It was hard going at Barfoot & Thompson's auction at the agency's head office on Friday morning (8 December).
Twenty five properties were on offer, with 21 of them located in Auckland's western suburbs plus three from the North Shore and one in Grey Lynn.
Most of those from west Auckland were located in suburbs such as Massey, Henderson, Te Atatu and Glen Eden with a couple from New Lynn and Avondale.
Traditionally, these have been considered among the more affordable parts of Auckland to live, so you would think that properties in these ares would sell readily.
But that was not to be.
By the end of the auction only seven of the 25 properties had sold, giving a clearance rate of just 28%.
Even more ominously, of the 18 properties that were passed in, only two received any bids and 16 properties (64% of the 25 on offer) received no bids at all.
Of course that does not mean the properties that were passed in will not eventually sell.
But it does show how much the market has slowed since last year, when a clearance rate above 80% would have been more likely at an auction of similar properties.
The latest auction figures also show how much of a gap is developing between the price vendors expect to achieve and the price buyers are prepared to pay.
Vendors with unrealistic expectations are becoming a major problem for the real estate industry and are causing a build up of unsold properties as we head towards the Christmas break.
The key to achieving a sale is now increasingly about the negotiations that take place after the hammer has fallen, and finding an agent with the right negoitiating skills in that situation could be crucial to having a successful outcome.
Details of all the properties offered at Friday's auction and the prices of the properties 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.
Our searchable database of auction results is here, and that includes these latest Barfoots auction results, by individual property.
309 Comments
In all fairness, that's probably what National was told to do.
I voted for John Key first-up when he told us we had a property speculation and housing crisis issue; when he told us that "You don't get out of debt by borrowing more money!" and, yes, because I understood his background and assessment of risk. But when he set out to do what he'd promised, he was likely taken out to the Global woodshed by The Big Boys, who told him "Who the Hell do you think you are? iceland! Get back and get your people borrowing, like we are, to 'stimulate' the economy". Give that we cant' survive without them, what choice did he have? ( Of course, I haven't voted National since then!)
Why buy at auction? When the buyer is under pressure, & has little time for due diligence, & needs to pay 10% on the spot.
Auctions are more of a marketing exercise for the RE company.
Wait until the property is passed in, go home, then put in an offer the next week.
RE companies would sell far more houses if they actually published the Price of the property instead of playing a guessing game with bona fide buyers.
The reason real estate agents like auctions is to put pressure on sellers and buyers alike. They are often a sign of overexcitement in the market (or the other extreme, fire selling). It is very, very stressful for sellers. The real estate person doesn't get paid unless he can get the seller to reduce his asking price and the buyer to increase his offer. Auctions are a great way to get a seller to capitulate and take whatever he or she can get.
More and more properties are being listed with a price (whether realistic or not) whereas even 6 months ago it was all auction and by negotiation - a sure sign the market is beginning to swing in favour of buyers. FHBs find it very difficult to buy at auction. The cost of carrying out due diligence without any idea of whether one has a chance on auction day leaves many FHBs "locked out". The risk of going to auction without doing due diligence is, well, stupid, but we saw A LOT of that in 2015/16. The risk is compounded more when FHBs are buying lower percentile properties, which are more likely to have building issues.
My worry now is FHBs are going to see this as an opportunity to get into the market when we're going to see a downturn. FHBs are always told, "there's never a bad time to get into the market" and "property prices never go down". Well, this time is different. Winter is indeed coming.
Zachary Smith, TTP, DGZ, and Eco Bird, a quick sample check of those that sold in Kohi against 2017 CV, it's pretty close in price and Zachary's assessments of price differences certainly appear accurate - choice properties are still selling. A pattern is emerging whereas choice properties are no longer selling at the massive premiums to latest Auckland CV within weeks afterwards - like they once did. It would appear an increasing number houses in "leafy" suburbs are now being passed in and the Christmas holiday wind down is not to blame. It would seem the weakness is spreading. The risk now is that as one area of the market falls away, the others will surely follow, just like the provinces will eventually follow Auckland - down. It's all connected. How many of those living in leafy suburbs also own rentals in the outer suburbs? - I suspect quite a lot. Like the report says, clearance rates of 80% were once the norm, now a growing proportion are not even getting bids!
No area will escape the coming slump. FHB wait, this is just the beginning of a prolonged slump and much cheaper prices coming.
I’m the one that posts most about Kohi and 1071 as I live there and it’s an area I know. The new CVs seem focused on land area whereas buyers look for the house quality, views, aspect and of course location. I’d be wary of citing CV versus sale price as a trend right now. e.g. homes.co.nz lifted my estimated property value by $200,000 based solely on the new CV. That’s not realistic. Re rental properties, I don’t know. No-one talks about their rentals to me, if they do have them. However i can say that there are a lot with holiday properties in Pauanui etc as the streets empty out pre Christmas.
Of course the Central Auckland Area has either gone up in price or remained stable
Nothing particularly amazing about that
Homes closest to CBDs everywhere generally are the last to experience any sort of decline in price
After all Zach & DubleDz chose those areas for proximity to the CBD where they work ( I guess ) the good public schools & a stable investment.
Obviously everyone would like to be able to afford to live in Central Auckland for all those reasons
I personally love StHeliers which used to have a very friendly family feel superior in my opinion to say Remmers although apart from cold frosts in winter I loved Burwood cres in the mid 70s
Even EastCoast Bays Coastal on NS has only declined a mere 1% so far
Now where are the boys ? I can just imagine their spruiking on this news !
Oh C’mon Zachy & Dubz ? Ha !
It will take a couple of years and there hasn’t been a real catalyst yet to encourage vendors to lower their expectations. If they’ve got sufficient capital then they simply won’t be selling. I’m confident we are going to see a slow decline in prices everywhere in Auckland ultimately even minus a catalyst like GFC2.
Two subtleties to consider; firstly there’s a difference between nominal and percentage price declines. i.e. 10% drop on a 2 million dollar north shore property is different to 10% on a house in the provinces (which are not so overpriced anyway). Secondly I doubt the percentages correlation between Auckland and the provinces will be linear. The fundamental driver of Auckland was Chinese money, however there was no fundamental drive in the provinces, it was a more healthy mixture of the ripple effect, low rates, retiring baby boomers, population growth etc..
Trust me, there was 'Chinese Money' in the Provinces as well. I have one behind me. Been empty except for 2 BnB stays for over a year. The lawn almost needs a bailer to tame it now! The sale of just that one house in the street recalibrated everyone else's expectations...
One thing about the provinces was that there were a lot of cashed up aucklanders coming down and bidding up the price of homes.now the market is drying up in Auckland sales are slowing up considerably.I do agree though that prices are still way below what you'd pay up in Auckland.
reality is coming. 2...3 years ago i had NO CHANCE to buy the house (as a FHB). often was out bid by investors or Chinese buyers. there was no possibility to negotiate, to select, to think. Everything was simply GONE ... and i see the houses the i missed that are largely intact being rented out. It is said and it was said for me as I wanted to have a home for the family - not interested in 'property portfolio' or capital gain.
I ended up buying a do-up. big do up that probably now would be worth renovated (properly!) similar to what i paid.
I'm really pleased to see that now some people will have more room to move, more options and better buys. Investors are locked out, Chinese buyers are gone. It is still super expensive, the prices are astronomic especially when you compare what you are getting but it will change. Any economic downturn would slash the prices quite a bit...
Jerry-NZ
You definitely will be able to get your 1st home
Just make sure you don’t lose the deposit
There is no term deposit insurance on savings in NZ
Australian bank accounts are covered up to 250K but check if that also applies to kiwis not residing in Aus ?
This is where property is more secure albeit not liquid than savings when a GFC arrives but so are shares which if diversified
bounce back in a pretty short time because investors see bargains & buy in
Happened like that after the GFC
"This is where property is more secure albeit not liquid than savings"
How much do you think any property will be worth if the banks are in such a state that they default on their implied savings 'guarantee'?
If ANY bank defaults ( even the smaller ones will be rescued by forced-amalgamation like St. George and BankWest were in Australia) the least of our problems will be 'how secure are my savings".....
(Oh. and property? It will be worth the same as the defaulted savings - $zero, because, without a banking system, we are back to barter, and just try bartering large ticket items, like property, for food...)
BW
I’m making a generalization for sure by calling an investment in property secure
To clarify I’m meaning that unlike a NZ savings deposit which has 0 insurance cover your property of bricks & mortar won’t just evaporate instantly into the banks coffers to keep the bank solvent in say the next GFC.
I’m a believer in not having all your wealth in one basket
Even if the bank you held a mortgage with went broke you’d still have your property
and even if the City Council demanded more rates/ property taxation you’d still have your property
However property is not a investment you can cash out of in a week.
Hence accountants used to steer clients towards family homes as these were easier to sell if needing cash than a commercial building. Again this is a generalization but more often than not is the case.
Is that explained enough for you BW ?
If not do some reading my friend
By the way your property provides shelter to yourself or others who you collect payment from
Maybe you would collect payment for providing shelter in the form of food
"Even if the bank you held a mortgage with went broke you’d still have your property" No you wouldn't! The Bank would sell you up to get it's money back - you are a debtor. You might be able to re-finance elsewhere - might ( have you tried to get alternative finance when the market gets tight? It's pretty nigh impossible!), but unless you are the ultimate owner - no mortgage, you WILL do as the Bank or it's substitute requires. As far as reading goes? Have a good read of the small print in your ( or any) mortgage document. YOU have few, if any, rights when it comes to who or when you can sell.... The Bank determines that - ALWAYS!
My dealings with Bank problem lending departments on customers’ behalf suggests that they have changed a lot post GFC. Dairy farm customers in trouble when payouts were low were a good example. Very few of them were forcably sold up. They’ll be even more careful now that WP is reviewing some behaviours.
Ex Expat, true. I suggest that in situations where the farm property value tanks - this would result in a far different outcome. Post GFC, farm values did not collapse. Banks have the discretion to provide mortgage repayment holidays, interest only repayments, refinancing to longer terms. As you know banks are not charities and their patience is limited in the event of prolonged tanking of security values.
I also recall Fonterra stepped in with additional support to dairy farmers as it all came pretty close to mush.
It seems to be more about what do the shareholders want. Let's live in hope all this has a soft landing and the banks are not tested in this way.
"Property is more secure than a Bank Deposit" is what my comments were rebutting. Mortgaged property, isn't! I promise you that if any Bank is in such a precarious situation that it has to ask its depositors to stand in line as creditors, its debtors - the mortgage holders - will have gone to the wall way before them! Property is not more secure than a bank deposit in financial terms. It is less so....
(So, yes. Banks will work with their customers to try to smooth their way through many circumstances)
BW
If you as the borrower do not default on your mortgage you do not lose your home
Forced to refinance is a totally different scenario
You failed to address the fact you can use your home as shelter for both yourself and boarders which gives you money for food
Do you need a Charles Dickens book to gain perspective?
Fact = House = Shelter Don’t default on mortgage = get to live in house Very Simple
Went to the Barfoots auction in Takapuna on Thursday morning for the first time this year. True - little sold but (a) just as big a crowd as a year ago (b) some sold/passed in below RV but some sold well above. Judging from a small sample prices seem in line with 12 months ago - I was hoping to bid $150k below RV for a cheap and rather grotty looking property but it bids started way above and ended passed in within $50k of RV & previous sales for similar. A crash may be coming but it is not here yet (North Shore).
Suspect you are right - but there is a wide range of properties even in the single suburb of Takapuna - with places that look future proof and others that could end up in a ring of tower blocks with dreadful access and congestion problems. I was hoping to be the one buyer with all the investors sitting on their hands; watching the bidding in an empty auction room. I was wrong. At a guess I'd put average down slightly more than 1% ~ there was some crazy stuff 12 months ago.
Lapun
The good news is buying is only going to get better so enjoy watching for now.
This new government won’t be as aggressive as National was pumping up the economy so there should be some downside in prices coming.
Takapuna will always provide a stable investment Nice and central to everywhere you’d need or Milford or Mairangi anywhere coastal side of the main road even better.
Don’t bother with Devonport unless they ever widen Lake road into a motorway !
In my view, it's not good strategy to market property via auction in a soft market - unless the property has something really special about it and is likely to attract widespread interest.
Nonetheless, a significant group of vendors choose auction - and take the consequences. (Admittedly, some properties still achieve a top price.)
The housing market seems destined to remain flat for the foreseeable future with sales volumes down - but with relatively little change in average price.
Real estate agents seem likely to be the biggest losers - owing to lower sales volumes. I hear, anecdotally, that some are looking for new job opportunities.
The next biggest group of malcontents might well be those yearning for a crash. Chances are that their frustration/disappointment (so evident here) will continue.
Am happy to stand on the sidelines and watch life's passing parade.
TTP
Yvil, I have no idea if this is a serious question or whether you are being facetious. I don't know how anyone today wouldn't be aware of what a a troll is. But;
"A troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, often for the troll's amusement".
I'm don't believe TTP is a troll though, i just think he has some serious biases and becomes somewhat obsessional at times. Trend Chasing Bias, confirmation bias, status quo bias etc etc
Kate, i'm in Wellington, and there is definitely a chill in the air here atm. The big freeze might make its way down in time though. Several users in these comments have been very annoyed with me for even suggesting a chill in Wellington but i'm just stating my own opinion.
I have been using the house I rent as a bit of a personal barometer. When we first moved in Sept 2016 the trademe estimate was 940k (low) 1.02 mil (mid) and 1.2 (high) now it's 840k (low) 970k (mid) 1.1 mil (high), last week mid estimate was 980k!
It appears I am not alone noticing the change in my local area!
I've been watching Eastbourne and the bays down your way for a year or two now. Starting to look tempting. Really love homes.co.nz - where the maps highlight all the recent sales in red. I do worry that some buyers just aren't aware/familiar with these tools. No reason to buy blind anymore.
Trade me insights is normally a little closer in the averages than homes and data offered is much better but even then it can be highly inaccurate as it pools from old council records about the old property a couple of decades old and take a long time and effort to update (often they do not bother to update any property details except the CV and sales).
Better gauges for the properties is to go direct to the sources in council GIS data and asset maps. They would have far more land, boundary, topology, pipeline and risk/natural hazard information as well as future development info. In some regions the utilities and lines companies also use the same mapping tools to post their asset details and upgrade plans which are imperative to know if you were considering buying to develop or plan to hold it long term.
Unfortunately each council does it differently and offers different map tools. I have found up Northland lacking a bit more, Auckland/Hamilton relatively ok to poor, and Otago pretty good. I have avoided the Wellington region as their council data can often miss quite a bit and the council management has been a bit of a stuff up, (like Auckland except with poorer services and more hazard risk). Why is it that Wellington has no information about services and pipelines, or even public lines but they spent a whole lot more money adding public transport routes onto their GIS map (which are highly variable season to season, company to company). You can visibly see and access the route data from another website with a map, but you cannot see the pipelines and service assets to see what the development potential could be or if a property has water & power connected up and how. Wellington seems completely backwards for GIS mapping for their main services. Grading them at poor because what they do have is far worse than Auckland and Hamilton. Better than Northland though... That is pretty sad for such a large and costly council.
Ok gingerninja - that's fair enough.
But I bet if their bosses find out, they'll be in trouble.
In my experience, real estate agents always try to "talk up" the market and prices.
That's one of the things that irritates me about them....... Why can't they just tell it as it is - which is stagnant/soft at the moment.
TTP
Perhaps an exception - but here's a good example of unrealistic expectations.
2/20 HELLYERS STREET, BIRKDALE - No bids.
http://classic.realestate.co.nz/3206327
2017 RV = $525,000
2014 RV = $360,000
2007 SOLD = $317,000
2017 homes.co.nz median price estimate = $535,000
Having been passed in at auction with no bids - the house is price marketed at = $628,000, and advertised as Ideal for first home buyers or those downsizing into more manageable property.
Totally laughable. The right price for a FHB is somewhere around the 2014 RV.
It would be pretty good buying at the 2017 RV of 495k. 360k would give a yield of +6.5% which would be snapped up by an Auckland investor if they were given the opportunity.
If a FHB were able to buy it at 360k with a 72k deposit the interest payments would only be about $250 a week. Compare that with renting it for at least $450 a week. These figures reveal that it is currently worth a little more than the 2017 RV. I'd say the homes.co estimate is bang on the money.
So, yes, 628k is a little optimistic however what else is there to buy for that money in that locality?
Kate, the houses you have highlighted really “put a face to the name” of just how overcooked this market is. Wow. Scary. And that burden really falls on FHBs. No doubt there are FHBs putting off kids because they need to save their 2 incomes to buy a home. Or otherwise taking big risks and taking on enormous debts. It’s just such a shame that this is where we currently are as a nation. What a waste of our time and effort.
Oops, got 2/20 (for sale, stats as above) but not the one auctioned - which was 4/20;
4/20 Hellyers Street Birkdale
http://classic.realestate.co.nz/3185813
2017 RV = $525,000
2014 RV = $360,000
2007 SALE = $317,000
2017 homes.co.nz median price estimate = $535,000.
Having received no bids at auction - 2017 Asking Price = $629,000 and (even more hilariously) it is being advertised as Reduced Price - Affordable First Home.
Anybody that suggests a FHB gets an interest only mortgage in this market is nuts. They need to be paying down the principal and on no more than a 25 year mortgage. There is not going to be enough capital gain in the next 5 years to give them equity if they are just paying interest. So payments if they purchased at $500k with 100k up front would be about $600/week, which isn't to bad if they can buy for that.
I don't think a FHB can get an interest only loan. That said the principal part of the mortgage is not really a cost but a form of saving. When a FHB pays the mortgage the cost of the property is the interest and the principal he will get back, all going well.
Perhaps a major psychological problem some people have is that they consider the P & I, if it exceeds rent value, to be a major turn off when buying a house. Rent the house for $450 or buy the house for $600 ($350 interest plus $250 principal) a week. If one considers the latter to be a bad deal one is not thinking ahead very clearly. Also if the property goes up with inflation of 2% on a 600k home then that's an additional $230 a week in the pocket. Of course there are rates and insurance and maintenance but I think it is best to not think too deeply about that as it is usually just an excuse to not do it. Two incomes should easily cover $600 a week plus the extra expenses.
A lot of people in the past have figured its just not worth it to buy and that was when houses were more affordable too. This was a big mistake.
Now we have an example of Nzdan who is paying a mortgage in Masterton but will no doubt find that he will get reimbursed all his mortgage interest as his house increases in value. He effectively gets a house but gets the interest back on the loan in the form of capital gain. Masterton value is up 21% for the year. If Nzdan bought only a few months ago he is theoretically up 10k already. Plus he gets all the benefits of home ownership and a happy wife.
Correct. Had a market appraisal done last month (have had the place 4 months) and Ray White believe it's gained $15k. We decided to start off our first 12 months fixed on minimum P & I payments over 25 year, but after that i'll look at putting a portion as floating so we can dump a bit more money on the mortgage which should help shed a bit more interest dollars off.
" Rent the house for $450 or buy the house for $600 ($350 interest plus $250 principal) a week. If one considers the latter to be a bad deal one is not thinking ahead very clearly."
Depends what you would do with the other $150 a week if paying rent. In the short term putting in into equities could well be a smarter move. Let the landlord pay rates and maintainence and top up the mortgage on a declining asset while your money is invested and earning you interest/dividends. Of course if you are going to piss it up at the pub then thats just silly.
And for nzdan.. you assume there is going to be capital growth in the short term.. I have no idea what is happening in masterton, but in Auckland their wont be. The market has peaked, its going to be flat or declining for the next cycle, barring govt intervention to crank it up again.
Banks don't issue interest only loans in a declining market, especialy when they are about to undertake a massive re-pricing/negotiation task on all cutomers who are due to have their 5 year interest only terms about to expire. The new terms of Principle and Interest, once applied to existing customers will cripple many, as these loan repayments still need to fall in-line within the original maturity date. Going interest only for the first 5 years is a big gamble, especially in a declining market.
This shows the procyclical behaviour of bank lending.
When property prices are rising, they ease loan criteria standards and issue interest only loans thereby amounts that borrowers can borrow and amounts that they can pay for property, thereby increasing property prices further.
When property prices fall, they make those on interest only start paying P&I loans which increases a borrowers debt payments substantially and puts them under increased financial pressure when the economy is slowing and further exacerbates falling property prices
Limits on FHB is $650k, and homes has a larger value variance than other tools, even then the CV would have been a bit above the market value. It is clear what the owners are doing trying to play under $650 by a bit, plus B&T would have quoted them 100k on top just to get the business. Normally the auction is their chance to tenderise the meat for a big drop. Even then, when attached cross leases on the shore go for high 500s in July prices today will more likely play to expectations and potential. In this case the property is also an attached cross lease, expecting above the new CV from July is a reach but the price will be well above of the 2014 RV. The min is likely very high 400s (which if it is a firesale the owners will take).
Being affordable to the local wages is not the NZ market any more.
And at the opposite end of the spectrum;
67B WELLPARK AVENUE, GREY LYNN
http://classic.realestate.co.nz/3199124
2017 RV = $2,475,000
2014 RV = $1,540,000
1990 BUILT - no previous sale history
2017 homes.co.nz median price estimate = $2,275,000
Having been passed in at auction with no bids - the house is price marketed at = $1,290,000 - nearly 50% below the 2017 RV.
It didn't get over 2M. That's the 2017 RV which is just blindly calculated on section size really. The section is not sub-dividable and it appears to be well below the surrounding properties. There appears to be no sales history for this place. A visit to the open home would reveal all, I'd say.
I agree with DG, a valuation helps though as they do some of the local area sales value comparison for you and I had to provide one for one of my revaluations. Essentially talk them "to death" i.e. provide comparisons where their metrics fail locally with other properties e.g. better properties but lower CVs to yours, recent sales comparisons to your property, and serious valuation concerns. Normally land concerns are better than property, i.e. pointing out a slope compared to the flat land value, service difficulties preventing development etc as the actual building could be at any standard and would not change the CV much.
Which is often the case, especially with a recent sale ahead. The current owners are not looking at holding long term and the new ones benefit buy fraud in the higher value. The difference in rates, which is not much, could be seen as a red envelope value. However they can always come back to council for a revision producing the valuation they used for due diligence. Had that happen myself for a couple of properties, no way I was taking QVs shite metrics. Got them revalued and the bank still used the old metrics of a couple hundred k higher, (odd but useful).
This is a good example of where QV have officially mucked up. Seriously the place is less than a block from Western Springs and the potential is stunted. The house is odd and lets have a look at the word the agents chose "rusticated". If I owned the place and was not selling soon I would string QV valuers by their lanyards. But then again I have a tendency towards accuracy in optimisation and value modelling. Likely many of the residents on that street are not fussed with the CVs and rates they have. Plus there are subdivisions and recent homes skewing the whole neighbourhood. QV are a real balls up, and in this case it looks as if the owners are well aware of it. Hmm 1990 built,... yeah lets look at the word rusticated with caution in future.
First they blamed it on the upcoming elections, then they blamed it on the pre-election. Next they blamed it on who got into the government and then they move on to blamed it on post election. Now they'll tell us it's the holidays and no one is around. Moving forward they will tell us because this summer is too hot and they're rationing for drought. And of course no one comes out during winter. June to December, another year.
I suspect that going forward, vendor finance will make a come back;
http://www.mortgagemantra.co.nz/index.php/advice/deposit-options
Was reasonably commonplace back in the 1990s, if I recall correctly.
Even that is to my mind over-priced. Not an ideal first home as very little section, so more suited perhaps as a granny flat/downsizer, given it has a brick exterior and no section to speak of.
It certainly didn't take much time for the vendor to figure out that they were in a losing situation. Props to them for cutting losses and selling. I have a close relative that is still unwilling to sell an unwisely purchased property from a decade ago. The fortunate thing is that the values have increased dramatically in the the last six or seven years (doubling in that time period), which has brought him back to break even. Of course, once one factors in opportunity costs, maintenance, rates, etc. for the last decade, he has been carrying around a loss leader for a very long time... the bank of Sealy would have been a far wiser choice for him!
Yes but it is Rathgar Road, during the heady days it was in a fast growing neighbourhood with multiple TV showcases about the amazing flipping potential... then there were a couple of hiccups and there were only so many ways to upgrade the old home with barely any land. Curious they were on the market so soon after, surely anyone would wait till after the new year... perhaps that is the plan and the lead up is at minimal cost.
Rathgar Road was in it's prime 20 years ago when Henderson fnished at the end of that road. Then Sturges Road was opened up and drove in pretty much a straight line towards Henderson Valley and linked up with an old country road called Candia Road. All of that resulted in new suburbs built right on top of West Aucklands major film locations for Zena Warrior Princess and others like "Ninja Turtles" lol. Seriously, we still had Ninja Turtles film crew filming over behind our back yard in Palm Heights only about 6 years ago!
Yep a lot of poky, damp, no sunshine, distant to transport, not maintained specuvestor property purchased in the excitement are going to tank. I'd suggest anything in DGZ that was previously subdivide but is now in the single dwelling zone is about to take a big hit as well. Time will tell.
And then, let's look at one that did sell at that auction.
44 NIGEL ROAD, BROWNS BAY
https://www.barfoot.co.nz/608172
2017 RV = $1,110,000
2014 RV = $790,000
2010 SOLD = $528,000 (that seller took a loss on the $642,000 price paid in 2007).
2017 homes.co.nz median price estimate = $$1,095,000
Sold at auction = $1,050,000 - $60,000 under 2017 RV.
Son and family (FHBs) bought a similar 1960s weatherboard place in Lower Hutt in 2015 - with attached double garage - paid RV at the time, $260,000. Affordable for them on one income. Works for a regional council, good job, paying the same for its equivalent in Auckland.
Auckland's got to get realistic about the incomes of FHBs.
First home buyer here, few months ago paid $210k for twice the land of that Nigel Road property, 5 minutes walk from the Train Station in Masterton. I certainly don't mind the 2 hour train ride into work when the mortgage is almost nothing. Meant my wife could stay home with the baby and not worry about work.
No one wants to hear your story Nzdan, it doesn't fit the narrative.
Just kidding, great work. You could consider that the train ride is being paid for by the lower housing costs giving a pretty good hourly rate for just snoozing. Can you get Internet while on the train?
Yeah internet access bar 10 minutes of tunnel travel, work pays for that privilege. The train ride is about $70 per week, which would almost certainly be offset by not running my own vehicle (petrol and maintenance). Mortgage payments are $1000 per month.
The hourly rate if you incorporate all the time I spend travelling is a bit crap (20 hours on top of a 40 hour salary), but I love my job and that’s all that matters.
$70 is a lot cheaper than most Auckland commuters would face per week for car kilometres and parking. Parking in Auckland is $20 per day, and many commuters would be going 20-40kms per day.
You could do a part time masters degree on your commute pretty readily too, if you wanted. Not to mention you get to avoid the absolute muppetry of Auckland drivers.
You mean the narrative that the issue was always with the main population centres where most the jobs are, not in small towns that have and continue to be low value. Masterton is fine but it is not a success story to buy there. The deposit rate is so low that it could be reached through a seasonal job. No offence intended NzDan a first home is always a good stage to reach. Especially if you are planning on settling with a family. Small towns and small cities work well when they have a good industry and employment opportunities around them. Train connections are even better. That being said unfortunately before the crisis many towns were suffering and still suffer a severe crunch in area wide good employment, population and services.
And the Wairarapa is typically warmer and drier than AKL year round. Love the big kids playground and park in the centre of Masterton - always stop there if we've got kids in the car when passing through. Beautiful beaches to the east as well. It's a lovely place and you might find work locally in the future as well.
Smart purchase.
I have encountered 3 US billionaires who love the Wairarapa, you would all know who one is. One high up at Blackstone Private Equity, loved the place and had purchased (surprisingly he was incredibly down to earth, no airs or graces, unless you knew who he was you would think he was an average business owner) . They seem to look on the Wairarapa as being how the US was when they grew up. If billionaires are moving in, probably not a bad place to settle down.
Yes but by comparison South Aucklanders face the same travel times and do not even get the benefit of affordable housing. They do get a good airport and festivals though... but whether they can afford to enjoy them is a bit tougher. I tend to use the logic to explain to old family that if the housing costs are lower the quality of life generally improves, alongside the opportunities for travel. High housing costs mean that the requirements and hours of work tend take over, (with second & third jobs also needed), and there is no money even for a weekend drive.
There he is
DubleDzz
Amateur landlard ha!
It would take One Hour just to get 20Kms down the bumper to bumper Northern Motorway in the early 90s to Auckland Hospital We would leave at 6:45am & get to the hospital at 8am
2 hrs is nothing in UK or US
You need to expand your spruiking life boy
Whats your point Kate ?
It depends on whether your a glass half full or a glass half empty type of person, I see them nearly doubling their money in 7 years, the RV is irrelevant other than to help pull up everyone's sell price close to it. Basically the underlying subconscious is trying to justify the $1,095,000 price tag. The buyer thinks they got $60K off so they are happy and the seller is deliriously happy so it s a win win.
@Zachary will you be attending the live auction tomorrow?
23 Ranui Road, Remuera (DGZ)
https://nz.raywhite.com/auckland-city/remuera/1782845/
2017 CV = $4,250,000
2017 RV = $5,020,000
2014 CV = $3,400,000
Jul-2017 SOLD price $5,000,000
Dec-2017 homes.co.nz median price estimate = $5,000,000
Sold at auction tomorrow = $?,???,???
@Double-GZ - that's odd as the listing has been changed today from "Auction" to "Negotiation";
http://classic.realestate.co.nz/3207199
Did it sell for a really low price to someone who thinks they can flip it for a profit, I wonder?
Yeah it was supposed to be a question mark at the end i.e. "Sold?"
Here's the new update though since I have rung a couple of my contacts...the property was passed in at $4.65M at the auction and they are now negotiating with the highest bidder. I will let you know again when I have more updates. Cheers.
You mean, the highest non-vendor bidder, I assume! If it was Passed In I doubt the highest bid wasn't the Vendors Bid.....That....is a practice that should be outlawed right away. It is in many places overseas, and people there laugh when I tell them that is goes on here...(In the Uk for instance, bidding starts at some arbitrary level and then FALLS until a genuine bid is found or it is withdrawn. It doesn't Magically go up!)
Trademe property data says it was sold in July 2017 for $5m.
https://www.trademe.co.nz/property/insights/address/Auckland/Remuera/Ra…
If the person selling it is only flipping it then who in the market is looking for a place like this?
Yes, I really dislike vendor bidding - particularly when that bid is then described as a bid at which the property was passed in at auction. I think of it as a technically legal out right lie. In so many cases, the only bid received was a vendor bid. In other words, there were no bids whatsoever.
I recall one auction I was a phone bidder in. They advertised the price at which bidding would start. Turns out that was the price I wanted to pay - so my plan was to be the one to open the bidding. Oddly enough, the auctioneer took a vendor bid at that opening price. The agent then asked me for my bid and I explained that I wanted to take the opening bid as that was the price I wanted to pay. He then said, but that bid has been taken - what's your bid. I repeated that my bid was the one that the vendor just took. The agent then explained I couldn't have that bid, I needed to bid higher - and I said I didn't plan on going higher - that number was my bid. They halted the auction so that the guy on the end of the phone could confer with the auctioneer. He came back onto the phone and they opened up again, seeking an advance on the vendor bid. I again said no advance - that was the price I wanted to pay. They closed the auction and rang me about half an hour later, explaining the vendor would take my "bid". I told them to get stuffed as I hadn't bid.
Watchlisted the property - sold about six months later for less than the bid I was never allowed to make.
Had another experience where again on the phone - and before I had a chance to bid at the RV of the property (which was the opening price called for). I bid another $10K. Another bid came in at $10K higher than mine. I didn't place another bid and the auction closed.
Got the phone call (this time only 5 minutes later as it was an on site auction - so was the only property they had to deal with on the day). They said they would take my earlier bid. I said, but someone else bid higher than me. The agent said to me, "don't worry about that - the vendor wants to sell the house to you". I said, well that's odd given they had a higher bid. The agent replied, "just ignore that".
I said, well, I'll offer the RV then. They took it.
Yes, like this one;
http://classic.realestate.co.nz/3195632
It only owes its current owner $2.9m (2014 sale) - so they might be a bit more negotiable.
Although the realestate.co.nz ad says "Deadline Treaty" - the deadline (30 November) has passed and it's now "Price By Negotiation";
https://rwremuera.co.nz/auckland/remuera/46c-eastbourne-road-18121226/
Zachary, DGZ, what's your take on this; 637 Remuera Road, 2017 CV $3,400.000, fixed price $1,980.000.
2014 CV, $1830.00
https://www.realestate.co.nz/3195063
Agent says urgent sale, large section, huge potential ra-de-ra-de-ra....
Looks more like a do up and stage job, (carpets, kitchen, paint etc), so the rise in price at that level would be a solid bet. But absentee owner? For instance we left a one of ours early (as we were living away for the sale), and a place like this could have been rented for a bit before reno, (it looks as if the second kitchette is still original but a bit damaged, likely not worth fixing). QV fails again though due to section shape. Do they even bother to load up land information at this point or are they really as slack just to use the sqm. It seems their algorithms have gotten worse over time.
This is similar to that Grey Lynn one. It has an epic long driveway. You will need to have a base camp just to take the rubbish bin out. Not sub-dividable, not DGZ. A lot of land taken by the driveway. House is odd and in need of a major renovation or knock down rebuild. It has always been fairly inexpensive selling for 1.1M in 2012. This still gives the seller a profit of 880k just for holding it for five years.
This is the right price, perhaps a bit high.
Check this photo:
https://mediaserver.realestate.co.nz/listings/3195063/39e36f8712b9134c5…
Thank goodness they threw the new CV out as bollocks. Perhaps that is the change in sellers that needs to happen. Before everyone had more trust with CVs, now they need to push them back with extreme force. QV are helping fuel unrealistic expectations through incompetence and the search for the lowest employment resource cost.
Ok here are a few quick facts of this property:
- around 400sqm of the 1125sqm is the very long steep driveway going downhill
- will take a big effort to push the rubbish bin out every week
- this is on the south side of Remuera Rd so it won't get the northern slope aspects
- unfortunately it is outside of the DGZ boundary ooops
- would be hard to turn right on top of the drive due to busy road
- Chinese owners
- 2014 CV $1,830,000
- bought 2012 for $1.1M
If they can sell it for the asking price they will still make ~900k over the last 5 years. Not bad location and centrally located. I think $1.98M is a fair asking price.
I'm definitely not a RE agent and am happy with my Mon-Fri job in the CBD at the bottom of Quay St. I do pay subscription fees to a few known property websites like QV, RPM, Property Guru etc etc. Still less than $100/mth though as I share with other investors ;-)
Jeepers. For the million-th time, I am not. I would be more than happy to admit it if I were a RE agent. The fact is I have nothing to do with any RE agencies. I have to admit I am a bit of a property fanatic though, especially in DGZ where I reside.
Note - I am also probably a bit out of touch with what's going on in other suburbs as I mostly live within my comfort "zone" ;-)
Side note, I hope you have some funds to also support this lovely site and it's services as well as it is also in our interests. QV is ok if you are in the process of shopping around but now it is usually the old guard and not as useful as many other 3rd party sites. Like the property press, very old school to read it now but you cannot deny that there are still people who prefer to read it over lunch rather than go to the sites (I cannot understand why but it may be a habitual thing).
Looks more houses the spruikers can’t afford without going into serious Debt !
Who do these guys think they’re kidding !?
They work in middle management jobs yet try desperately to boost their importance through blogging !
There must be a psychological cause Perhaps underlying lack of self esteem!
This article is old but all the key points are still valid. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/news/article.cfm?c_id=8&objectid=104…
Remuera Rd has traditionally been a dividing line, with homes on the northern slopes being worth much more than those on the other side.
I don't quite agree with the best streets in the article though. IMHO they should be:
1. Burwood Cres
2. Victoria Ave
3. Arney Cres
4. Arney Rd
5. Westbury Cres
6. Ridings Rd
7. Eastbourne Rd
8. Entrican Ave
9. Ranui Rd
10. Martin Ave
11. Kenny Rd
12. Darwin Lane
13. Lucerne Rd
14. Seaview Rd
15. Westbourne Rd.
At some point the debt is always collected. Warning bells every where.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=119…
Thanks Zachary,
Another pertinent statistic is that this run-of-the-mill news item has collected a whopping 157 comments in a mere 22 hours. That's quite a feat.
So, who says interest in the property market is not running at fever pitch?
No other subject area in this website attracts anything like the attention that residential property does. And it ain't about to change.
TTP
But at least there is less religious zeal and conspiracy theorists than in other sites bitcoin threads. Perhaps because property investors have to be realistic at some stage and have been through a few bubbles and calamities already. Plus there is far more variation in property. This site tends to focus on NZ purchasing only and has a much rarer commercial report so perhaps it mirrors that NZ housing is close to many NZ investors hearts and minds. Our own home grown speculation market with loads of economic risk. Hence the longer comment streams.
This site does tend to troll the readers with a heavy emphasis on real estate. The titles of articles are often a little deceptive and don't really reflect the content of the article. Reader comments of the day often seem to be odd choices and are invariably only from the gloomer faction. I have been tempted to keep a record of theses comments to prove an editorial bias toward gloomerism.
It should be noted that some of us have been advised to largely comment only about real estate or business things and to keep extreme views of a right wing, nationalist or masculine nature suppressed even though some articles seem to have rich potential for this sort of discussion.
Of course there needs to be some sort of control to stop the comment stream becoming an absolute zoo.
There have been many articles that have really been about fascinating subjects that have drawn few comments. This week's top ten for example is replete with interesting topics but it only gets a fraction of the comments.
I guess at the end of the day real estate is a safe subject that does overlap with societal issues making for some interesting discussions. It is a little repetitive though.
TTP You will find that people care even more about the crash than they did about the bubble inflating. Expect greater fever pitch if prices start really sliding.
This is the great tragedy of letting housing bubbles blow up like this, the popping negatively impacts on people, much more than it facilitated anything positive on the way up. And I would say that is true on the macro level too. Economies are disproportionately damaged by housing crashes, much more than they were boosted by the housing bubbles.
If this one deflates slowly, over a long period, that would be preferable, but if this one pops in spectacular fashion, it's going to drag a lot of people, businesses and the economy into the dirt for a time. Everybody will talk about that.
If this bubble was to slowly deflate back towards the long term affordability mean by way of wage increases and price stagnation, it would still take decades to deflate. Seems pretty unlikely. At some point there will be a Big Bang. We don’t yet know when or what will cause it, but it seems pretty certain to me that’s what’s going to happen.
Bobster, I am inclined to agree, but it could slide by a small % a year for a longer period say, instead of a prices falling off a cliff. Dramatic market corrections are quite rare, obviously they do happen, but it might be more likely that prices have an initial slide of say 20-35% over 2 years and then plateau for a long time, which would return house prices to NZ wage fundamentals in a shorter period of time.
It all depends on 1. whether a major external shock or other factor appears and 2. if there is a strong psychological reaction to panic and pessimism. If that happens, NZ households are definitely in a vulnerable enough position for a major crash.
The local cohort that has been buying property - and forcing prices up - has been the ( for want of a better word) the Boomers. Ok. So what do they do from here? Buy more? Or look to sell-up, downsize to take the capital; gains out of the market and use it for their retirement spending? The chances that they will continue to buy more to add to their stock is minimal. Age will have both done its job or beaten them, if they haven't provided for their futures by now.
What I'm suggesting is that the driver of property prices has gone. And absent a replacement group ( X & Y) the price escalation won't go on. Given level of prices now, whoever above suggested a 70% - 80% fall might not be too far away from the mark!
Yup. Plus retiree's are demographically the most fiscally conservative, take the least risks and spend the least money of any age group.
And it's a bit morbid to say, but they also have the highest mortality rate, and that will start freeing up lots of homes too. Boomers own the biggest percentage of the housing stock, so as their generation shrinks in size, they will release a disproportionately large percentage of properties back to the market. There's unlikely to be anything going forward but deflationary pressures from the boomer generation (apart from maybe in the health care industry and the retirement home industry).
TTP P We come here to learn from you
Witness that pearl of wisdom from your pal DubleDzz about “NorthernSlopesRemmers”
Almost childlike
We come here for laughs
Zach is a former P&T worker has no degree Compter hardware guy
DubleDzz is a middle management level IT guy
Both have to get up each day & work
RE is their hobby
You live in Palmy TTP & copy text from RE blurb like DubleDzz & his “ NorthenSlopesRemmers” line
Anyone born in Auckland knows so maybe DubleDzz is an outsider who moved to Auckland
Yawn, it’s time to go eat sushi
Hi gingernnja,
Interesting comment.
But we might find that if prices crash by say 50-80% then people will be out buying houses - rather than sitting at home blogging??
In other words, there might be less talk and more action. (-;
Anyway, hope you enjoy the day in beautiful Brooklyn!
TTP
TTP
I've not heard anyone suggesting a 50-80% crash! Blimey, I hope that doesn't happen, that would be an apocalypse for the NZ economy and likely trigger widespread bank failures.
Yes, there are some us out there, who are cash ready to take advantage of any softening in the housing market, and many potential NZ FHB's have been saving deposits, which will obviously go much further in the event of a house price slide, but I don't think all of the "doomers" (as you call them) are potential home buyers. some are just parents and grandparents of younger Kiwi's who see the glaring danger for NZ's future with continued house price hyper inflation and mounting household debt.
Our first dream, was always to build a house, but we had given up on that because viable sections in Wellington are rare as hens teeth and with skills shortages, builders have been almost that rare too! But for us, with the housing market softening, we are suddenly finding builders very keen to think about working for us next year and after our recent Bitcoin windfall, we can fund a project even in price decline. However, I would guess that we are the exception and wouldn't want to generalise about other potential home owners buyer/building positions. If there is a crash, lending might tighten, and banks will likely want even bigger deposits and impose more rigorous lending criteria. So it could get very messy.
We bought our first family home in the UK after the downturn & during the credit crunch. We could only get a mortgage with a 25% deposit and x3 DTI. They also had very intense affordability checks, going through your credit history and current expenses with a fine tooth comb, so we had to spend a year clearing all debt and being very frugal month to month so that when we came to apply for a mortgage, the banks would see very low monthly outgoings. And even then, we could only afford to buy a total disaster of a house, that had serious, serious problems (it required completely gutting, new electrics, new plumbing, plastering, windows, bathrooms, kitchen, flooring, damp courses, landscaping, new roof...nothing in that house didn't require work!). So buying after a crash wasn't easy in our experience, even with a fair deposit. I wouldn't want to assume it will be easy in NZ either but those who do manage it, will find themselves with much lower debt than those who bought in 2016, i imagine.
gingerninja, its possible TTP is demonstrating some insight here - some homes could fall by 50-80%
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/99598757/aucklanders-living-in-d…
As prices fall, this will bubble to the surface again for sure!
Reading comments such as tothepoints "this article is run of the mill" and alike, I am getting the impression that the resident property Spruikers are starting to capitulate - thin out in numbers. In the absence of articles that pleasure them, Spruikers will attempt to minimize the importance of articles that reflect poor sentiment, all for their own personal ends. They will continue to blame contributors here of creating commotion and even bringing on a crash.
Reality of what we are about to face is starting to sink in. It's quite possibly a financial crisis like none other in NZ history that sits before us. Interest rates are presently falling and finance is getting harder and harder to obtain. This is just the beginning.
Like others here, I certainly hope it's a soft landing although I doubt it will be.
I agree, what we are faced with is not just “toppiness”, it’s the biggest credit bubble in our history. If this bubble were to burst badly the effects for our banking system and our economy would be absolutely devastating. There’s going to be a correction with significant falls in prices, any other scenario where there is a gentle deflation for many years if not decades just seems implausible. When it happens, the specific cause and how bad it gets are for now unknowns.
Bunch of losers from pic 2.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99548696/tears-hugs-and-kicki…
Commercial investment anyone? This address offers a great location between two of Auckland’s wealthiest suburbs — Remuera and Meadowbank.
http://truecommercial.nzherald.co.nz/insights/news/property-articles/ch…
Like Meadowbank ever was a wealthy suburb
You sure you are an Aucklanders DublecDzz ?
Like you ever lived in Burwood Cres or Lucerne Rd or Darwin Lane ?
I did so it’s hilar reading yourself street name dropping !
Do you know the deceased Eastern Euro architect of Remmers ?
Perhaps not
Heck this sushi is good !
National support is strengthening :) http://nzh.tw/11956854 Now we need a recession to finish off the three ring circus and the man someone called ‘political pus’. Batten down the hatches people. Survival of the financially fittest and all that.
Interesting half-reporting there Ex Expat, it's borderline misrepresentation really. National up 2%, Labour up 2%, Greens up, NZ First, TOP down.
National have eaten all of their "allies" support, they would need to receive over 50% of the vote by themselves to govern. Nobody outside of National voters like them, and as more and more of their incredible ineptitude bubbles to the surface only the true blue will continue to defend the indefensible.
No comment on Jacinda increasing her popularity as PM either? That's an interesting omission...
The goal is to see support for NZ first fall below 5% then convince the swing voters that they were fed lies, given an accidental prime minister and are better off with National. Looking very positive so far. All the lollies have been passed out. Now it’s time to count up the mounting broken promises.
It probably will, that doesn't mean they'll switch to National mind.
What effect do you think National's lies will have on swing voters, as they all come to the surface? Recent exposure of rail's benefits that were buried, the true state of waterways and the environment, the real cost of health that was ignored, the housing crisis that they campaigned to eliminate, poverty, debt...
Not forgetting the dodgy deals that were done, Sky City looks like an absolute stinker for example.
A recession (which I assume is code for the rupture of the property bubble) will be laid squarely at the door of the previous national governments, not this one. John Key will be the Bertie ahern of the South Pacific, people will laugh at him in the street. The reputation of Bill English and the national party for prudent management of the country’s economy will be utterly and deservedly shredded.
Bobster - exactly right. National and their supporters wanted the benefits of a 'rockstar' economy and bubbling housing market, but they don't appear to want responsibility for the negative consequences they have caused.
They actually think they have can their cake and eat it too....but that's not how life works....
Now that the effects of their actions are coming to light...well its time to blame the new government...yes that is a reasonable position to take (NOT)
I can't fathom the lack of foresight displayed by the previous govt. the narrative that low wage economy was a sign of a rockstar economy, whilst at the same time our house prices increased at a rate that was amongst the top in the world, also apparently a sign of a rockstar economy. Low wage economy and fast-rising house prices is not, never was and will never be a sign of a rockstar economy - unless the rockstar in question was someone like Amy Winehouse, consume as much as you can, live fast, die young, leave a trail of devastation behind you.... In which case they absolutely nailed it!
An absolutely inexcusable way to manage a country, they were a complete waste of space.
'But at the end of the day' John Key got to live out his childhood dream of becoming Prime Minister (clearly at whatever cost) by taking a bunch of people on a greed driven ride, some of whom who still haven't sobered up yet (still binging).
Growth is great, but slow and steady is best. Rockstar...not so much (will we be the next Ireland..?)
I think don brash’s assessment of Key is spot on
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/87235086/john-key-savaged-by-f…
Haha, yes you forgot to add that Bill English thought a credit induced property bubble was a “sign of success” and a “nice problem to have”.
I am glad I am not the only one who thinks that. John Key had a lot of political capital and the smarts to know that we were on an unsustainable path. He could have transformed our national conversation. But in the end he just completely wasted the opportunity he had. A real shame.
Bobster - that's why I concluded that he was an incredibly self-serving individual (even narcissistic personality disorder). He had the opportunity to reign things in, but he might lose votes by making the tough calls. More important to remain the popular PM than make the tough calls....but then when the writings on the wall, jumps ship leaving things to Bill, sells up his house to a Chinese buyer (after claiming that this sort of stuff isn't really significant). I think history may not see him in such favorable light (Sir or not)
Doubt it, Bobster,
Many people (and businesses) felt a lot safer under the English/Key management of the Treasury benches than they do of Labour/NZ First.
Already business is reacting to Labour's policies with a big thumbs down. Unsurprisingly, business confidence has fallen markedly.
The reality is Labour's big-spend policies are seen as a risk to the economy.........
Notably also, National is still polling far ahead of Labour.
Remember, Labour said it was going to do great things. It now needs to be responsible for doing those great things. If it fails (as many believe it will) it can't turn around and start blaming previous governments. That would be pathetic.
TTP
Do you think if we experienced more moderate growth over the last 10 years that we would be more or less likely to experience a recession - and if we do experience a recession, whether it would be more or less pronounced because of the significance of the previous growth?
IO. Its a waste of time trying to educate those that refuse to see reality. Indeed blind support for any party is rather inane. One must vote according to the issues of the day and for the party or parties that one hopes will be able to fix or at least ameliorate them. As to John Key some of the wiser among us consider that he may be considered by history to be our worst ever PM up to this point in time.
Many people and Businesses .. you say ...
Care to name them? Care to name a few? Are you one of them?
You are probably talking about the big end of town with their lobbyists in tow - those with Billy's phone number on their speed dial with direct access
Like the time there was a some push-back on the number of low-skilled migrants coming into NZ and the very next day, 24 hours later, Billy was on the Nightly News telling us how a couple of employers had been on the phone to him already telling him the local talent pool are largely druggies
Morse Code for - stiffen up Billy, don't buckle at the knees
Remember that?
National are full of self nesting covetous mammals. When in power they offered little in the way of solutions to close the wealth gap. Easy as she goes, don't rock the boat. We will now pay dearly for years to come.
Jacinda is polling well ahead of Bill English as preferred PM. What's that say about Nationals prospects heading into 2020? Maybe this is an early indication Labour will not need coalition partners next time around - time will tell.
I prefer the current leader and party that can steer the country through a downturn not the one that's less popular and whose policies most likely contributed to a downturn in the first place.
The current national line up look to me a spent political force. If we are tripped up by this bubble and there is a material recession the current National leadership will have zero credibility. They need to start renewing now. Instead their only plan seems to be to wait for the other team to fumble the ball. I think that’s a mistake and they underestimate the number of kiwis who were unhappy at the direction the country was taking under National.
I'll give you Chris Finlayson in return. As for The Rest? Do you mean the zoologist that we had as a Finance Minister? Or the Woodwork Teacher we had as, well whatever Gerry Brownlee tried to do! Or the man who lost an election as a leader for National, twice! The list goes on....and I haven't even got down to Nick Smith!
I am not sure whether achieving preferred Prime Minister poll by 37 per cent is the lowest record in NZ history for a new PM in the first term. But both former PM Helen Clark and John Key achieved much better than this.
https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/23-03-2017/a-statistical-analysis-of-…
Sorry, but this coalition will self destruct, and won’t be able to work together!
There will not be enough money coming into the coffers to pay for the airey fairy promises and the supporters will get to see that we are getting mismanaged next year.
There will be a change of Govt. in 3 years max!
I agree. The target now is NZ first voters, the only reason this three circus is in power. Keep them polling below 5% and MMP will do the rest. If National are still the highest polling party after Slippery has emptied the lolly jar then wait until the economy slides, people lose jobs and they look for accountability.
I doubt it Bobster, the public isn’t totally dumb (well not eventually). When you’ve enjoyed being a critic, but then think you can do it “better and fairer and want to take the reins of responsbility, you certainly can’t complain about a GFC arriving, or an earthquake taking out your second biggest city, you actually have to govern and improve the situation for the country that voted you that responsibility.
This coalition will hopefully not have those disasters to manage, but it has to realise that managing and leading is what its job is now, not complaining, or their time together will be a short one. I don’t wish for their failure for all our sakes, but unless this realisation sinks in fast, I’m concerned.
An economy where household debt is at record levels, house prices are at world leading levels of unaffordability and domestic demand is substantially reliant on both unsustainable levels of mortgage credit and of immigration is indeed well described as a timebomb. That’s the legacy of the national government of the last 9 years. Less of an inheritance than a hospital pass. And people will recognise this as such.
And what do this profligate bunch do in anticipation of trouble (signalled by WP)? They give away tax payers money to students, who for the most part didn’t ask for or need it. It’s like a person being made redundant giving the money to their children. There is no escaping responsibility here no matter how much deflection is attempted.
Jacinda needs to say no to something meaningful in terms of labour’s spending wishlist. This govt needs to build its brand with the centrist swing voters. She can’t be seen to be leading a lolly scramble. It would be a real test of her leadership. But it would be very powerful politically. And it would help build a wider base of personal support for her, which is pretty much the only ammunition she can use to push things through.
students, who for the most part didn’t ask for or need it.
How did you deduce that little pearler?
Student debt is a massive burden on many new grads/young people. Why would any young person choose to start their working career with a debt which I think must be repaid at the rate of 10% of their after tax wages?
Why Kate, why does a NZer want to incur potentially massive mortgage debt, because they perceive value in it for them whether its an "investment" or a roof over their heads - no doubt they would love the tax payer to pay 20% of it them let along 100%. Why do students incur debts to get a degree, because they know that on average they'll earn $1.5m more in income than they ones that don't - no doubt they'd love to have the tax payer fund that 100% for them...but wait........frankly I don't see the difference,
12% of earning above a certain figure. I think it was $19k last time I checked. works out to ~7.5% if you earn $80k,. almost 10% if you earn $100k. But if you are a new grad earning $100k you can afford that 10% easily.
I wouldn't call student loans a massive burden if you are staying in NZ and did study something useful.. its interest free, and so long as you can manage to give your employer your correct tax code there is no effort involved to repay it. And no stress, they will never chase you for it. The only time it matter is when you are trying to mortgage yourself to the eyeballs to buy a house in Auckland, or leave to go overseas which means you start getting charged interest.
We started our young couple/married life as broke but with no debt. A year later we bought our first house. And a year later we had our first child. And a year later we upgraded to a bigger house before having a second child. And then as they got older, upgraded again so they could take their own bikes to school and then again when they became teenagers and needed a bit more of their own space.
To my mind, none of this was a struggle, and is how the world should be for young people who want to have a family in their early years together.
Sounds very old fashioned these days, I know. Not because it's different than what many young couples aspire to, but because it is unattainable for many who aspire to it. So, what was just the norm for us simply doesn't get talked about that much these days in my experience.
Instead, most of the conversation I hear from parents of the young people we know, talk about the kids paying off the student debt, then saving the deposit for a house, then having the family. And more lately, many young couples even give up on the idea of saving the deposit for a house, and instead are looking to start a family while renting.
I know the world has moved on, but I can't help thinking that for the majority, it hasn't moved on for the better.
I think it will go down in history as the last bastion of boomers in the top positions of power in NZ;
J Key born 1961
S Joyce born 1963
B English born 1961
J Collins born 1959
C Finlayson born 1956
N Smith born 1964
G Brownlee born 1956
A Tolley born 1953
D Carter born 1952
T Groser born 1950
M McCully born 1953
W Mapp born 1952
K Wilkinson born 1957
And, no, I don't think they did us too many favours as they failed to set up the next generation of NZers with the advantages that they had in their youth. Very sad indictment to my mind.
Well said Kate.
Just to add to that, many of the intelligent young people who only have the kids they can afford are consequently only having 1 child or even none. A lot of bigger families out there are often the ones that can't afford it and dare I say it - the ones that shoudn't be having kids. What that could bring in the future is worrying.
Wow would have to go a few generations back for that lifestyle... even gen X was two gens above that. I kind of pity the generations where student debt had large interest, and the wages dropped to the floor for skilled trained work (even for engineers). But given a few years they could at least save for a deposit. At least the gen now has relatively ok pay for skilled work, (unfortunately low pay & zero contracts for most other roles and healthcare) and no interest loans. However as the wages have been static the housing opportunities have slipped even further away, often living with their parents longer and many do not have children until a decade later (the ones that aim for secure housing).
Waiting that way is a noticeable problem. Delicate medical issues and difficulties arise for women when family growth is attempted that much later in life when they do eventually have a secure home. I remember one horrifying result while in hospital when a woman was told without any privacy in a full ward that her attempted pregnancy failed and due to the location her ovaries had to be removed... yet the hospital staff were treating it as run off the mill. Looked up online and there were stats on medical issues like this occurring more often with the age shift, and services where women could freeze eggs for later to avoid other issues. Even with my partner we understand that the complexities of having a family through medical difficulties come with hundreds of thousands in bills. It is not something I would wish on a higher percentage of the population, especially since they have to rely on the same failing health service with absolutely shocking patient care. Yet I find myself having to explain to colleagues that many young couples now are facing the choice: They can have a family, or a home. But having both in the same decade is very rare in Auckland, like millionaires or large estate inheritance. Hence the sort of live for the moment lifestyle. There are medical windows which do not wait to close and there is a constantly moving and shifting housing environment. When you can plan one with a closing window but not the other with a flexible and changing market young couples will more often than not make the non traditional less secure financial decision which they can actually enact for equally worthy reasons.
They're doing it wrong... they should not be putting any effort into paying down the student loan, just let their employer make the minimum required repayments, and save/invest faster for the deposit. Student loans are interest free, so let it sit there as long as possible.
Ex expat, Labour gave extra money to students because they promised they would. They were smart in that they captured the student vote and I suggest they intend to keep it. Promised Labour policies will help close the wealth divide which is just the opposite of what the previous did. Give them a chance, I think they're the best we have had in a long while to help us steer clear of social disorder. Previous Government in some ways had it easy. Loads of cheap money to blow bubbles everywhere, heaps of immigrants to falsify GDP. Per capita GDP, that's a different measurement altogether - right?
They gave my hard earned money as a bribe, just as their predecessors did with going interest free on student loans. It’s easy to be profligate with others money, and Labour are masters at it. I have to pay my (considerable) taxes from my salary but otherwise will give nothing to this circus and it’s accidental prime minister.
Forgot to ask the other time, how much were your fees per year in the 1990s? About $1,000-$1,600 per annum, from what I remember.
Chances are current students will still pay more than you did, even with one year less to pay for.
NZ society operates on a quid pro quo basis, surely? Why should these young folk have to pay taxes to fund the pension of their elders if they don't get anywhere near the benefits the elders enjoyed from the taxes of the generations preceding them?
It is 20 plus years ago, but I recall telling my wife that it cost us $12,000 in fees, plus all of the peripheral costs e.g. books.
As a comparison my eldest son is accumulating student debt of $7,000 per year for fees. When he graduates we will repay the lot for him or circa $30,000. We have encouraged him to expatriate himself and don't want issues with authorities chasing him. The next one should be fee free so will graduate with no debt to repay. How that makes sense for a fairer NZ is beyond me, but there you go.
About as fair as you or I paying less, and your son who is currently studying paying $30k. Not really fair that older NZers increased your older son's fees that much because they wanted to pay lower taxes, really - especially when they still expect younger workers to pay for them their pension afterward.
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.