Header Ad Module

Collapse

Sales down as market cools

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • muppet
    Banned
    • Sep 2003
    • 10593

    #1

    Sales down as market cools

    Sales down as market cools
    5:00AM Sunday January 27, 2008
    By Cliff Taylor

    Some might argue that when the Auckland property market sneezes, the rest of the country catches a cold.

    Others would say it's the Reserve Bank's sniffles causing people to reach for the tissues.

    Whatever the case, the slowdown in home sales that hit the Queen City last year is clearly reflected across the North Island.

    Real Estate Institute of New Zealand figures for last year show only the Thames/Coromandel area registered a slight increase in the number of sales, although most areas reported modest price gains.

    Four areas - Mt Maunganui and Papamoa, New Plymouth, Central Wellington and Hutt Valley - registered flatlining or falling prices.

    But the sun shone brightly on the Gisborne market, with a 13 per cent price rise for the year, although sales were down significantly on 2006, down 100 to 647.

    Philip Searle, of Harveys in Gisborne, said he thought the figures were accurate, although earlier in 2007 the price rises were even higher.

    "It's been a really good year," said Searle. "I think people from the bigger centres like Auckland, Tauranga and Hamilton have started realising there's a nicer lifestyle here.

    "The people are laid-back, we've got some of the best weather, the best beaches and the best wines. It's quite common for young couples to come here to live."

    Searle said this year could see a "falling off" in prices as higher interest rates bite.

    "I don't think there will be a big crash, no major slide. But people who are genuine about selling have to listen to what the market is saying."

    Other good performing areas around the North Island were Tauranga, with a 12 per cent rise, Northland and Palmerston North on 11 per cent, and Upper Hutt and Pukerua Bay/Tawa - outside Wellington - on 10 per cent.

    Prices in Whangarei rose by 8 per cent. But Martin Dear, manager of the city's Barfoot & Thompson branch, said the market had slowed down in the past three months. His verdict was backed up by Real Estate Institute figures, which showed that sales in the city and the region generally had fallen significantly.

    "The latest interest rate round has impacted on people," Dear said.

    "Vendors have been sitting on their hands. We're near the bottom of the seven-year cycle. Once properties reach the right value, sales will start happening."

    Dear said the outlook for Northland remained bright, and the region was still luring plenty of Aucklanders and immigrants.

    "Whangarei has finally come of age. It's a combination of climate, lower prices and job opportunities.

    "People are coming from all over. I've been here 20 years and it's really changing a lot. It's never looked better for us."

    The situation at the other end of the North Island is less clear cut.

    The institute figures show Wellington City suffered a 3 per cent drop in house prices, although the median remains high at $415,000.

    Hutt Valley was also down 3 per cent, although Upper Hutt registered a healthy 10 per cent rise. The Wellington region was up 5 per cent.

    John Ross, of Professionals in Hutt City, was phlegmatic about the ups and downs of the region's market.

    "Nowhere in particular is booming and we're seeing a lot less growth than we were before. People have been spoilt, no doubt about it. We got used to growth of 13 to 20 per cent every single year, for year after year. Anything which drops to single figure growth feels small but it's still good."

    Ross said property owners had to accept prices weren't going to double in price every five or 10 years.

    He said the drop in median price for central Wellington could have been "skewed" by the shortage of million dollar homes being sold, but the capital's market was traditionally steady, in contrast to the volatility of Auckland.

    "People here are typically fairly conservative. We have a large pool of Government workers, they dominate the market.

    "We've always had a really stable market. That's healthy from a business planning point of view, although it's a bit sad when you hear the rest of the country is booming."

    But for those seeking a bargain, Wanganui remains far and away the best bet. Even though the median price rose 4 per cent, it's still only $186,000 - much lower than any other region in the North Island.

    Sutton Real Estate manager Doug Lacy said Wanganui's median price was so low, the city was being targeted by bulk-buying investors.

    He said a five-bedroom house at coastal Castlecliff was advertised on the internet for $120,000 and offers had "flooded" in.

    "I had a lady from Auckland last week who bought half a dozen houses," he said.

    "If they can get an 8 to 10 per cent return they are happy. If a good house comes on the market you have to be quick, especially now they are marketed on the internet."


    THE MOVERS

    Percentage rise in house prices for the North Island outside Auckland this year.

    1. Gisborne: +13

    2. Tauranga: +12

    3. Palmerston North: +11


    THE DRIFTERS

    Percentage change in house prices for the North Island outside Auckland this year.

    1= Central Wellington: - 3

    1= Hutt Valley: - 3

    3. New Plymouth: - 2

    Rural boom

    While increased interest rates seem to be putting the brakes on runaway house prices, the rural property market has discovered a new gear.

    Pushed along by record dairy payouts, the national median farm sales price rose from $1.150m for the quarter ending December 2006, to $1.650m in the same period last year.

    Unsurprisingly, dairy farm prices have been particularly strong, reaching a record median of $3.575m in December, up from $2.5m the year before.

    Real Estate Institute of New Zealand rural spokesman Peter McDonald said the rural sector had reached a new level as farmers and new investors were competing for properties in a sector with "unprecedented growth".

    The lifestyle market also showed a small increase in median prices in the three months to December, up to $455,000 from $425,000 for the final quarter of 2006.

    But the number of properties sold was considerably lower.

    "Demand for lifestyle properties tends to mirror the residential market, which is currently experiencing a period of consolidation," said McDonald.

    Latest breaking news articles, photos, video, blogs, reviews, analysis, opinion and reader comment from New Zealand and around the World - NZ Herald
  • revdev
    Fanatical
    • Jan 2005
    • 1816

    #2
    Originally posted by muppet View Post
    But Martin Dear, manager of the city's Barfoot & Thompson branch, said [snip] "Vendors have been sitting on their hands. We're near the bottom of the seven-year cycle. Once properties reach the right value, sales will start happening."
    Hmmm, plenty more to come before we get to the "bottom" I would say.

    G
    Premium Villa Holidays in Turkey

    Comment

    • AndyB
      Opinionated
      • May 2005
      • 162

      #3
      "John Ross, of Professionals in Hutt City, was phlegmatic about the ups and downs of the region's market"

      Interesting description ...

      Comment

      • green as grass
        Banned
        • Aug 2005
        • 100

        #4
        We're near the bottom of the seven-year cycle



        I might be green as grass but really!

        Comment

        • Tucker
          Fanatical
          • Jun 2004
          • 1327

          #5
          Yeah but remember a flat period can still mean 0 to 5% growth.
          Nigel Turner

          Comment

          • green as grass
            Banned
            • Aug 2005
            • 100

            #6
            Yeah but remember a flat period can still mean 0 to 5% growth.
            What makes me laugh is the idea that Martin Dear is trying to propagate in readers minds (assuming they reported correctly) that we can have record growth for years on end & after 6 months of cooling markets we're "near the bottom of the cycle"
            Talk about the eternal optimist!!

            I've been wrong before but come on!

            Comment

            • Gatekeeper
              Fanatical
              • Jan 2004
              • 1542

              #7
              Originally posted by Tucker View Post
              Yeah but remember a flat period can still mean 0 to 5% growth.
              Less inflation, less negative cashflow, less blood sweat and tears.
              looks pretty negative to me
              Find The Trend Whose Premise Is False - Then Bet Against It

              Comment

              • Monid
                Philophaster
                • Feb 2004
                • 3062

                #8
                Originally posted by Tucker View Post
                Yeah but remember a flat period can still mean 0 to 5% growth.
                And in real (inflation adjusted) terms that is -3% to 2%. If there are any holding costs... I'd say that was a pretty poor performance.

                Cheers
                David
                New to property investing? See: Best PropertyTalk Threads for New and Old Investors And/Or:Propertytalk Wiki

                Comment

                • Tucker
                  Fanatical
                  • Jun 2004
                  • 1327

                  #9
                  Growth of 0 - 5% is still better than -5 to -10%. What I'm saying is you can still have positive growth during a flat period.
                  You guys always go on about inflation and how the returns are less but you don't continue on and mention that because of leverage most only have a small portion of their own funds invested in these. I don't have any of my own money in any of my properties so growth on nothing is pretty good even when adjusted for inflation.
                  Last edited by Tucker; 28-01-2008, 07:19 AM.
                  Nigel Turner

                  Comment

                  • 67910241
                    Fanatical
                    • Jan 2008
                    • 1077

                    #10
                    Trucker

                    Originally posted by Tucker View Post
                    Growth of 0 - 5% is still better than -5 to -10%. What I'm saying is you can still have positive growth during a flat period.
                    You guys always go on about inflation and how the returns are less but you don't continue on and mention that because of leverage most only have a small portion of their own funds invested in these. I don't have any of my own money in any of my properties so growth on nothing is pretty good even when adjusted for inflation.
                    If you have none of your "own money" in your property (that I interpret as no equity, if you had some that'd be your own money that's sitting in the house until you sell it), how come you're cashflow positive (woulnd't that require something like 10+% yield)?

                    Comment

                    • 67910241
                      Fanatical
                      • Jan 2008
                      • 1077

                      #11
                      The prob that I have with

                      the idea of buying new investment property nowadays is:

                      a) You either have to have lots of equity/cash to contribute to it, in which case you incur the opportunity cost of your equity not possibly doing something "smarter" or just plain old "more reliable" such as sitting in a hi-yield savings account, or

                      b) You are happy to go cashflow negative.

                      Now, why would one do the later (or even the former) without being quite certain of a foreseeable short-to-mid term capital gain in excess of inflation I am struggling to understand. Is it because of tax-deductions? Or is it because you still essentially believe the market is just about to shoot up again regardless of the general sentiment?

                      Just no "long-term" excuses please, because property won't just disappear forever if there are no short to medium term gains. It might actually become more affordable and abundant the longer the downturn continues.

                      Comment

                      • Tucker
                        Fanatical
                        • Jun 2004
                        • 1327

                        #12
                        I purchased all of my properties well below value, most of which were 20% or more below valuation so I didn't need to put in any funds - the bank mortgaged the full amount. They are all positive cashflow because they all have 10%+ yields plus I have low interest rates locked in for quite a while. For buying property in a market like todays I do a lot of trading and use those funds for buy and holds, also if you can find a subdividable property you can subdivide off a section and sell it to pay down the mortgage, there are many options. My buy and holds are long term and if I want short term cash or gains I trade. There are still positive cashflow properties around just not as abundant as it use to be, you just have to get out there and look (a friend has just purchased a block of 8 flats for $800,000 with a 10% yield and they valued up at $1.4mil). Another option is invest in Aussie where their market is strong while waiting for NZ's to turn, this is not everyones cup of tea though.

                        You can put your money in the bank... but even if you had 20% in a property it still has to be better because of the leverage. Lets say for a worse case a property had no growth for two years and then went up 20% over the next 3 years so only 20% in 5 years (probably the next few years after that you would see some great growth but we won't worry about that because you want short term plus you may see more than 20% in 5 years if you buy in a good growth area). You have just doubled your money/equity which works out to 20%pa.
                        Last edited by Tucker; 30-01-2008, 09:42 AM.
                        Nigel Turner

                        Comment

                        • tricky
                          Fanatical
                          • Dec 2004
                          • 1127

                          #13
                          Originally posted by 67910241 View Post
                          the idea of buying new investment property nowadays is:

                          a) You either have to have lots of equity/cash to contribute to it, in which case you incur the opportunity cost of your equity not possibly doing something "smarter" or just plain old "more reliable" such as sitting in a hi-yield savings account, or

                          b) You are happy to go cashflow negative.

                          Now, why would one do the later (or even the former) without being quite certain of a foreseeable short-to-mid term capital gain in excess of inflation I am struggling to understand. Is it because of tax-deductions? Or is it because you still essentially believe the market is just about to shoot up again regardless of the general sentiment?

                          Just no "long-term" excuses please, because property won't just disappear forever if there are no short to medium term gains. It might actually become more affordable and abundant the longer the downturn continues.
                          If you're not comfortable with property then don't buy any.
                          Stick to something that suits your risk profile.

                          Comment

                          • Davo36
                            Fanatical
                            • Sep 2007
                            • 8450

                            #14
                            Originally posted by 67910241 View Post
                            the idea of buying new investment property nowadays is:

                            a) You either have to have lots of equity/cash to contribute to it, in which case you incur the opportunity cost of your equity not possibly doing something "smarter" or just plain old "more reliable" such as sitting in a hi-yield savings account, or

                            b) You are happy to go cashflow negative.

                            Now, why would one do the later (or even the former) without being quite certain of a foreseeable short-to-mid term capital gain in excess of inflation I am struggling to understand. Is it because of tax-deductions? Or is it because you still essentially believe the market is just about to shoot up again regardless of the general sentiment?

                            Just no "long-term" excuses please, because property won't just disappear forever if there are no short to medium term gains. It might actually become more affordable and abundant the longer the downturn continues.

                            I agree totally. And I have said this before, this discussion has in fact been held lots of times.

                            Right now it's a time for waiting I reckon. Why would you borrow money with things the way they are? e.g. stockmarket going down for the first 13 days of the year, the US heading into recession, highish interest rates, low rents etc.

                            I don't believe there's any hurry to jump in and buy.

                            David
                            Squadly dinky do!

                            Comment

                            Working...