) and Winnie are promising structural change. Immigration hand brake, capital gains tax, ban on foreign ownership, chinese capital controls tightening further, debt based tax avoidance ring fence, more favourable tenant laws, promises of mass govt building of affordable houses, increased penalties for old non maintained houses and DTI back on the discussion table. How is that not structural change?
You would have to be very brave to load up on more property debt before the election. If there is a change in govt, predicting a rush to the door for specuvestors, to beat capital gain legislation. At todays prices, and no foreign cash parachutes, who will want to bail the ponzi out at todays prices and on a falling market?
I have also been wondering, how many specuvestors had been planning to sell rental properties before the insulation legislation comes into effect July 2019. Waiting to achieve (perceived) maximum capital gain before cutting and running.
If you are negatively geared and therefore not making enough in rent to set aside for capital expenditure and maintenance, and if interest rates go up, as cost of living is also rising... how many non-insulated houses will be up for sale?
Hi Gingerninja,
I don't know how many non-insulated house will be up for sale - and neither do I know what the demand for such houses might be. Prices may go up or down - or remain much the same.
But I do know that one can insulate a reasonable size house for about $2,000.
Nonetheless, it's a reasonable assumption that those landlords/investors who have got themselves donkey-deep in debt might well have to liquidate assets in a soft market - and some might end up taking a loss. But that's normal market discipline........ I see little argument for propping such landlords up with subsidies. I think that would be socially inefficient!
P.S. Please also see my post above in response to nymad. Thanks.
The house I currently rent was not insulated to regulations during a more recent overhaul because it was deemed too expensive (difficulty accessing under the house). It will be considerably more than a $2k job. But that aside...
I have no idea what you mean by structural issues in reference to the NZ housing market. I haven't read any such discussions here. Could you be more specific about what you mean, as I likely wasn't on the website then and am not as frequent a visitor as some. Cheers
Gingerninja, at 18:57 you wrote in reply to tothepoint:
The structural elements you refer to (which I assume you mean high migration and slow house building rate)
This is at odds with your claim at 20:15 that you have no idea what you mean by structural issues
I have in the past discussed at length the common factors that make the cities like Auckland, Sydney, Vancouver, Brisbane, Toronto and now even Hobart and others desirable property markets currently. Basically, British heritage (history, law, freedom etc), European majority, low population, English language, great economies, great education facilities, established ethnic communities, high employment, easy to migrate to, international transportation gateways and still perceived as being in pioneering nations with untouched wilderness areas. A lot of other factors no doubt as well. Add to this the increased wealth and mobility of the people in over populated formerly and currently repressed and rather third worldish standard countries and it all makes a lot of sense that property prices have boomed.
It's not at odds at all. Tothepoint replies to me down the thread after that comment (in a comment to Nymad) implying that I have not understood what he means "structural". I understand what I mean by structural, I was asking for his clarification.
But I am well aware of your Elysian fantasy, as are most readers of interest.co.nz comments so really no need to go over that again.
Good post, Zachary,
You're right on the money.
Clearly, sorting out the structural factors is not rocket science. Any competent analyst/forecaster/modeller would be well aware of them.
You mention some important ones - and, as you allude to, there are many others as well.
"You mention some important ones - and, as you allude to, there are many others as well."
- Refering to structural change factors in the NZ economy. (Something you were unable to outline yourself - obviously for good reason).
The English language is a structural factor that has changed in NZ recently?
Education facilities/standards have fundamentally changed in New Zealand?
Employment rate is now a structurally higher?
Migration rate is now structurally higher?
International transportation gateways - New Zealand?
Very interesting 'structural' change factors, Tothepoint.
I'm so glad we have your wisdom on this site.
Hi nymad,
You are just so narrow-minded and unthinking!
There are many, many structural factors that impact on property markets - not just the ones mentioned above by Zachary, Gingerninja and various others who comment here. And they all impact to varying degrees and intertwine in complex ways that are not easily subject to measurement. But, collectively, they can (and do) make a huge impact.
Have you considered environmental issues - climate change? geophysical? national/international security (including biosecurity)? demographics? transportation? technology? resource availability/deployment (including factor mobility)? globalisation (a huge issue for small, isolated countries)? intra-industry issues? changing patterns of regional and national development?
Many (if not all) are fundamental to understanding contemporary housing markets - Auckland, NZ, abroad - and of course there are a host of others.
The world is a rapidly changing place - in both good and bad ways - and through structural phenomena we can go some way to exploring and explaining why. And sometimes, through modelling, we can attempt to measure and project forward as well.
"Have you considered environmental issues - climate change? geophysical? national/international security (including biosecurity)? demographics? transportation? technology? resource availability/deployment (including factor mobility)? globalisation (a huge issue for small, isolated countries)? intra-industry issues? changing patterns of regional and national development?"
Definitely.
Again, I return to my original question though - which of these factors represent a structural change in the NZ market?
Just tell me what structural factors have changed to underpin the market in the past 5 years or so - something you continually assert, but can't seem to outline.
Hi nymad,
Demographics for a start - the massive (and largely unforeseen) increase in Auckland's population.
It's a major structural factor and one that Government (including local government) is going to have to grapple with for quite a few years to come. Just consider the magnitude of the impact of rampant population growth on Auckland's housing and infrastructure (transport).......... Notably, house prices have been driven up enormously in Auckland's inner-city suburbs, as people seek to avoid the daily transport/traffic horrors. That's a key structural issue. All up, a big headache for policy-makers, business/industry and the community at large.
As recently said, the effect of Auckland's demographic change has been so vast, it's like the whole country's become lop-sided.
And look at the impact of the Christchurch earthquake (geophysical) on the ChCh economy (including housing) in ChCh. Nobody foresaw it but, equally, nobody would deny its structural impact - both social and economic. And, of course, the effect has been felt well beyond ChCh.
Tothepoint I believe nymad has an agenda which is influencing his reaction to our observations. Soon now he will state that we are simply staing the obvious as if that somehow negates our argument. It has to be much more clever than what is so obviously happening with facts and figures and bar graphs.
The greatest change in recent years has been the growth of the middle classes in China and India and other places. This has coincided with a massive increase in immigration levels in NZ, Australia and Canada. Put those two together and things get explosive!
But why the former British colonies with majority European populations? English language and culture is the biggest factor. It's not me so much that is an Anglophile but the immigrants themselves. Somebody should have a talk to them about that disturbing tendency.
Anyway, this is an anathema to many, especially nymad. He is a type of libertarian Marxist who wants to see total economic and cultural equality for all, where the elites are the ones who are smart and have many university degrees. Those who know that the Sami language is the equal of English or that the Papua New Guineans are superior to almost everyone because of their low carbon footprint. No one should be able to become rich or have privilege through speculation. Only professors will rule a world where everyone is equal.
haha.
A Libertaian Marxist? Me?
It sounds as if you don't know what you're talking about, ZS (again).
As per below - exactly how do the elites fit into a Libertarian Marxist's paradigm?
"He is a type of libertarian Marxist who wants to see total economic and cultural equality for all, where the elites are the ones who are smart and have many university degrees."
Fair enough. Demographic change can be structural in this case.
Exactly how so, though?
What exactly has changed? All those ethnic chefs and retail managers are bringing with them hoards of capital and increasing productivity in New Zealand? Awesome!
And this is going to continue ad-infinitum - as a structural change should suggest? Cool!
Don't tell Winston or the Labour party (or any other party), though because they seem to think migration is a cyclical thing. Our population growth statistics and labour mobility factors would also support this - but hey, don't take my word for it!
The Christchurch earthquake is a structural factor for Auckland?
So we are going to continually have more CHC geophysical issues that continually underpin demand or supply in Auckland?
The Christchurch 'rebuild' is going to go on forever, or perhaps is it going to one day be completed?
Have you considered environmental issues - climate change? geophysical? national/international security (including biosecurity)? demographics? transportation? technology? resource availability/deployment (including factor mobility)? globalisation (a huge issue for small, isolated countries)? intra-industry issues? changing patterns of regional and national development?
Not to mention Leprechauns.
These are all true TTP, but as they are true then this could mean property prices move down as well because of all these things. There are two directions, up or down, and its not always up.
Hi swapacrate,
Well, of course prices can go up and down! That's stating the obvious!
House prices have gone UP in Auckland for particular reasons.
They have gone DOWN in Perth (and most of Western Australia) for particular reasons.
Markets are dynamic - and a large part of the reason for that is that they are affected by structural changes.
Anyone can buy a house in Auckland apparently.
Just follow the lead of these 2 clever individuals:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=119…
Boost your declared income with your multiple bank loan applications.
Is this an example of the outcome of the highly skilled immigrant?
How this for structural change. At work we have 4 under 35s that have all left Auckland (10% of head count) in the last year to acheive the security of owning a house. They were all renting and were good tenants. If all the kiws leave Auckland, you definetly have your international gateway, because that will be all thats left.
Not long to go. Vote for (the few) ongoing record bank profits, and domestic and foreign speculation, or vote for (the many) people living and paying tax in NZ.
I would suggest that its more about what people think is happening obviously there are some who will wish to deny a downward trend , perhaps for many reasons , having purchased at all time highs , owns substantial Auckland property or in the real estate business. I would suggest once people believe that downward spiral exists buyers will be thinner on the ground and feed the downward spiral .
Its not just houses, its traffic and infrastructure issues, class sizes, school reduction, immigration of over 70,000 a year, low wage economy bringing in truck drivers, fruit pickers, restaurant workers, hospital ques, education rorts, money laundering, foreign buyers buying new zealand property, low productivity, the list goes on.
We are going backwards, we need to be creating businesses that are global and scalable, where we have a highly intelligent workforce, increased productivity and adding value to our core competence.
Not making some people rich and creating a low wage economy. Lets think smarter then growing an economy by bringing in people and artificially growing our GDP with no investment in infrastructure.
Read about Y Combinator. NZ needs to do something like this, and create something where all NZers buy into it, create a few unicorns.
Ive had an idea, about these druggie NZers, which I dont believe. Get these guys learning development and coding, building websites. For their education they can help startups, provide development for free. This is a huge cost for start-ups. Have awesome developers mentoring and teaching. Then you can take a website to the market test and change to adapt it to the market. Get successful NZers to help mentor these start-ups. This way you build businesses and educate NZers, and create an intelligent workforce. The businesses are global and scalable.
And a by product could be hiring some of the developers, and project managers if start-up is successful.
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.