Property costs in NZ - the heart of evil [Archive] - Page 2

View Full Version : Property costs in NZ - the heart of evil

Pages : 1 [2] 3

Ocean1

2nd January 2013, 15:23

If you buried it under a pile of dirt, you could call it a earth ship:niceone:

Tell you what, it's been standing for longer than almost all of the dwellings built under any form of subsequent regulatory control are likely to, and it'll probably outlast most of them. So, the purpose of the regulations is?

Any guesses what the framing is likely to be?

Ocean1

2nd January 2013, 15:28

there must be some kind of work in invergiggle
its about 70 a week,,

if I stopped drinking.........

stephen

Friend owns a large colonial era house on the hillside just a block or two from there. He's got semi-permanent boarders, does a bit of freelance programing, grows most of what he needs. Not too bad a lifestyle at all.

unstuck

2nd January 2013, 16:42

Any guesses what the framing is likely to be?

My guess would be red pine, or maybe celery pine. Got a mate with a wee hunk of turf not far from there too, he loves it. There is a 7 acre block there he wants me to buy.Nah, not a bluff fan.:Punk:

Ocean1

2nd January 2013, 17:05

My guess would be red pine, or maybe celery pine. Got a mate with a wee hunk of turf not far from there too, he loves it. There is a 7 acre block there he wants me to buy.Nah, not a bluff fan.:Punk:

The reason for the comment was the friend's place, the original studs are all 4x4, at 18" centres, in what looks very much like Totara. Must be 12ft stud, the scotias are hand carved Rimu a foot deep and the floors are all 1 1/4" Matai. No idea what the cladding is but it's all original and dead straight.

I like Bluff, but I remember it from 50 years ago, it's had some hard times since then, the freezing works closing down must have come particularly hard. And there's a chance the smelter may go...

unstuck

2nd January 2013, 17:15

The reason for the comment was the friend's place, the original studs are all 4x4, at 18" centres, in what looks very much like Totara. Must be 12ft stud, the scotias are hand carved Rimu a foot deep and the floors are all 1 1/4" Matai. No idea what the cladding is but it's all original and dead straight.

I like Bluff, but I remember it from 50 years ago, it's had some hard times since then, the freezing works closing down must have come particularly hard. And there's a chance the smelter may go...

Wouldnt be surprised at all if it was totara, a lot of it came from the hokanuis and the catlins, but I think most of the catlins stuff went to dunners.

Brian d marge

2nd January 2013, 17:21

I might even buy it hahaahaha

Stephen

unstuck

2nd January 2013, 17:22

I might even buy it hahaahaha

Stephen

OI , You stay away from KB when drunk ....yes you...:lol::lol::lol::killingme:killingme:killingm e

Brian d marge

2nd January 2013, 17:27

OI , You stay away from KB when drunk ....yes you...:lol::lol::lol::killingme:killingme:killingm e

oi its only 2 in the afternoon here , give us a chance

mind you , the repayments on that is less than I piss up against the wall , 2 or 3 times a week ....

a coat of paint , and some IKEA funiture !

Stpehen:msn-wink:

unstuck

2nd January 2013, 17:34

oi its only 2 in the afternoon here , give us a chance

mind you , the repayments on that is less than I piss up against the wall , 2 or 3 times a week ....

a coat of paint , and some IKEA funiture !

Stpehen:msn-wink:

Not a silly idea really, spend a bit tidying it up and use it for a rental for stewart island backpackers.
When we moved down here a fella offered me his place, 3 bdrm double garage and a couple of acres for 40 grand, and I said no. just sold a couple of months ago for 210.000 grand.:brick::tugger:

Brian d marge

2nd January 2013, 19:09

Does invergiggle have internet, thats the question

at least 100 Mbps ,

I dont like to wait for me eerrr "prom" movies

Stephen

unstuck

2nd January 2013, 19:27

I am sure Invers has the net, no friggin Idea what a mbps is.:(

jonbuoy

3rd January 2013, 10:30

Heres hoping NZ house prices stagnate rather than free fall as has happened in a lot of countries. Spains biggest problems have been from huge amounts of toxic property debt which the government had to swallow. For a long time here you couldn't loose by just buying property and holding onto it for a couple of years. People were scrambling as fast as they could onto the ever climbing property price escalator, house prices easily outstripped any deposit savings you could try and make in a year. Investors and home buyers snapped up new developments and properties as fast as they could. Sound familiar? That was pretty much how things were last time I was in NZ.

Problem is the foreign investment tends to get pulled as soon as they see a possible low or negative return, triggering off a hideous self feeding price plummet.

Swoop

4th January 2013, 13:43

We need to start shooting people who promote political correctness. It just ain't right.
Yup.

I also laughed quite loudly when the new Long Bay development announced that they didn't include "low cost housing" into the area. Too fooken right! With all the bullshit and vast amounts of money spent getting things going on that project, who in their right mind would limit part of that when the scummier areas of Torbay do that already?

flyingcrocodile46

4th January 2013, 16:25

Yup.

I also laughed quite loudly when the new Long Bay development announced that they didn't include "low cost housing" into the area. Too fooken right! With all the bullshit and vast amounts of money spent getting things going on that project, who in their right mind would limit part of that when the scummier areas of Torbay do that already?

We can forget about seeing true "low cost housing" anywhere in Auckland unless someone is prepared to give property away (i.e sell sections for half price). Apart from the odd granny flat built in the back yards of existing properties for family (or illegal rental income) there aren't likely to be many instances where the home owner wants a down spec house while also having enough equity to avoid the necessity of maximising capital gain in order to meet minimum mortgage equity requirements while they are having to pay a quarter of a million dollars + just to get a section to build on. Yes I know there are some half sites available for less, but they are generally undesirable sites because of additional development costs that are required in order to make them buildable.

We'll see true affordable housing in Akld when flat or near flat builable sites are available for $100K or less. that will never happen now as people who own the land and rely on it for investment return aren't going to give it away and the land development costs for residential use in Akld are likely to cost more than that anyway. Even the govt land at Hobsonville point is being sold for maximum return (and to be fair.. should be).

Until such time as capital gain taxes are introduced to eliminate the undesireable effect of investor speculation in land and rental properties there will be an ever increasing imbalance in property ownership and the satisfaction of genuine/appropriate needs for property.

scumdog

4th January 2013, 16:53

We can forget about seeing true "low cost housing" anywhere in Auckland unless someone is prepared to give property away (i.e sell sections for half price). Apart from the odd granny flat built in the back yards of existing properties for family (or illegal rental income) there aren't likely to be many instances where the home owner wants a down spec house while also having enough equity to avoid the necessity of maximising capital gain in order to meet minimum mortgage equity requirements while they are having to pay a quarter of a million dollars + just to get a section to build on. Yes I know there are some half sites available for less, but they are generally undesirable sites because of additional development costs that are required in order to make them buildable.

We'll see true affordable housing in Akld when flat or near flat builable sites are available for $100K or less. that will never happen now as people who own the land and rely on it for investment return aren't going to give it away and the land development costs for residential use in Akld are likely to cost more than that anyway. Even the govt land at Hobsonville point is being sold for maximum return (and to be fair.. should be).

So...the advantages and benefits of living in that area are?...are??:scratch:

flyingcrocodile46

4th January 2013, 17:43

So...the advantages and benefits of living in that area are?...are??:scratch:

Funny you should ask

unstuck

4th January 2013, 17:52

My first job when I left school in 1982 was on the farm that was owned by sunline homes, and incorperated some of the ARC reserve.Basically all the way from the southern end of long bay to okura estuary. They turned down an offer for $20 million when I was there, it is staggering to think what it may cost nowadays.:eek5:

Indiana_Jones

6th January 2013, 13:09

Problem is the foreign investment tends to get pulled as soon as they see a possible low or negative return, triggering off a hideous self feeding price plummet.

You make it sound like a bad thing....

-Indy

unstuck

7th January 2013, 05:37

There seems to be a few resonably priced houses in Otautau at the moment too, been looking at this one here...http://www.trademe.co.nz/property/residential-property-for-sale/auction-526866922.htm

jonbuoy

7th January 2013, 10:00

You make it sound like a bad thing....

-Indy

Ha well a price plummet isn't good for anyone - including people who are looking to buy a first home. It comes with all sorts of other economic baggage....

Indiana_Jones

7th January 2013, 11:10

Ha well a price plummet isn't good for anyone - including people who are looking to buy a first home. It comes with all sorts of other economic baggage....

I don't want a plummet, but rather a correction. Say 30%-40% off the current prices would be ideal.

-Indy

Flip

7th January 2013, 11:14

Don't hold your breath.

House prices are on the way up now.

jasonu

7th January 2013, 12:18

We need to start shooting people who promote political correctness. It just ain't right.

Quote of the year (so far) right there!
Note I know it was posted last year but I just read it...

Jantar

7th January 2013, 12:46

I don't want a plummet, but rather a correction. Say 30%-40% off the current prices would be ideal.

-Indy

No it wouldn't. All thos people who have bought houses at less than 40% deposit (most I'd say) will find the bank's foreclosing on the mortgages as the equity left in the house is less than owed to the bank. This is what partly caused the economic collapse in USA a couple of years ago.

Brian d marge

7th January 2013, 13:29

No it wouldn't. All thos people who have bought houses at less than 40% deposit (most I'd say) will find the bank's foreclosing on the mortgages as the equity left in the house is less than owed to the bank. This is what partly caused the economic collapse in USA a couple of years ago.

thats right , but then the banks would want their money ......so we have a lot of cheap houses on the market

boo hoo cry me a river if you bought , a shoebox in Auckland for 1/2 a mil on 5% deposit . ....

The oldies wont like that you know , just not cricket, that aint

Stephen

Flip

7th January 2013, 16:03

No it wouldn't. All thos people who have bought houses at less than 40% deposit (most I'd say) will find the bank's foreclosing on the mortgages as the equity left in the house is less than owed to the bank. This is what partly caused the economic collapse in USA a couple of years ago.

It was the banks fault lending to people who they knew could not meet the repayments (sub prime) and the insurance industry fault for taking out insurance against the banks loss (deritives insurance).

It wasn't at all that difficult to understand, was driven by corporate greed and all it resulted in was the whole pile of cards falling in.

scumdog

7th January 2013, 16:08

It wasn't at all that difficult to understand, was driven by corporate greed and all it resulted in was the whole pile of cards falling in.

I've no problem with banks going bung - as long as it doesn't cost ME more.

The people behind the counter tend to be OK - it's their banks blood-sucking policies that burns my arse, greedy muthafuckas all of 'em.

Flip

7th January 2013, 16:16

They honestly thought they could mitigate the risks of lending money to folk who could not pay it back.

Morons is the term that comes to mind. They fucked up a lot of people.

unstuck

7th January 2013, 17:06

Bankers...rhymes with Wankers.:tugger:

scumdog

7th January 2013, 17:16

Bankers...rhymes with Wankers.:tugger:

Yup, WE screw-up. YOU pay.

Seems to be their credo....

Indiana_Jones

7th January 2013, 17:18

jonbuoy

7th January 2013, 18:04

It was the banks fault lending to people who they knew could not meet the repayments (sub prime) and the insurance industry fault for taking out insurance against the banks loss (deritives insurance).

It wasn't at all that difficult to understand, was driven by corporate greed and all it resulted in was the whole pile of cards falling in.

Nobody forced anyone to take out mortgages, public stupidity played a part. Even if you put up a 20% deposit on a property you buy for 500k, if house prices drop by 50% and you loose your job both you and the bank are screwed. But yeah writing has been on the wall for a long time...

Brian d marge

7th January 2013, 18:53

Banks do what banks do , make money
And people do what people do ,
That's a recipe made in heaven ..:-)

So let me get this straight , the banks , get a dollar , then lend that same dollar out up to 9 times , amend charge a fee for taking the risk (fair enough) , so you now have 9 times more money in the economy than you did before ,,and if the supply of houses is finite or growing less than 9 times , then the price of the house will go up, until it becomes unsustainable at which point something has to happen

Something ain't right :-)
Stephen

mashman

7th January 2013, 19:12

Nobody forced anyone to take out mortgages, public stupidity played a part. Even if you put up a 20% deposit on a property you buy for 500k, if house prices drop by 50% and you loose your job both you and the bank are screwed. But yeah writing has been on the wall for a long time...

I reckon that many Republicans would disagree with you. They blame Bill Clinton and his mortgage de/regulation bill of 1995 that "forced" banks to make mortgage loans to whomever asked. Obviously not as simple as that, but just shows that they'll blame anyone and anything instead of laying the "blame" at the doorstep of where it should. Didn't the US bail out some of the homeowners who were "swindled"?

The bank are never screwed as they have to play pin the tail on the underwriter first.

Brian d marge

7th January 2013, 20:34

I reckon that many Republicans would disagree with you. They blame Bill Clinton and his mortgage de/regulation bill of 1995 that "forced" banks to make mortgage loans to whomever asked. Obviously not as simple as that, but just shows that they'll blame anyone and anything instead of laying the "blame" at the doorstep of where it should. Didn't the US bail out some of the homeowners who were "swindled"?

The bank are never screwed as they have to play pin the tail on the underwriter first.
Would that be the " glass steagal bill " 1933? which limited the banks from speculative dealing, and slowly eroded until clinton kicked ashes over the coals in 1999, 2000 and by doing so helped the speculative bubble
Still even without that , as soon as you start using fiat money at a rate greater than growth ( working age population) you are going to get price increases ,
while this isnt a "bad thing " when you start getting excesses and or laws that promote such excess ( thank you IMF , aka merica) , then all we are looking at now is the "speed and/or the regularity of these corrections .
Iceland had a good idea , Money ( as we have decided to use it ) brings with it responsibility , and as we all use it and it has potential to cause great hardship. The punishment for failing should be hard , (harsh)
Trouble is money can buy a lot of get out of jail cards especially in merica .

A good start is a capital gains tax on residential properties

all in my Humble opinion

Stephen

Indiana_Jones

7th January 2013, 20:40

flyingcrocodile46

7th January 2013, 21:38

http://www.interest.co.nz/property/60973/rodney-dickens-warns-bear-trap-awaiting-unwary-home-buyers-who-gear-max-encouraged-lo

^^^Pretty much looking at that first graph, since you didn't buy a house before 2000/2001, you're fucked sunshine. Yay.

-Indy

I'm more than a little suspicious of the validity of the graph representations given that the first one shows incomes increasing quite a bit faster (and consistently) than the CPI for the last 9 or ten years. I have great difficulty accepting that.

Indiana_Jones

7th January 2013, 21:54

Whatever the case it doesn't look good for anyone wanting to buy in Auckland. Catch 22 really, as a lot of the jobs are there.

Supply and demand I guess....

-Indy

mashman

7th January 2013, 22:05

Would that be the " glass steagal bill " 1933? which limited the banks from speculative dealing, and slowly eroded until clinton kicked ashes over the coals in 1999, 2000 and by doing so helped the speculative bubble
Still even without that , as soon as you start using fiat money at a rate greater than growth ( working age population) you are going to get price increases ,
while this isnt a "bad thing " when you start getting excesses and or laws that promote such excess ( thank you IMF , aka merica) , then all we are looking at now is the "speed and/or the regularity of these corrections .
Iceland had a good idea , Money ( as we have decided to use it ) brings with it responsibility , and as we all use it and it has potential to cause great hardship. The punishment for failing should be hard , (harsh)
Trouble is money can buy a lot of get out of jail cards especially in merica .

A good start is a capital gains tax on residential properties

all in my Humble opinion

Stephen

Could be, I've not looked into it that deeply. I've learned that history is a pretty poor teacher :laugh:

heh... I don't think it'll matter what measure we take where money is supposed to be the solution. An FTT on EVERYTHING (including shares instead of money) would be by far the "best" solution. After all, everything "translates" in to monetary format whether is shares, gold or hard currency comrade ;). Thems that write the rules will leave the loopholes open that they always have on the premise that it's the rich people that make an economy tick. Whilst partially correct, the rich ain't exactly big spenders in regards to small items. Screw the little guy over and they stop buying, can't afford the loans etc... anyway, the loopholes will be left open to allow thems with the money to keep as much of it as possible. Tis the way it has always been, else the loopholes wouldn't exist. It was nothing more than laziness, apart from a wee smidge of utter insanity, when the fractional reserve system was implemented. I understand why we would, but it's gonna go tits at some point. As always though, I'll hope that some fucker finally sees sense and starts to manage the financial system out of existence... we may even have a chance at that point in time.

as yourself, just my humble opinion.

mashman

7th January 2013, 22:08

http://www.interest.co.nz/property/60973/rodney-dickens-warns-bear-trap-awaiting-unwary-home-buyers-who-gear-max-encouraged-lo

^^^Pretty much looking at that first graph, since you didn't buy a house before 2000/2001, you're fucked sunshine. Yay.

-Indy

I don't think that pre 2000 is really gonna make a blind bit of difference (maybe a little, heh)... as the guy in the article says, it's how you're leveraged that'll matter. I'm looking forwards to an extended period on the dole, I kinda miss it :).

Indiana_Jones

7th January 2013, 22:11

I'm looking forwards to an extended period on the dole, I kinda miss it :).

Giz a job spec? lol

-Indy

Brian d marge

8th January 2013, 00:35

jonbuoy

8th January 2013, 03:23

I would look at how Spain has gone belly up , the freeing up of regulations after Franco
Speculative money poured into building and tourism , the tightening of credit and the inability to repay ( NZ is slightly shielded by Australia , who are digging money out of the ground ) now 1/4 of the country unemployed local governments unable to pay even for the basics .
Bailouts offered by the IMF if they can impose IMF austerity ( Bolivia and water,all that will do is benefit a few haliburtons )
If anyone is " foolish" enough to think this won't happen in NZ , or IS happening , well good luck
Here in Japan , we have an excess of oldies , the art of building your way out of the pooo is alive and well, and rampant consumerism is alive and well
What we do have going for us , is low cost housing , read mortgages are over 40 years and the interest is 2/5 of f all ..but as of late I've noticed the prices going up , beer 500ml was 220 a can , now is 280 ish for example , my electricity was18000 last month due to poorly insulated houses and a touch of water in the works
If they introduce the 10% sales tax a lot of people will go to the wall....
What ( if we are going to follow this consumerist path) we need to do is , remove speculation on residential housing , bring back sensible government departments on essential utilities and remove taxes from basic healthy food,
That's crap that is too difficult, a carrot is a carrot ffs
Finally , start telling outside influences to fk off , IMF, world wank
This will free up disposable income in the average kiwis pocket ...of which they will spend ....
Stephen

Or go back to the old mortgage calculation - 2.5 x your annual gross income. Would stop people being able to borrow more than they can comfortably afford. It wont help with foreign owners snapping up properties but I don´t think a huge number of immigrants are arriving with enough cash to buy a house outright so they must be borrowing from somewhere. Average house price in Auckland being $500K doesnt really add up to an affordable mortgage. Can´t go on climbing at this rate forever.

Indiana_Jones

8th January 2013, 07:14

Or go back to the old mortgage calculation - 2.5 x your annual gross income.

So say your average income was 60k (we'll be generous), that's a mortgage of 150k, not many houses in Auckland for 150k lol

Can´t go on climbing at this rate forever.

And you'd think so, but it still does. I doubt much will change any time soon.

-Indy

jonbuoy

8th January 2013, 08:18

Exactly Indie 20% deposit adds a bit to the pot plus other savings. I think one thing the US has proven is that not everyone can/should be a homeowner.

flyingcrocodile46

8th January 2013, 17:19

Brian d marge

8th January 2013, 18:07

mashman

8th January 2013, 18:33

Giz a job spec? lol

-Indy

As long as you can communicate that you can do that, you'll be fine :eek:

mashman

8th January 2013, 18:44

I would look at how Spain has gone belly up , the freeing up of regulations after Franco
Speculative money poured into building and tourism , the tightening of credit and the inability to repay ( NZ is slightly shielded by Australia , who are digging money out of the ground ) now 1/4 of the country unemployed local governments unable to pay even for the basics .
Bailouts offered by the IMF if they can impose IMF austerity ( Bolivia and water,all that will do is benefit a few haliburtons )
If anyone is " foolish" enough to think this won't happen in NZ , or IS happening , well good luck
Here in Japan , we have an excess of oldies , the art of building your way out of the pooo is alive and well, and rampant consumerism is alive and well
What we do have going for us , is low cost housing , read mortgages are over 40 years and the interest is 2/5 of f all ..but as of late I've noticed the prices going up , beer 500ml was 220 a can , now is 280 ish for example , my electricity was18000 last month due to poorly insulated houses and a touch of water in the works
If they introduce the 10% sales tax a lot of people will go to the wall....
What ( if we are going to follow this consumerist path) we need to do is , remove speculation on residential housing , bring back sensible government departments on essential utilities and remove taxes from basic healthy food,
That's crap that is too difficult, a carrot is a carrot ffs
Finally , start telling outside influences to fk off , IMF, world wank
This will free up disposable income in the average kiwis pocket ...of which they will spend ....
Stephen

I'm gonna be interested to see where we go from here. Primarily because most of the products that are produced these days are upgrades and nothing really new (just smaller). Where once we have automation innovation, is there really that much out there these days that improves efficiency so radically that people will spend yet more money on it? I am wondering if too many people's interest in "stuff" has peaked (along with affordability). We're not producing anything of value, a phone is a phone is a phone, a tablet is a tablet is a tablet and being able to afford a house seems to be so far out of reach that people will eventually just give up, especially if the jobs where the cheap houses are won't even cover that mortgage. All of those things, and many more, pumped new money into the system which is the name of the game. I woulda thought mortgages where a great vehicle for pumping new money into the system.

flyingcrocodile46

8th January 2013, 19:15

then, where will the council get the monies from, ,speak easies , illegal booze and tabacco or extortionate rates

stephen

spain an economic miracle coming to you real soon
bought to you by bankers who care

The Govt has already limited their ability to raise rates as they please, so I think the aim is to force them to stop spending money on things that aren't affordable, rationalise services, seek funding through donations (rather than taxes/levies etc) and learn to live within budgets that ratepayers can afford.

Ocean1

8th January 2013, 19:32

I recently heard a rumour that there is a bill under review (third reading) that National are looking to sign off on, and which should severely reduce or eliminate the Councils ability to impose levies for amenities parks & reserves contributions etc for new sections and building consents. They currently add ten$ of thou$and$ to building costs. I haven't checked it out to establish the details but have my fingers crossed.

Best news I've heard all month.

then, where will the council get the monies from,

They can fucking earn it, just like their ratepayers. They're a completely unregulated monopoly, it's about time someone held them to account.

Brian d marge

8th January 2013, 19:36

I'm gonna be interested to see where we go from here. Primarily because most of the products that are produced these days are upgrades and nothing really new (just smaller). Where once we have automation innovation, is there really that much out there these days that improves efficiency so radically that people will spend yet more money on it? I am wondering if too many people's interest in "stuff" has peaked (along with affordability). We're not producing anything of value, a phone is a phone is a phone, a tablet is a tablet is a tablet and being able to afford a house seems to be so far out of reach that people will eventually just give up, especially if the jobs where the cheap houses are won't even cover that mortgage. All of those things, and many more, pumped new money into the system which is the name of the game. I woulda thought mortgages where a great vehicle for pumping new money into the system.
While i do seem to be pissed , err doom and gloom most of the time , I think there are encouraging signs, for example; Im not sure about NZ but just look at the increase of programs , people interested in the "simple life " , or an "alternative"
Sure , this only applies to the "haves" or educated ones but I hope the movement gathers pace.
Unfortuantly when you have nowt the warehouse and noel leming become regular haunts. Values change I think. ( nowt as in track suit wearing gut buckets with a different set of values who with their toothless slack jawed grins , sap my will to live, not your Ghandi types)
Peak consumerism was also a worry for retailers at the turn of the century , which led on to the creation of the catalogue and other retail devices. So dont worry the slack jaws will continue to abuse credit for my lifetime at least if history does indeed repeat.
Future proofing me and mine would include , freehold land and the skills for food production ( AND BEER ) all of which I am doing now .....( seem to hung up on the home made whiskey , but Im sure Ill get it right , just need some more practice !!!!!!)

Stephen

ps tapped this out on a non Iphone , so there is NO way I am going to correct and spelling or grammatical mistakes ...fk that

Indiana_Jones

10th January 2013, 07:03

Off to see the lovely bank manager tonight, yay....

-Indy

Banditbandit

10th January 2013, 09:03

Stephen

ps tapped this out on a non Iphone , so there is NO way I am going to correct and spelling or grammatical mistakes ...fk that

So much for the simple life then ?

Brian d marge

10th January 2013, 13:24

So much for the simple life then ?
yup , nature of the business ...

on saying that , I dont have a phone now , just a nexus 7...

Stephen

mashman

13th January 2013, 17:56

While i do seem to be pissed , err doom and gloom most of the time , I think there are encouraging signs, for example; Im not sure about NZ but just look at the increase of programs , people interested in the "simple life " , or an "alternative"
Sure , this only applies to the "haves" or educated ones but I hope the movement gathers pace.
Unfortuantly when you have nowt the warehouse and noel leming become regular haunts. Values change I think. ( nowt as in track suit wearing gut buckets with a different set of values who with their toothless slack jawed grins , sap my will to live, not your Ghandi types)
Peak consumerism was also a worry for retailers at the turn of the century , which led on to the creation of the catalogue and other retail devices. So dont worry the slack jaws will continue to abuse credit for my lifetime at least if history does indeed repeat.
Future proofing me and mine would include , freehold land and the skills for food production ( AND BEER ) all of which I am doing now .....( seem to hung up on the home made whiskey , but Im sure Ill get it right , just need some more practice !!!!!!)

Stephen

ps tapped this out on a non Iphone , so there is NO way I am going to correct and spelling or grammatical mistakes ...fk that

I don't read it as doom and gloom, pissed maybe, but not doom and gloom :laugh:. The downside is that there are encouraging signs for the economy. I see Japan are about to print a bucket load of cash to get themselves kick started. The simple/alternative life is still expensive to kick off though eh. You need the land and the house and iffen ye haven't got that as you're stretched on the mortgage, it becomes anything but simple/alternative... even if you do have yer veggie garden/beer (of which the latest batch is ready for testing tonight, well, lager) etc... I think one of the biggest problems with peak consumerism was the "introduction" of the superstore. A decade or so ago supermarkets started selling warehousey type stuff and the high street knick knack shops started to go tits. Since then that's stretched to things like building/IT etc... The big boys get the big contracts whilst the rest scrabble about for the smaller pieces of work... Eventually the big boys are the ones who end up offering the work to the workforce. At that point in time, imho, skillsets take a beating as people are "forced" to specialise and essentially the business just becomes another factory, churning out robots and not thinking, skillful, adaptable individuals (something I believe smaller business does much bettrerererer). This seems to be the new business model. Acquire the competition and kill off the "local" job market, driving wages down as they're the only game in town etc... In amongst all of that man gotta eat, buy house, accrue assets etc... on what some faceless prick is willing to shell out for wages that year. Tis an epic farce and each time I see another boarded up ship or a closing down sale or overhear a discussion about how things are getting hard, I keep wishing for a rather large planet to appear out of nowhere and render the lot of us non-existent. Now as much as that may sound ever so slightly doomy and gloomy, I think it'd do a fuckload of folk a lot of good :eek:.

Good luck with the Whiskey :niceone:

Off to see the lovely bank manager tonight, yay....

-Indy

Are you now an official Homo wner?

Indiana_Jones

15th January 2013, 11:57

Are you now an official Homo wner?

Na, the mrs and I just wanna get some idea where we stand and how much we can borrow.

-Indy

merv

15th January 2013, 15:27

Na, the mrs and I just wanna get some idea where we stand and how much we can borrow.

-Indy

So how'd it go with the nice bank manager?

Zedder

15th January 2013, 15:48

[QUOTE=mashman;1130464692]I don't read it as doom and gloom, pissed maybe, but not doom and gloom :laugh:. The downside is that there are encouraging signs for the economy. I see Japan are about to print a bucket load of cash to get themselves kick started. The simple/alternative life is still expensive to kick off though eh. You need the land and the house and iffen ye haven't got that as you're stretched on the mortgage, it becomes anything but simple/alternative... even if you do have yer veggie garden/beer (of which the latest batch is ready for testing tonight, well, lager) etc... I think one of the biggest problems with peak consumerism was the "introduction" of the superstore. A decade or so ago supermarkets started selling warehousey type stuff and the high street knick knack shops started to go tits. Since then that's stretched to things like building/IT etc... The big boys get the big contracts whilst the rest scrabble about for the smaller pieces of work... Eventually the big boys are the ones who end up offering the work to the workforce. At that point in time, imho, skillsets take a beating as people are "forced" to specialise and essentially the business just becomes another factory, churning out robots and not thinking, skillful, adaptable individuals (something I believe smaller business does much bettrerererer). This seems to be the new business model. Acquire the competition and kill off the "local" job market, driving wages down as they're the only game in town etc... In amongst all of that man gotta eat, buy house, accrue assets etc... on what some faceless prick is willing to shell out for wages that year. Tis an epic farce and each time I see another boarded up ship or a closing down sale or overhear a discussion about how things are getting hard, I keep wishing for a rather large planet to appear out of nowhere and render the lot of us non-existent. Now as much as that may sound ever so slightly doomy and gloomy, I think it'd do a fuckload of folk a lot of good :eek:.

Yeah, things are a bit of a crap fest alright Masho. However, I've talked to lots of folk lately who are finding ways to circumvent "the system" all very heartening. Incidently, I'd go for a massive electro magnetic pulse scenario rather than some planetary/asteroid collision event. Being wiped out is just too easy.

Indiana_Jones

15th January 2013, 16:26

So how'd it go with the nice bank manager?

We could borrow enough to buy a unit etc, but if the interest went up we'd be high and dry I think.

Not gonna be buying until I've finished studying (working 32 hours a week at the moment), which is 2 years away.

-Indy

mashman

15th January 2013, 18:25

Na, the mrs and I just wanna get some idea where we stand and how much we can borrow.

-Indy

Funnily enough you've sparked me and mrs mash off with reconsidering our mortgage etc... We were speaking with a "mortgage advisor" a month or two ago and he was offering certain alternatives that "could" lower our mortgage. There are "alternatives" out there and a gent I share smoko with sent me a rather large PDF on mortgage structuring, something I've yet to read, off the back of a couple of chit chats. More than happy to send it your way should you want it as it'll be a wee while before we change our circumstances.

Yeah, things are a bit of a crap fest alright Masho. However, I've talked to lots of folk lately who are finding ways to circumvent "the system" all very heartening. Incidently, I'd go for a massive electro magnetic pulse scenario rather than some planetary/asteroid collision event. Being wiped out is just too easy.

YOu should start a thread, then we can all get in each others way circumventing the system :laugh:. Yeah, but an EMP v's a Planetary collision... which'll be more prettier to watch before the shit hits the fan? Aye, I think Chch rammed that one home. We were down there recently and had a brief drive around with mouths agape and shedding a wee tear. Gets me blood boilin so it doos.

Zedder

15th January 2013, 18:55

Funnily enough you've sparked me and mrs mash off with reconsidering our mortgage etc... We were speaking with a "mortgage advisor" a month or two ago and he was offering certain alternatives that "could" lower our mortgage. There are "alternatives" out there and a gent I share smoko with sent me a rather large PDF on mortgage structuring, something I've yet to read, off the back of a couple of chit chats. More than happy to send it your way should you want it as it'll be a wee while before we change our circumstances.

YOu should start a thread, then we can all get in each others way circumventing the system :laugh:. Yeah, but an EMP v's a Planetary collision... which'll be more prettier to watch before the shit hits the fan? Aye, I think Chch rammed that one home. We were down there recently and had a brief drive around with mouths agape and shedding a wee tear. Gets me blood boilin so it doos.

Snap! The mortgage restructure is certainly on the list of things to do. It's about rethinking your situation and then researching options. I also know people who are simply trading skills for example.

I really wouldn't wish any global catastrophy but see an EMP as more of a challenge in a "survival of the fittest" scenario.

As for the CHCH situation, it's absolutely disgusting and I can't believe Brownlee etc are still alive.

mashman

15th January 2013, 19:54

Snap! The mortgage restructure is certainly on the list of things to do. It's about rethinking your situation and then researching options. I also know people who are simply trading skills for example.

I really wouldn't wish any global catastrophy but see an EMP as more of a challenge in a "survival of the fittest" scenario.

As for the CHCH situation, it's absolutely disgusting and I can't believe Brownlee etc are still alive.

I love the idea behind skills exchange, primarily as that's fundamentally how the world works (the financial bit is unnecessary :)). We just did a wee trip around the top 2 thirds of sarf island and the missus was impressed enough to consider a move, should we decide to. If I can get the mortgage down by half (which is possible given some of the prices doon there) the pair of us can take on part time jobs (I'll happily work in a supermarket), or she can work full time :shifty: and I can get on to other things. Tis a shame that there isn't too much work around the places we'd like to move to.

Could be fun learning some new skills.

Agreed.

Zedder

15th January 2013, 21:13

I love the idea behind skills exchange, primarily as that's fundamentally how the world works (the financial bit is unnecessary :)). We just did a wee trip around the top 2 thirds of sarf island and the missus was impressed enough to consider a move, should we decide to. If I can get the mortgage down by half (which is possible given some of the prices doon there) the pair of us can take on part time jobs (I'll happily work in a supermarket), or she can work full time :shifty: and I can get on to other things. Tis a shame that there isn't too much work around the places we'd like to move to.

Could be fun learning some new skills.

Agreed.

Yep, learning new skills is great. I always remember going to the Oz outback for the first time and having to learn a whole range of skills, some of them simply to survive. Some of my colleagues though didn't even want to "get stuck in".

I admire anyone with a No.8 wire mentality or sense of what they call "kiwi ingenuity".

Banditbandit

16th January 2013, 10:48

Snap! The mortgage restructure is certainly on the list of things to do. It's about rethinking your situation and then researching options. I also know people who are simply trading skills for example.

Yeah - it's worth it ... I talked to a banker a few years ago and rstructured our mortage and insurances ... borrowed some money to buy another bike and wound up needing to pay less in mortage and insurance than before I bought the new bike ... (without extending the life of the mortgage) ... so I kept the payments at the same level and paid the mortgage off faster

HenryDorsetCase

16th January 2013, 10:58

Yeah, things are a bit of a crap fest alright Masho. However, I've talked to lots of folk lately who are finding ways to circumvent "the system" all very heartening. Incidently, I'd go for a massive electro magnetic pulse scenario rather than some planetary/asteroid collision event. Being wiped out is just too easy.

Mr Akzle doesn't count, mkay?

Zedder

16th January 2013, 11:12

Mr Akzle doesn't count, mkay?

Totally agree.

Ocean1

27th January 2013, 09:06

I wonder if you imported NZ made Gib from Perth, where it retails at about 40% less than here, and managed to undercut Winstone's local prices whether the Commerse Commission would admit they'd been had. You'd only have to do it long enough to get a few calls out to the media.

The CC are a fucking joke, monopolies siphon huge quantities of cash from the economy, mostly off shore, and the entity charged with protecting the economy from such underhanded bullshit sits gibbering in the corner.

Maybe, just maybe the tide's turning. http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/8223088/Fletcher-Building-faces-rival-imports

Last April, Knauf Insulation's general manager for Australia and New Zealand, Stuart Dunbar, said his company was selling its insulation for half the price Fletcher was charging.

"The cost of building a house in New Zealand is among the highest in the world because components to make houses are more expensive," he said.

"With companies in a monopoly or duopoly, consumers tend to pay higher prices and that's happening in the New Zealand market."

Woodman

27th January 2013, 09:19

Who is paying the premium? The builders or the end user? or both? What markups are the builders putting on the materials compared with Oz builders?

What margins are there in building a house?

Ocean1

27th January 2013, 09:31

Who is paying the premium? The builders or the end user? or both?

Both.

What markups are the builders putting on the materials compared with Oz builders?

Don't care, the fact is you can walk in to a hardware shop in Perth and buy NZ made Gib for about half the price you pay here. That's true for trades discounted prices also.

What margins are there in building a house?

That, my son is a very good question, and one for which I'd love to know the answer. Not sure how you'd go about finding a coherent answer, though.

flyingcrocodile46

27th January 2013, 10:57

Who is paying the premium? The builders or the end user? or both? What markups are the builders putting on the materials compared with Oz builders?

What margins are there in building a house?

On charge up jobs builders will typically add 5 to 10% for management of subcontractors and materials that they source/co-ordinate and pay for. Overall margins on full contract tenders are typically 10% or less (back in the late 80's large contractors were pricing work at negative margins then screwing the subcontractors down to compensate). The reality is that half of the margin is never realised due to errors and omissions. Not infrequently the other half is eroded due to disputes that see the builder short paid. One error can easily cost over 10% of the contract value. There are very real and big risks in running a building business and few succeed past 4 or 5 years of trading before they are bust.

If you see a builder who looks like he has money it is often due to his spending forward against projected profits using the cashflow to finance it. When the cashflow slows down these guys tend to fall over pretty quick. Very very few builders make more than a living.

flyingcrocodile46

27th January 2013, 11:12

Both.

Don't care, the fact is you can walk in to a hardware shop in Perth and buy NZ made Gib for about half the price you pay here. That's true for trades discounted prices also.

That, my son is a very good question, and one for which I'd love to know the answer. Not sure how you'd go about finding a coherent answer, though.

Rawlinsons is a good place to start. Put together by Queer Suckers (quantity surveyors working for Rawlinsons) who are involved in many ongoing projects (mostly as representatives for funders). They list the prices they see that industry is actually paying for materials, services, etc over varied build styles.

It is over to the reader (often another Queer Sucker) to add up and apply profit margins. Analysis of this data often reveals tender prices at less than the Rawlinson Sum COST. :facepalm: It's a hard industry to build a medium to long term profitable business in.

Ocean1

27th January 2013, 11:21

Rawlinsons is a good place to start. Put together by Queer Suckers who are involved in many ongoing projects (mostly as representatives for funders). They list the prices they see that industry is actually paying for materials, services, etc over varied build styles.

It is over to the reader (often another Queer Sucker) to add up and apply profit margins to. Analysis of this data often reveals tender prices at less than the Rawlinson Sum COST. :facepalm: It's a hard industry to build a medium to long term profitable business in.

Monopolies are just one of the ways market distortion fucks the consumer.

I used a new industrial electrician a year or so ago, my usual was on holliday. His invoice looked well high, so I asked for a breakdown. He was charging me +20% for materials, +20% on RETAIL. We had a discussion where he learned that I knew he was getting materials at -80%, and that was about the only reason I subbed that part of the job out at all. If he insisted on charging me almost 1000% of his costs we probably wouldn't be seeing him again.

What the fuck's wrong with charging every client a reasonable price for your product, rather than gouging the fuck out of the "less important" ones?

mashman

27th January 2013, 15:29

What the fuck's wrong with charging every client a reasonable price for your product, rather than gouging the fuck out of the "less important" ones?

Hmmmmm... could it possibly be that this is where the youth of today are getting their perceived attitude from :innocent:

unstuck

27th January 2013, 15:41

This would do me I reckon.:Punk::Punk::Punk:

http://www.trademe.co.nz/property/lifestyle-property/auction-550658696.htm

mashman

27th January 2013, 17:42

This would do me I reckon.:Punk::Punk::Punk:

http://www.trademe.co.nz/property/lifestyle-property/auction-550658696.htm

That is seriously tempting.

unstuck

27th January 2013, 19:00

That is seriously tempting.

House aint much, but you could fix it up or rip it down. Something like this would do me, nice and simple.http://www.lockwood.co.nz/Images/PlanBanners/LittleWing_banner.jpg

mashman

27th January 2013, 20:04

House aint much, but you could fix it up or rip it down. Something like this would do me, nice and simple.

Could be an ideal spot for tagging on a couple of second hand houses (or whatever ya call them) and fixing them up too iffen yer that way inclined.

Madness

28th January 2013, 10:06

Greymouth is cheap. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10861773

I lol'd at the bit about the scrap metal dealer. :laugh:

unstuck

28th January 2013, 10:58

Greymouth is cheap. I lol'd at the bit about the scrap metal dealer. :laugh:

Yeah me too.:laugh::laugh: I would live in greymouth if I could find a decent enough place out past bodytown somewhere.

Indiana_Jones

18th June 2013, 13:25

So any chance of a crash soon? :)

-Indy

mashman

18th June 2013, 13:48

So any chance of a crash soon? :)

-Indy

I hope so.

avgas

18th June 2013, 15:33

Average house price in Auckland being $500K doesnt really add up to an affordable mortgage. Can´t go on climbing at this rate forever.
I always love this statistic.
Has anyone here paid $500K+ for a house? I didn't. I live 10min from work and 20min from CBD.

Not saying House prices are cheap in Auckland. But when I look at people earning $50K in NY, buying a $6-700K house, or Tokyo 80M yen apartment...........can't be that bad here.

You just have to be a bit committed is all. Sell your bike, get a haircut and get a real job.....:whistle:

Ocean1

18th June 2013, 16:23

Not saying House prices are cheap in Auckland. But when I look at people earning $50K in NY, buying a $6-700K house, or Tokyo 80M yen apartment...........can't be that bad here.

You just have to be a bit committed is all. Sell your bike, get a haircut and get a real job.....:whistle:

I think you're largely right. That, and the expectation of what your parents would call a mansion for a first house.

Although there's been some unnecessary increases in building standards compliance, and there’s still a couple of building materials monopolies that need squashing asap.

Delerium

18th June 2013, 16:35

I think you're largely right. That, and the expectation of what your parents would call a mansion for a first house.

Although there's been some unnecessary increases in building standards compliance, and there’s still a couple of building materials monopolies that need squashing asap.

lol wut?
a 3 bedroom house in avondale isnt a mansion. That'll cost 500k now. No correction, that wil be LISTED at 500k, and when I go to view I see audi's, bmw's, and mercs pulling up with property speculators from china and hong kong. I dont have any flash toys, and im squeezed out of the market. Im not going to buy a 300k house in manukau and then lose the difference in price through time and cost of commuting to town.

Indiana_Jones

18th June 2013, 16:45

Well I've solved the issue of Auckland house prices for myself, I'm leaving. :niceone:

-Indy

HenryDorsetCase

18th June 2013, 17:21

lol wut?
a 3 bedroom house in avondale isnt a mansion. That'll cost 500k now. No correction, that wil be LISTED at 500k, and when I go to view I see audi's, bmw's, and mercs pulling up with property speculators from china and hong kong. I dont have any flash toys, and im squeezed out of the market. Im not going to buy a 300k house in manukau and then lose the difference in price through time and cost of commuting to town.

your problem, son, is you live in orklind.

Ocean1

18th June 2013, 19:28

mashman

18th June 2013, 20:07

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETxmCCsMoD0

Brian d marge

18th June 2013, 20:35

Your choice. I was simply pointing out that by international large city standards you've not got it so bad.

Once a city gets over a critical threshold in size they become massively cost inefficient to live in. The solution's pretty obvious.

I live in Tokyo

I have a 3 bedroom town house

a little bit of a garden and a Car port and a 10m square office/workshop

15million yen total over 40 yrs

hows that compare!

stephen

mashman

18th June 2013, 20:38

I live in Tokyo

I have a 3 bedroom town house

a little bit of a garden and a Car port and a 10m square office/workshop

15million yen total over 40 yrs

hows that compare!

stephen

Nice, I'll take 2.

Ocean1

18th June 2013, 20:48

I live in Tokyo

I have a 3 bedroom town house

a little bit of a garden and a Car port and a 10m square office/workshop

15million yen total over 40 yrs

hows that compare!

stephen

No idea, I don't live anywhere near a city.

I'd struggle with the workshop size. 'Er indoors reckons I need to get rid of some stuff, but there's not a single item in those garages that isn't absolutely vital to civilisation as we know it.

Indiana_Jones

18th June 2013, 20:49

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETxmCCsMoD0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2NETSIzFr8

-Indy

unstuck

18th June 2013, 21:08

Naki Rat

18th June 2013, 21:17

I always love this statistic.
Has anyone here paid $500K+ for a house? I didn't. I live 10min from work and 20min from CBD.

Not saying House prices are cheap in Auckland. But when I look at people earning $50K in NY, buying a $6-700K house, or Tokyo 80M yen apartment...........can't be that bad here.

You just have to be a bit committed is all. Sell your bike, get a haircut and get a real job.....:whistle:
Don't know if it's been mentioned, and I can't be arsed checking back, but how much are New Zealand's real estate prices now being influenced by the internationalisation of the market? Immigrant buyers, expats returning with their overseas earned funds and New Zealand residents with offshore income streams all serve to highlight the real problem; our average domestic income is low by international standards, which by contrast makes our housing costs seem high to those of us living in a New Zealand 'bubble'.

BoristheBiter

18th June 2013, 21:43

I always love this statistic.
Has anyone here paid $500K+ for a house? I didn't. I live 10min from work and 20min from CBD.

No I paid more, much more, but then I paid more to be in the country.

No fucking way would i live that close to the cbd or work.

Brian d marge

18th June 2013, 22:30

No idea, I don't live anywhere near a city.

I'd struggle with the workshop size. 'Er indoors reckons I need to get rid of some stuff, but there's not a single item in those garages that isn't absolutely vital to civilisation as we know it. oh I understand ,,,,,,,I really do

we built the house on the site of me larger workshop....... , Now I have a computer terminal and a bike ramp,,and bench space ( storagein another place ) ,,,

it forced me to do everything on the computer and basically to get it right first time ( as it cost me moneyto do it again!)

there is a work I use a lot and it starts with an F and ends with a K ........ and I used that a lot when we built the house ...

Stephen

PS NONE of the enfield bits went ...they ARE essential to western civilisation

scissorhands

19th June 2013, 06:33

Overseas buyers are seeing value in the NZ market. While Kiwis dither and moan, more aggressive virulent species of human are making money while we doze in godszone's temperate climate of lassitude....
As a property holder myself for many years, I can only suggest we look at our own lifestyles, if the foreign hordes invade our lands, maybe we need to sharpen our own pencils rather than dull the pencils of these invaders
They bask in sunshine and a driven climate, and bring/fly over its harvest upon our meagre climate and attitudes...
Aggressive invasive species of plant and animal are nothing new to these lands, yet now they take the form of a property investor
Something is rotten in Denmark....

The land has spoken. regards Scissors

Australians are contributing to New Zealand's skyrocketing house prices, with new research showing they bought more property than any other overseas group.

The figures have prompted calls to ban purchases by foreigners or impose a tax on top of the sale price.

BNZ chief economist Tony Alexander has found Australians are the biggest single group of overseas buyers with 22 per cent of all property purchases by foreigners. Chinese are second at 20 per cent and British at 13 per cent.

The BNZ-REINZ survey asked real estate agents to identify the proportions of their sales to various groups. It found 8 per cent to 9 per cent of sales were to foreigners.

While there are no exact figures showing the number of house purchases by foreigners, Real Estate Institute figures last month showed 7714 residential properties were sold. If that trend continued and around 90,000 houses were sold annually, about 8000 New Zealand houses could be going to foreigners...........
cont http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10891504

unstuck

19th June 2013, 06:41

Funny, seems to be Hamiltonians that are buying up the houses around here.:yes:

scissorhands

19th June 2013, 07:05

Funny, seems to be Hamiltonians that are buying up the houses around here.:yes:

Southland has incredible value, many properties have buildings that to replace, would be 5times the sale price
I nearly purchased a pub near you for $150k.... 2 bars 10 bedrooms 1 acre on a main road. The building alone to replace would be $1million

Dont wait!

unstuck

19th June 2013, 07:34

Interesting, I have been keeping an eye on this, http://www.trademe.co.nz/property/rural/auction-601360659.htm And came across this, http://www.trademe.co.nz/property/rural/auction-521635106.htm Which is where I do most of my trail bike riding, and is actually DOC estate. I wonder if DOC know it is for sale.:nya:

Indiana_Jones

16th July 2013, 12:12

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8921877/Loans-door-shutting-on-first-home-buyers

Worried about this shit going ahead. Glad I'm not going to be buying in Auckland now.

-Indy

avgas

16th July 2013, 15:41

I live in Tokyo

I have a 3 bedroom town house

a little bit of a garden and a Car port and a 10m square office/workshop

15million yen total over 40 yrs

hows that compare!

stephen
Dirt cheap - $200K?

Brian d marge

17th July 2013, 00:21

Indiana_Jones

9th August 2013, 09:40

mashman

9th August 2013, 13:00

"The higher cost of living in terms of home purchase and rental prices, rates, public transport and petrol consumption are easily offset by the higher salaries and better job opportunities in Auckland, compared to the rest of New Zealand. So this must be held in perspective when Auckland is criticised by the rest of New Zealand for its high cost of living."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10910135

:killingme

-Indy

Everything is cheaper because of competition and yet, it's more expensive. Cunt should make his mind up. I didn't realise that the 50k earned in Wellington less far as the 50k earned in Auckland... I must ask for a payrise.

How's the hunting going?

Indiana_Jones

9th August 2013, 13:10

Been to a few open homes, just taking it slow, no rush. Would help if the mrs got a job, but that won't happen until the baby pops out at the earliest.

-Indy

mashman

9th August 2013, 13:42

Been to a few open homes, just taking it slow, no rush. Would help if the mrs got a job, but that won't happen until the baby pops out at the earliest.

-Indy

:rofl: lazy bitch... (was thinking the Meaning of Life with Mother in the kitchen and the stork arriving, but couldn't find the clip)

Ocean1

17th August 2013, 09:52

About fucking time.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9053732/Home-buyers-to-benefit-from-fee-cut

Although the cynic in me suggests rates will simply go up to compensate...

BMWST?

17th August 2013, 10:41

About fucking time.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9053732/Home-buyers-to-benefit-from-fee-cut

Although the cynic in me suggests rates will simply go up to compensate...

Make the infrastructure the developers problem then including the required upgrades ,keep the councils out of it

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

Ocean1

17th August 2013, 10:57

Make the infrastructure the developers problem then including the required upgrades ,keep the councils out of it

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

Infrastructure is already done at the developers cost, the council fees are simply parasitic compliance charges.

And no developer is going to sign anything requiring them to upgrade anything to a future, undefined spec.

I think councils have a part to play in managing development, but ANY monopoly causes costs to rise without any relation to actual value. The trick is firstly to define the services councils are supposed to provide and secondly to make them accountable for the value of their performance and charges. Not easy.

flyingcrocodile46

14th September 2013, 13:18

Just put my thoughts down in writing on this issue in another forum. Thought I would share them here.

 Politicians debating the housing cost issue do little more than demonstrate how little they really understand about the problem. None of them have any genuine expertise or in depth knowledge of the industry, where it is at or how it works. They tackle these political issues on an ad hock basis by doing a bit of study so they are partly informed on about 33% of the influencing factors then climb in with solutions that don't actually work for the 66% of the problem which they have no knowledge of.

Govt can’t sell or make land available in Auckland (or other cities) at cheaper prices when demand by people with access to money is driving the cost up. Demand establishes the cost. Anyone who sells land for less than it can be sold is going to take a loss. Is a developer going to give away potential profit or take a loss on land they already own? Hell no. Is the govt going to do it by using taxpayer money (or more realistically using or increasing the public debt) to buy and sell land in a non profit venture? Not if they expect to get voted in again.

The problem is that of supply and demand. If the demand is inflated by easy access to money, how on earth is pouring taxpayer money into the problem going to solve it? It can only make it worse.

Yes there is some merit in looking at the issue of material costs, but who is going to diminish the potential capital gain of a $400,000 section by putting a small 120M2 $120,000 to $140,000 3 bedroom house (with no garage) on it which will only sell for $550,000 when a 220M2 $350,000 to $400,000 5 + bdrm house with double garage will turn it into a much more easily marketable $1,000,000 + property (that the market with money demands)?

The answer is to side step or reduce the inflationary pressures created by demand and easy access to money. Part of the problem is because of market players who are investing for reasons other than providing a roof over their own heads.

First step is to kill the subsidies that artificially and/or inappropriately assist returns to rental property speculators.

Second step is to introduce capital gains tax so that tax is paid on the profiteering that drives up demand. Home ownership should be confined to the purpose of putting roofs over people’s heads. It should not be used by investors as an investment mechanism which serves no purpose other than returning an investment profit, when the side effect of investing promotes the inflation which enhances the return to people who have no need of the housing for any purpose other than making money (and drives the cost beyond the means of people who don't have easy access to the ever increasing amount of money needed to put a roof over their heads and forces them into paying rent which pays another person’s loan off). It's crazy in every sense except for that of the short term return on investment.

Third step is to remove all import protectionism on building materials (yes there is plenty of it) which would force local manufacturer's to compete in a proper open market and reduce the NZ sale prices of their materials down to at least match the prices that they get for their exported materials in other countries (yes you can buy NZ timber and gib board cheaper in other countries than in the country of their origin). This would not be undue interference as it would only be correcting an unnatural market imbalance.

Fourth (and much harder) is to address the supply and demand cycle by increasing the supply, but that only works when the land is genuinely cheaper (rather than subsidised). Forcing people to sell land cheaper than the market will pay would ruin some people and would be unfair to those who have invested. It would be interfering directly with the market to create an artificial impediment to natural market forces. So the alternative has to be to provide alternatives to the market. You can't buy cheap land and move it into expensive areas (land is not a refrigerator, TV or car). You have to shift the demand to where the cheaper land is located. Decentralisation is the only way that is going to happen. Shift the demand to where the affordable supply exists. That requires societal change and that is where the politicians come in. That is the area where they should be focusing their efforts. It is no small task but it is the only real alternative. Centralisation has created the problem, reversing the process is the only real solution.

Ocean1

14th September 2013, 13:36

Just put my thoughts down in writing on this issue in another forum. Thought I would share them here.

Concise. And I think you're right on just about every count.

I'm not happy with a capital gains tax myself, unless it allows correction for inflation, and even then it'd be almost impossible to administer if taxing non-resident dwellings only. And if you tax the lot then what does that do for the idea of capital improvement? New driveway? Not if I'm paying to do it and getting taxed on top.

And new development. Of all of the opportunities for govt to interfere in the market that's possibly the least damaging, buy up a couple of square kilometres of farm, institute a public "Works Development" department and sell the result for cost. I might be wrong but I think that approach would halve the price of a section, at least. Which, as you implied would have a beneficial knock-on effect to downstream costs.

And while we're getting all commie, let's have a public building supply department, eh? I don't feel much sympathy for the existing outfits, and it's about time the Commerce Commission started doing the job they're supposed to. A public supply chain would eventually stagnate, like every public service endeavour always does, but it'd last long enough to see the existing parasites gone.

mossy1200

14th September 2013, 13:46

flyingcrocodile46

14th September 2013, 14:06

I find it hard because im just about to hit settlement on the house we are buying and change could mean I end up with zero capital in the house.
Failure to buy now will leave me to little deposit to buy later on. So im stuck in lose lose. If I don't buy now guaranteed when new buyers cant buy rent will lift in demand areas a lot and the people wanting to buy wont be able to save money for the larger deposits.

Don't worry, you are in a much better position than many. If you can get a start in the game you are usually ok unless the market crashes and the signs are positive for continued growth at present.

It is the people who can't get the deposit together because they are forced to pay high rent that are the losers. Once you are in the high stakes game in the bigger cities you are generally exempt from the inflation cycle.... as long as you are making good progress in reducing the principal of your mortgage.

slowpoke

14th September 2013, 19:24

Concise. And I think you're right on just about every count.

That's funny 'cos I reckon he's wrong, not to mention contradictory. It's OK to invest in land and force up land costs, but it's not ok to invest in housing? And if you aren't allowed to own any house except your own....what happens if you can't afford a house? Who's house do you live in? And having lived in Perth I can tell you that property investment is probably even more rife than in NZ despite a Capital Gains Tax and hefty Stamp Duty, so what does CGT accomplish other than line the Governments pockets?

If you want a tax that will accomplish something how about institute a tax on Auckland businesses inside a certain geographic boundary? Say 0.1% of profits per employee up to a maximim of 10%. They'll soon move, along with their employees, and it's problem solved.

Indiana_Jones

14th September 2013, 20:50

If you want a tax that will accomplish something how about institute a tax on Auckland businesses inside a certain geographic boundary? Say 0.1% of profits per employee up to a maximim of 10%. They'll soon move, along with their employees, and it's problem solved.

Not sure about the approach, but I agree with making some sort of incentive to get businesses to spread out of Auckland. Too much focus of Auckland being the be-all and end-all.

-Indy

flyingcrocodile46

14th September 2013, 21:07

That's funny 'cos I reckon he's wrong, not to mention contradictory. It's OK to invest in land and force up land costs, but it's not ok to invest in housing? And if you aren't allowed to own any house except your own....what happens if you can't afford a house? Who's house do you live in? And having lived in Perth I can tell you that property investment is probably even more rife than in NZ despite a Capital Gains Tax and hefty Stamp Duty, so what does CGT accomplish other than line the Governments pockets?

If you want a tax that will accomplish something how about institute a tax on Auckland businesses inside a certain geographic boundary? Say 0.1% of profits per employee up to a maximim of 10%. They'll soon move, along with their employees, and it's problem solved.

I never said or implied
It's OK to invest in land and force up land costs property developers pay tax anyway. Subdivision developers do not drive prices up. It is the demand for the property that drives prices up.

Communities can own houses. They can be tax exempt (as they don't invest for profit). If a community can't provide housing to cater for an increasing worker population (that can't afford local housing prices), then there are Hotels, Motels, Boarding houses etc which can grow to meet demand (they are businesses and pay taxes on all aspects of potential profit). If not, then growth through centralisation will stall and imo that is not a negative.

The business tax idea might work ok to a point. Need to think it through a bit more, but it would likely have the added benifit of discouraging monopoly through devouring the competition and would give small businesses an advantage to help offset some of the advantages that bigger competitors gain as they grow.

Flip

14th September 2013, 22:27

What a lot of twaddle.

NZ has a working class poor problem, who want to live like middle class people but dont have the income to do so.

Rents are historically low because the govt let ma and pa investers run their rental properties like a business.

The problem now is the user is paying the real market rental price.

flyingcrocodile46

14th September 2013, 22:36

mashman

15th September 2013, 00:15

avgas

15th September 2013, 09:10

well with me packing the family up into boxes and shipping off to the u.s. I have put the house on the market. So hopefully a couple of suckers will try an out-bid each other on the auction day and I get a good price.

Won't have anything to do with the govt and tax either. Just 2 dude (actually prob gonna be 2 chicks) going el mano against each other to buy my house. Market forces and all that doo-dacky.

flyingcrocodile46

15th September 2013, 11:55

These guys believe in a Land Value Tax. Personally I think they're out of their fuckin minds as I don't see anything really changing other than the usual rob peter to pay paul. Still, for those interested they've made the movie available fwee of charge. It's worth a watch and iffen ye give enough of a shit, I've got the book that they've written that accompanies the movie, also for fwee :) (primarily due to a nice couple of poker wins).

No comment on the land tax as I really need to give that more thought.. I do see good potential (as there is in many alternative and the current system[sans Fiat money]). Most systems have potential to work ok as long as they aren't perverted to suit the interests of the ellite.

However the video (which I have seen before) is a timely reminder that my own earlier musings (like those of the politicians over this issue) are really all for naught as they relate only to dealing with the symptoms of the real problem that drives ALL inflation. The Fiat money system is the root of all inflation problems and we must get rid of it. Good reminder thanks.

mashman

15th September 2013, 13:04

No comment on the land tax as I really need to give that more thought.. I do see good potential (as there is in many alternative and the current system[sans Fiat money]). Most systems have potential to work ok as long as they aren't perverted to suit the interests of the ellite.

However the video (which I have seen before) is a timely reminder that my own earlier musings (like those of the politicians over this issue) are really all for naught as they relate only to dealing with the symptoms of the real problem that drives ALL inflation. The Fiat money system is the root of all inflation problems and we must get rid of it. Good reminder thanks.

Well with any luck they're going to push that alternative, well, they're making the right noises and they certainly have the contacts. There's a group in NZ who advocate LVT although I haven't kept up. But as you say, the root problem isn't being addressed and I have to take "issue" with your assertion that fiat money is the primary driver of inflation. Main reason being that once a single $ is created, you have debt... and the only way to balance that debt is by inflating the "value" of that which that single $ was loaned against, which requires more borrowing, which leads to more interest, which requires economic policy to re-value shit (write-downs) etc... So for me the primary driver is the issuance of money as a means of valuation. Someone is always gonna have to have the shitty end of the stick debt wise and therefore we'll end up those who know how to dodge the shitty end. Tis a seriously fooked way of valuing effort/production etc...

Oldrider threw up The Guernsey Experiment as a way of negating inflation and interest by giving the money a timestamp for use. Interesting theory that seemed to work in practice until the banks stepped in. T'would make a $ worth a $ and housing materials/land/labor could be set prices. This would probably lead to a much less complicated financial system and likely a fuckload less compliance costs etc... Still though, there'll always be that race to the bottom somewhere or other.

flyingcrocodile46

15th September 2013, 14:52

Well with any luck they're going to push that alternative, well, they're making the right noises and they certainly have the contacts. There's a group in NZ who advocate LVT although I haven't kept up. But as you say, the root problem isn't being addressed and I have to take "issue" with your assertion that fiat money is the primary driver of inflation. Main reason being that once a single $ is created, you have debt... and the only way to balance that debt is by inflating the "value" of that which that single $ was loaned against, which requires more borrowing, which leads to more interest, which requires economic policy to re-value shit (write-downs) etc... So for me the primary driver is the issuance of money as a means of valuation. Someone is always gonna have to have the shitty end of the stick debt wise and therefore we'll end up those who know how to dodge the shitty end. Tis a seriously fooked way of valuing effort/production etc...

Oldrider threw up The Guernsey Experiment as a way of negating inflation and interest by giving the money a timestamp for use. Interesting theory that seemed to work in practice until the banks stepped in. T'would make a $ worth a $ and housing materials/land/labor could be set prices. This would probably lead to a much less complicated financial system and likely a fuckload less compliance costs etc... Still though, there'll always be that race to the bottom somewhere or other.

I think adding dollars into circulation would work perfectly ok as long as it is limited to the increase in national product (not productivity) and that the increase in product is measured net of retired product (such as broken or functional but abandoned product that goes to the tip). This would mean that in some years money would be added (but fuck all) and other years money would have to be taken out of circulation. Then the amount of money will always match the value of product and the dollar wouldn't devalue/product price wouldn't inflate. The form of the money doesn't matter as long as it can't easily be counterfeited and isn't a finite resource (like gold). We could even go back to wooden tally sticks :lol:

slowpoke

15th September 2013, 16:11

I never said or implied

It's OK to invest in land and force up land costs, but it's not ok to invest in housing?

Eh?! How else do you interpret this:

"Forcing people to sell land cheaper than the market will pay would ruin some people and would be unfair to those who have invested. It would be interfering directly with the market to create an artificial impediment to natural market forces."

:brick:

Communities can own houses. They can be tax exempt (as they don't invest for profit). If a community can't provide housing to cater for an increasing worker population (that can't afford local housing prices), then there are Hotels, Motels, Boarding houses etc which can grow to meet demand (they are businesses and pay taxes on all aspects of potential profit). If not, then growth through centralisation will stall and imo that is not a negative.

Jeezus, what are we, a kibbutz now? How do communities go about building/buying property? Who's gonna pay for that? Council Rates are exhorbitant already and most people are battling to pay for their own house let alone pay to house other people. And when was the last time you stayed in a Motel/Hotel etc? It's a helluva lot more expensive than any current rental that's for sure.

flyingcrocodile46

15th September 2013, 16:21

Jeezus, what are we, a kibbutz now? How do communities go about building/buying property? Who's gonna pay for that? Council Rates are exhorbitant already and most people are battling to pay for their own house let alone pay to house other people. And when was the last time you stayed in a Motel/Hotel etc? It's a helluva lot more expensive than any current rental that's for sure.

Communities already buy and own properties and they spend hundreds of millions on less worthy shit, incl entertainment.

Rent

About three months ago

Yes $160 a night for 2 people is, but it could have been $50 (as a day rate and less on a monthly rate) which isn't out of line with rental rates.

Madness

15th September 2013, 17:13

And when was the last time you stayed in a Motel/Hotel etc? It's a helluva lot more expensive than any current rental that's for sure.

I stay in motels a lot for work. $90 per night for a tidy yet run-of-the-mill single bedroom unit is attainable in most North Island towns & cities. I rent in Auckland and up until recently was paying a pretty median-priced $450 per week for 3 bedrooms with a double gargre, nothing flash & in the burbs. When you consider that for $90 per night in a motel you're getting free electricity, water, milk & laundry done (not to mention the furniture) the difference isn't that staggering when comparing to $65 per night for 3-bedrooms, full kitchen & a gargre by the time you add electricity, water & laundry.

Auckland is pretty fucked if you're not already on the ladder.

mashman

15th September 2013, 19:08

I think adding dollars into circulation would work perfectly ok as long as it is limited to the increase in national product (not productivity) and that the increase in product is measured net of retired product (such as broken or functional but abandoned product that goes to the tip). This would mean that in some years money would be added (but fuck all) and other years money would have to be taken out of circulation. Then the amount of money will always match the value of product and the dollar wouldn't devalue/product price wouldn't inflate. The form of the money doesn't matter as long as it can't easily be counterfeited and isn't a finite resource (like gold). We could even go back to wooden tally sticks :lol:

Other than "printing" more money (virtual or not), which is an infinite resource, I can't see anything changing other than a shifting of the deckchairs. The same social issues will remain. The same corporate structures and philosophy will remain. The same value will remain (just a different "currency"). The same people will remain in power. So what really changes by changing the currency? We've tried it for an awful long time. The system has failed. It limits what can be achieved. For example:

We need more houses. They're too expensive for some where "currency" is the requirement for building the property. The manpower is there, as are the physical resources for building the houses. What's the limiting factor? It's not how much "currency" people get paid, because inflation/interest rates will ensure that prices will always rise and when you tag on a little (a little, tui) bit of speculation in order to obtain more "currency", the issue becomes obvious.

The pisser is, we could house 20+ thousand people within a year. Whilst it may not be the flashiest of digs, a roof over your head is a roof over your head. The problem with not being able to achieve what I'm about to offer as a "solution" is due to "currency". Quite simply, we need to convert "useless" warehouses and offices into housing. These places already have the required utilities, so the main problem will be manpower and logistics in regards to partitioning and training. How many people could work from home? I know plenty who could and given the tech available for instant communication and information flow, it is more than possible to free up offices to convert into flats/houses. Again, the main stumbling block is "currency". The insane bit, it's all very possible.

blue rider

15th September 2013, 19:09

Not sure about the approach, but I agree with making some sort of incentive to get businesses to spread out of Auckland. Too much focus of Auckland being the be-all and end-all.

-Indy

so good it needed to be repeated.
there are a lot of businesses the could be 'incentivise' to locate elsewhere in NZ to provide much needed jobs. But for some reason some think that forcing another 1 million odd peeps into AKL is an awesome idea.

go figure.

flyingcrocodile46

15th September 2013, 19:45

Other than "printing" more money (virtual or not), which is an infinite resource, I can't see anything changing other than a shifting of the deckchairs. The same social issues will remain. The same corporate structures and philosophy will remain. The same value will remain (just a different "currency"). The same people will remain in power. So what really changes by changing the currency? We've tried it for an awful long time. The system has failed. It limits what can be achieved. For example:

We need more houses. They're too expensive for some where "currency" is the requirement for building the property. The manpower is there, as are the physical resources for building the houses. What's the limiting factor? It's not how much "currency" people get paid, because inflation/interest rates will ensure that prices will always rise and when you tag on a little (a little, tui) bit of speculation in order to obtain more "currency", the issue becomes obvious.

The pisser is, we could house 20+ thousand people within a year. Whilst it may not be the flashiest of digs, a roof over your head is a roof over your head. The problem with not being able to achieve what I'm about to offer as a "solution" is due to "currency". Quite simply, we need to convert "useless" warehouses and offices into housing. These places already have the required utilities, so the main problem will be manpower and logistics in regards to partitioning and training. How many people could work from home? I know plenty who could and given the tech available for instant communication and information flow, it is more than possible to free up offices to convert into flats/houses. Again, the main stumbling block is "currency". The insane bit, it's all very possible.

TLDNR :lol:

Shit! I'm a busy man and don't have time to jump, tear down or side step all the hurdles you throw up.

But the short answer is that IMO, progress to your objectives (yes read your blog) might realistically be made through a gradual introduction of pathways to utopia and a gradual weaning off of our addiction to casino chips. But you have to wean us off or it will all fall into anarchy and rebirth as a clone striving for the golden age that preceded the dark ages from which we will emerge.

mashman

15th September 2013, 19:52

TLDNR :lol:

Shit! I'm a busy man and don't have time to jump, tear down or side step all the hurdles you throw up.

But the short answer is that IMO, progress to your objectives (yes read your blog) might realistically be made through a gradual introduction of pathways to utopia and a gradual weaning off of our addiction to casino chips. But you have to wean us off or it will all fall into anarchy and rebirth as a clone striving for the golden age that preceded the dark ages from which we will emerge.

:killingme

I'm not doing any of this to make people feel bad. I'm doing it because I am sure that 99% of people really don't want to make bad situations worse and really will feel bad about themselves when (if ever) they eventually do find out the truth and realise (in hindsight from lessons in history) that given how obvious it was, they really should have known better and further realise they abdicated responsibility to even pretend they cared enough to be as fully informed as practically possible.

It isn't enough that governments must answer to the people.

The people have to answer to themselves and each other in respect to their individual duty as human beings to be well enough informed to know what their governments are doing and the consequences of those doings, and they must voice their concerns openly that they might either be satisfactorily allayed or properly considered by the community and acted on accordingly. NOT SILENCED

As a species we have a very poor track record in this respect and incomprehensible human suffering is the result of our failure. If it is to change, we must make a concerted (and yes, uncomfortable) never ceasing effort to not only reject the status quo, but to never stop striving to improve on and be more responsible and accountable to and for each other.

flyingcrocodile46

15th September 2013, 20:31

:killingme

I'm not doing any of this to make people feel bad. I'm doing it because I am sure that 99% of people really don't want to make bad situations worse and really will feel bad about themselves when (if ever) they eventually do find out the truth and realise (in hindsight from lessons in history) that given how obvious it was, they really should have known better and further realise they abdicated responsibility to even pretend they cared enough to be as fully informed as practically possible.

It isn't enough that governments must answer to the people.

The people have to answer to themselves and each other in respect to their individual duty as human beings to be well enough informed to know what their governments are doing and the consequences of those doings, and they must voice their concerns openly that they might either be satisfactorily allayed or properly considered by the community and acted on accordingly. NOT SILENCED

As a species we have a very poor track record in this respect and incomprehensible human suffering is the result of our failure. If it is to change, we must make a concerted (and yes, uncomfortable) never ceasing effort to not only reject the status quo, but to never stop striving to improve on and be more responsible and accountable to and for each other.

LMAO :laugh:

Wanker. I said I was busy. Got MotoGp distractions to immerse myself in. Sooon :whistle:

mashman

15th September 2013, 20:47

LMAO :laugh:

Wanker. I said I was busy. Got MotoGp distractions to immerse myself in. Sooon :whistle:

:devil2: you were watchin the superbikes then. Decent race.

Pointless dodgin hurdles that you keep throwing in your own path ;).

R-Soul

27th September 2013, 17:14

so good it needed to be repeated.
there are a lot of businesses the could be 'incentivise' to locate elsewhere in NZ to provide much needed jobs. But for some reason some think that forcing another 1 million odd peeps into AKL is an awesome idea.

go figure.

Faaark! At 2600 posts, I am very proud of the debate that I started.

Secondly, I also think tha the government should offer tax incentives for businesses (and hence people) to relocate to smaller villages and towns where economies are dying and places are ghost towns. if people move out of Auckland, house prices drop.

Maybe try and incentivise the building of a development corridor from Auckland to Whanagrei, or Auckland to Tauranga?

mashman

27th September 2013, 17:54

Faaark! At 2600 posts, I am very proud of the debate that I started.

Secondly, I also think tha the government should offer tax incentives for businesses (and hence people) to relocate to smaller villages and towns where economies are dying and places are ghost towns. if people move out of Auckland, house prices drop.

Maybe try and incentivise the building of a development corridor from Auckland to Whanagrei, or Auckland to Tauranga?

Why move your business if all of your business is in the city? Coz that's have to be some serious incentive.

Ocean1

27th September 2013, 19:22

'Bout fknig time... http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9219065/Fletcher-Buildings-role-investigated

flyingcrocodile46

28th September 2013, 00:59

'Bout fknig time... http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9219065/Fletcher-Buildings-role-investigated

Yup! I was involved with Rikki Merchants 20+ years ago and they had already suffered a tariff increase due to the opposition (now Fletchers) lodging complaints with the Commerce commission alleging that the Thai Gypsum manufacture was dumping in the NZ market and the result was that Rikki Merchants were selling below the local production cost. The fact that RM were then immediately undersold by our monopoly made a lie of that. Still they wouldn't go away and pencils were sharpened again. Then they went back to the CC with the same complaint and the tariff was increased, and so it continued. I lost count after the third time. I subsequently found out that they were selling NZ gib in the Islands for less than here in NZ (after paying to ship it there). Then there was the market dumping Fletchers carried out in Oz as part of their successful strategy to intimidate CSR into abandoning their product expansion plans for NZ. I hope they get busted into pieces.

Woodman

28th September 2013, 08:18

'Bout fknig time... http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9219065/Fletcher-Buildings-role-investigated

Agreed, what about timber supply to our own domestic market? Theres a fair bit of dodgy stuff happening there too from what I have heard.

Road kill

28th September 2013, 08:58

I just wonder where it's going to end.

We've now taken our place in Tokoroa off the market,who might of bought it can now not afford the deposit.

The place up here that we had our eye on,we can now not afford the deposit on.

So we take our place off market and another place for young starters and their families is taken out of the loop.

Why does our gov't hate people so much ?

Fuck me they used to be people themselves.:facepalm:

BMWST?

28th September 2013, 09:00

Agreed, what about timber supply to our own domestic market? Theres a fair bit of dodgy stuff happening there too from what I have heard.

you would probably be surprised at what a prenail plant has to pay for 90x45

BMWST?

28th September 2013, 09:11

Ocean1

28th September 2013, 09:34

I subsequently found out that they were selling NZ gib in the Islands for less than here in NZ (after paying to ship it there). Then there was the market dumping Fletchers carried out in Oz as part of their successful strategy to intimidate CSR into abandoning their product expansion plans for NZ.

I was never inside the industry to see the details, didn't need to be, I just saw them selling NZ Gib in Perth 25% lower than NZ prices.

I hope they get busted into pieces.

Well, according to antitrust precedent centuries old that's exactly what should happen, monopolies are forced to sell strategically important business. Important to maintain a competitive free market, that is, as defined by the commission.

And I'd dearly love to see that happen, but it won't.

Agreed, what about timber supply to our own domestic market? Theres a fair bit of dodgy stuff happening there too from what I have heard.

I dare say you're right. Again, to check for price gouging ignore the inside data and go straight to the market prices. In the case of building timber, though I doubt there's an off-shore comparable product, our treatment standards are probably unique. You should be able to break the cost-to-market down, though, and any part of the manufacturing or logistics process that isn't exposed to competition, (often through standards compliance requirements defined by the monopoly holder in the first place) will certainly be where the extra costs will be claimed to have been accrued.

mossy1200

28th September 2013, 09:36

i dont understand why they have done this....isnt it going to make the demand even worse....the few houses that are affordable will be under immense demand...prices will go up

We just got our first house settled Yesterday.
There was a 3 month delay on the COC for the garage and deck.
Few more weeks delay and we wouldn't own a home and would have had to continue renting.

$100k plus deposit for first home is a little hard to get.
All the new laws will do is trap people in rentals and as the rich can see the potential profit margins in rental properties get better they will buy out the affordable homes and charge bigger amounts to rent them.

We couldn't even get our Kiwisaver out due to me owning a percentage of a 60k house 15years ago.
More people remove kiwisaver money on hardship grounds than first home.

Woodman

28th September 2013, 10:24

Road kill

28th September 2013, 12:10

Was talking to a guy who got a promotion which required a move to a different town, but if he sells his house the equity in it will not cover a deposit for a house in the new town so he is now commuting for almost 3 hours per day. Company car and all that, but its only a matter of time before the bean counters put the hard word on hm about fuel/servicing costs etc.

Tough out their for those starting out.

That's where we are,own there but work here.
House is now outside the reach of the type of people we would liked to have seen it go to and as of last week we now couldn't buy up here if our place did sell.

An older mate of mine just bought a cheap do it up and only got in by the skin of his teeth.
If not for that he would of been condemed to live the rest of his life in the caravan park he spent 5 years in while saving the money for what he has now.

No doubt the rent will now go up on the place we live in up here.:angry:

slowpoke

28th September 2013, 17:55

Woodman

28th September 2013, 18:39

Sorry, but I don't understand that. If the increase in pay didn't cover the increase in his cost of living why did he accept the position?

Has very small equity in his house, and if he sells won't have enough for a deposit to buy a new one with the new bank rules that are now in place. Promotion was a step up, not a lotto ticket.

mashman

28th September 2013, 18:59

Anyone considered that this may be Basel III at work?

Winston001

28th September 2013, 20:27

Anyone considered that this may be Basel III at work?

Of course, and rightly so.

slowpoke

28th September 2013, 20:30

Has very small equity in his house, and if he sells won't have enough for a deposit to buy a new one with the new bank rules that are now in place. Promotion was a step up, not a lotto ticket.

But he made the choice didn't he, no-one had a gun to his head, and he chose a promotion over housing security. Nothing wrong with that but at the end of the day it's his choice.

Ya never know, not being mortgaged to the eyeballs may well be a good thing in coming months: The State's have yet to taper/cut off their quantitative easing program, yet must do so very soon as they are effectively broke. When they do we could be in for GFC MkII, only worse as no countries have any money left for stimulus programs. Imagine the poor guy above, stretched tighter than a guitar string paying for a $500k mortgage on a house that's just massively devalued overnight.......

Winston001

28th September 2013, 20:33

Has very small equity in his house, and if he sells won't have enough for a deposit to buy a new one with the new bank rules that are now in place. Promotion was a step up, not a lotto ticket.

Yes, these days people often need to move or else become unemployed. Not much of a choice.

Got a mate who is in his 50s. He is a scientist paid off the house but doesn't earn a lot. Now he has to sell up and move or try the brave world of being a "consultant".

Winston001

28th September 2013, 21:07

We've now taken our place in Tokoroa off the market,who might of bought it can now not afford the deposit.

So we take our place off market and another place for young starters and their families is taken out of the loop.

Why does our gov't hate people so much ?

That must be pretty frustrating for you and certainly not your fault.

The problem is the price of housing has got out of sync - the average house now costs about 6x the average family income. Historically it was 3.5x income - houses are way above what they should be.

As for equity requirements, up until 20 years ago 80% mortgage loans were standard. The only people who could borrow 90% were those on low incomes and the loan was from the Housing Corporation at 9%. The market rate at that time was 14%.

The Reserve Bank does not hate anybody. They are trying to slow house price rises by requiring banks to limit 90% loans: these are still allowed but less of them.

The Reserve Bank is also (correctly IMHO) worried some banks are getting into risky territory with all the high ratio lending. Bank failure is not good for anyone.

Brian d marge

29th September 2013, 03:14

Winey winey ,,!,,winey,
Come over here
No fat tarts , on my way home from a date with a 23 yr old and a milf, they paid the bill

The house 100 m2 is new and 0.16 % of my income , this means my wife can be a full time mother

Hahahahààaà your life is shit ,,,,,suck my cock
I'm OK bhyatch

Stephen

PS buy motorbikes , cause they pay me stupid money:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

Indiana_Jones

29th September 2013, 13:39

Jantar

29th September 2013, 15:01

The new loan to equity rules only apply to banks. There are other lenders out there who will still provide mortgage finance with smaller deposits.
e.g. http://www.resimac.co.nz/

Brian d marge

29th September 2013, 23:52

Sweet as, giz a job lol

-Indy

Jizz mopper in a nudie booth $ 8.50 an hour

Stephen

avgas

30th September 2013, 10:46

Anyone considered that this may be Basel III at work?
Yep. But with house prices where they are - houses are almost pure liquid. Ours sold in 6 days - I can't even forex to go liquid in that time.
I do laugh a little at the people crying about the 20% min standard. Morons never did the math.

Say you buy your first house @ 5% and pay it off over 30 years.........your going to have to sell for millions to make your money back. So in turn you make the market worse purely because you didn't save as much as you could beforehand. Idiots think these days you can save for a year a buy a house - you can't afford it if that is what you think it takes.......doesn't matter who gives you the loan.
Deposit takes about 7 years (roughly) so if you haven't been saving 7 years. You can't afford it.

Indiana_Jones

30th September 2013, 11:13

Say you buy your first house @ 5% and pay it off over 30 years.........your going to have to sell for millions to make your money back. So in turn you make the market worse purely because you didn't save as much as you could beforehand.

This is one of the problems with houses, people seem to think they're entitled to make a profit off it.

One house we looked at was bought by the current owners before the 'GFC' and had paid top dollar for it. The house has just got back to it's market value now, but they wanted more than that as they had paid 'X amount' and thus we have to make a profit.

Of course saying that it's worth what someone is willing to pay etc.

-Indy

avgas

30th September 2013, 16:06

This is one of the problems with houses, people seem to think they're entitled to make a profit off it.

One house we looked at was bought by the current owners before the 'GFC' and had paid top dollar for it. The house has just got back to it's market value now, but they wanted more than that as they had paid 'X amount' and thus we have to make a profit.

Of course saying that it's worth what someone is willing to pay etc.

-Indy
Don't forget the $20,000+ increase just to cover the agents fee's. So if you buy a house today, sell it tomorrow - its now $20,000 more expensive just to cut even.

Winston001

30th September 2013, 18:28

Yep. But with house prices where they are - houses are almost pure liquid. Ours sold in 6 days - I can't even forex to go liquid in that time.

Good on you but this illustrates the complete disconnect between Auckland and the rest of NZ, (although Christchurch is an anomaly).

The average time to sell across the whole country is 35 days. Manawatu 55 days, Southland 60 days, and Taranaki 50 days. In reality houses sit unsold in many places for months.

I don't know how we change but it seems incredibly inefficient to have houses going begging in some places while people take on telephone number mortgages to buy an old or very basic house in one area.

Say you buy your first house @ 5% and pay it off over 30 years.........your going to have to sell for millions to make your money back. So in turn you make the market worse purely because you didn't save as much as you could beforehand....
Deposit takes about 7 years...

True but oddly nobody ever seems to point out this basic fact.

One thing: everyone needs to live somewhere so inevitably they pay rent. Once you are settled might as well pay a mortgage.

mashman

30th September 2013, 18:46

Yep. But with house prices where they are - houses are almost pure liquid. Ours sold in 6 days - I can't even forex to go liquid in that time.
I do laugh a little at the people crying about the 20% min standard. Morons never did the math.

Say you buy your first house @ 5% and pay it off over 30 years.........your going to have to sell for millions to make your money back. So in turn you make the market worse purely because you didn't save as much as you could beforehand. Idiots think these days you can save for a year a buy a house - you can't afford it if that is what you think it takes.......doesn't matter who gives you the loan.
Deposit takes about 7 years (roughly) so if you haven't been saving 7 years. You can't afford it.

You'll get something decent for yer cash in the US by the looks of things ;). A nice white picket fence in the burbs.

There's that problem still lingering though. By the time you've saved 200k, you end up needing 300k for the deposit. One thing I do wonder, is that 20% based on the principle or the amount that will have been paid over those 30 years? I ask as once they have my 200k, don't they have a debt for approx 700k? After all they expect me to pay off the interest before I pay off the principle, on some form of sliding scale. I believe I start paying 50% principle and 50% interest at about the half way point of the mortgage.

Ocean1

30th September 2013, 19:57

One thing I do wonder, is that 20% based on the principle or the amount that will have been paid over those 30 years?

Neither, it's 20% of purchase price.

I ask as once they have my 200k, don't they have a debt for approx 700k?

No. You have a debt of whatever the mortgage is for. If you paid it back in a year you'd be paying back around 105% of the total loan.

And yes, table mortgages are weighted to pay more interest up front, more principle later. You don't have to have a table mortgage, but the cost will be different for other forms of loan.

unstuck

30th September 2013, 20:07

Should be signing up for house number 2 tomorrow, already has tenants who want to stay and are paying $250 pwk. Now I get to be the landlord from hell.:devil2::headbang::headbang:

mashman

30th September 2013, 21:37

Neither, it's 20% of purchase price.

No. You have a debt of whatever the mortgage is for. If you paid it back in a year you'd be paying back around 105% of the total loan.

And yes, table mortgages are weighted to pay more interest up front, more principle later. You don't have to have a table mortgage, but the cost will be different for other forms of loan.

The purchase price? So I borrow 200k to buy a property at 500k and the bank has to keep 20% of the 500k and not of the 200k principle that I borrowed?

Providing your mortgage hasn't been sold on?

True.

Woodman

30th September 2013, 21:53

The purchase price? So I borrow 200k to buy a property at 500k and the bank has to keep 20% of the 500k and not of the 200k principle that I borrowed?

Providing your mortgage hasn't been sold on?

True.

You are confusing the living shitbags outta me.

If you have 20% deposit on a $500,000 house that is $100'000, so you only pay the interest per annum on the rest which is $400'000 less any principal paid depending on the type of mortgage. The deposit goes to the old owner of the house along wth the rest of the amount borrowed as the agreed purchase price of the house.

Or have I missed your point (possibly) again?

mashman

30th September 2013, 22:09

You are confusing the living shitbags outta me.

If you have 20% deposit on a $500,000 house that is $100'000, so you only pay the interest per annum on the rest which is $400'000 less any principal paid depending on the type of mortgage. The deposit goes to the old owner of the house along wth the rest of the amount borrowed as the agreed purchase price of the house.

Or have I missed your point (possibly) again?

:rofl: I'm confusing myself enough at the moment. Was just wondering how much the bank would need to hold, but I'm off in captain tangent land in regards to Basel III and can't even blame beer... a loss of an hours sleep perhaps :shifty:. I must be having my period, yeah, that's it.

No you haven't missed my point. I have :yes:

BMWST?

30th September 2013, 22:20

Good on you but this illustrates the complete disconnect between Auckland and the rest of NZ, (although Christchurch is an anomaly).

The average time to sell across the whole country is 35 days. Manawatu 55 days, Southland 60 days, and Taranaki 50 days. In reality houses sit unsold in many places for months.

I don't know how we change but it seems incredibly inefficient to have houses going begging in some places while people take on telephone number mortgages to buy an old or very basic house in one area.

True but oddly nobody ever seems to point out this basic fact.

One thing: everyone needs to live somewhere so inevitably they pay rent. Once you are settled might as well pay a mortgage.

true but the asking price is relevant .When we sold our last house we did some sums and came up with a figure we needed to go to the next one.It must have been the right number.House on Market Sunday afternoon for 1st open home 2pm .Sold Monday evening,a t 6 pm.Wellington

Ocean1

1st October 2013, 10:03

:rofl: I'm confusing myself enough at the moment. Was just wondering how much the bank would need to hold, but I'm off in captain tangent land in regards to Basel III and can't even blame beer... a loss of an hours sleep perhaps :shifty:. I must be having my period, yeah, that's it.

No you haven't missed my point. I have :yes:

You're obviously upset about Basel III, but as usual you don't quite know why.

It's easy, the GFC was caused by banks lending money to dodgy bastards that, unsurprisingly failed to pay it back.

In steps govt and says: Thou shalt not lend money to dodgy bastards, and thou shalt not wrap the dodgy loans in bright colours and flog them to even dodgier bastards in order to avoid the fallout. And to make sure you don't here's a few new rules for you.

It's essentially the opposite to what the US did to cause their share of the GDC, and that alone makes it a good idea.

Now fuck off and do some work you lazy dodgy bastard.

Morcs

1st October 2013, 10:12

slow down the population swelling. Less need for more housing. Stop immigration. Especially to the ones who dont speak english, and the island quotas. unless they are actually bringing money into the economy rather than taking it via prison accommodation and benefits.
.

mashman

1st October 2013, 11:31

You're obviously upset about Basel III, but as usual you don't quite know why.

It's easy, the GFC was caused by banks lending money to dodgy bastards that, unsurprisingly failed to pay it back.

In steps govt and says: Thou shalt not lend money to dodgy bastards, and thou shalt not wrap the dodgy loans in bright colours and flog them to even dodgier bastards in order to avoid the fallout. And to make sure you don't here's a few new rules for you.

It's essentially the opposite to what the US did to cause their share of the GDC, and that alone makes it a good idea.

Now fuck off and do some work you lazy dodgy bastard.

Yeah yeah... it was my period.

avgas

1st October 2013, 11:37

You'll get something decent for yer cash in the US by the looks of things ;). A nice white picket fence in the burbs.

There's that problem still lingering though. By the time you've saved 200k, you end up needing 300k for the deposit. One thing I do wonder, is that 20% based on the principle or the amount that will have been paid over those 30 years? I ask as once they have my 200k, don't they have a debt for approx 700k? After all they expect me to pay off the interest before I pay off the principle, on some form of sliding scale. I believe I start paying 50% principle and 50% interest at about the half way point of the mortgage.
Wife quite liked this http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/9-Bogert-Ave-White-Plains-NY-10606/32979045_zpid/ its in a good neighbourhood, fucking huge......thank god power is cheap there. Our crapbox in Auckland sold for $641.......and was about 1/3rd size of this. So yeah bit disproportionate.

Good on you but this illustrates the complete disconnect between Auckland and the rest of NZ, (although Christchurch is an anomaly).
The average time to sell across the whole country is 35 days. Manawatu 55 days, Southland 60 days, and Taranaki 50 days. In reality houses sit unsold in many places for months.

I don't know how we change but it seems incredibly inefficient to have houses going begging in some places while people take on telephone number mortgages to buy an old or very basic house in one area.

True but oddly nobody ever seems to point out this basic fact.
One thing: everyone needs to live somewhere so inevitably they pay rent. Once you are settled might as well pay a mortgage.
Unfortunately that is life. People seem to think because my love shack in Auckland sold in 6 days for a gazillion dollars that a similar property will sell in Greymouth for proportionate price.
Failing to account for the one thing every market needs. Buyers. If you can't sell a house for $120,000 (marked down $50K) in Chicago......how can you justify a mark-up of $50K for a house in Gore?

10 years ago I just about bought a place in Putaruru (investment only). Back then you could buy it for $60K. Same place now would be $300K+. In comparison I looked at Sandringham in Auckland - $250K. Same place is now $1M. So Auckland up by 4 and selling straight away.......Putaruru up by 6 - and taking longer to sell.
Its not rocket science. Drop the putaruru house price down, to the price the PEOPLE will pay and it will sell. People think Auckland is crazy - nah its just a saturated market. If you market isn't saturated how can you expect a big price?

:rofl: I'm confusing myself enough at the moment. Was just wondering how much the bank would need to hold, but I'm off in captain tangent land in regards to Basel III and can't even blame beer... a loss of an hours sleep perhaps :shifty:. I must be having my period, yeah, that's it.

No you haven't missed my point. I have :yes:
Basel basically meant that if banks had loans for assets - and the asset was not liquid, they had to put liquidity aside to cover some of the debt.

So if you have a house in Gore, worth $100K, mortgaged for $80, and they can't sell it tomorrow for $80......they had to have an additional $20K (not your deposit) to cover their ass if their debt collectors came calling.

i.e. bank chases you and gets house, lenders chase bank and get house + $20K.
Rather than what happened with U.S. sub-prime which was....
bank chase you, and gets house valued at 1/10 of the debt (you still owe 9/10s of debt), lenders chase bank gets house and bank still owes 9/10ths of debt - which you can't pay. Whole market turns into chain-gang owing the guy in front. With no assets left to sell.

Morcs

1st October 2013, 14:17

It seems in times like this, anyone selling or buying in this climate is only thinking of capital gains - so anyone interested in simply buying a house as a place to live gets shafted. People need to focus more on building equity - starting with a deposit.

mashman

1st October 2013, 18:02

Ocean1

1st October 2013, 18:48

Awwwww that's nice. Free money from your caring sharing govt if you meet the criteria and buy a former state house. (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/govt-boost-provincial-first-home-224742475--spt.html)... and who says you get nothin for free.

I see that. Not a bad idea, especially as most of them will be in the smaller centres.

Think of it as a "Get out of Town" bonus.

blue rider

1st October 2013, 20:22

I see that. Not a bad idea, especially as most of them will be in the smaller centres.

Think of it as a "Get out of Town" bonus.

any jobs coming with that "get out of town" bonus?

avgas

1st October 2013, 22:00

any jobs coming with that "get out of town" bonus?
Fixing up other peoples state houses <_<

mashman

1st October 2013, 22:10

Fixing up other peoples state houses <_<

heh, all 500 over the next 4 years. That should keep 10's of thousands of people in a job across the country for like a billion years.

Ocean1

2nd October 2013, 07:23

any jobs coming with that "get out of town" bonus?

There's always jobs for those that want them.

Fixing up other peoples state houses <_<

heh, all 500 over the next 4 years. That should keep 10's of thousands of people in a job across the country for like a billion years.

Certainly keeps my boy busy. Very busy in fact, you've got no idea how delicate and fragile those bloody state houses are, you can kick holes in the walls! And the windows break at the slightest stone!

mashman

2nd October 2013, 07:55

Certainly keeps my boy busy. Very busy in fact, you've got no idea how delicate and fragile those bloody state houses are, you can kick holes in the walls! And the windows break at the slightest stone!

You seem to be assuming that I don't know what a state house looks like from the inside, let alone whether I have lived in one or not. Wrong on both counts.

Ocean1

2nd October 2013, 08:27

You seem to be assuming that I don't know what a state house looks like from the inside, let alone whether I have lived in one or not. Wrong on both counts.

You're reading shit that's not there again, what on earth makes you think I give a fuck?

mashman

2nd October 2013, 08:32

You're reading shit that's not there again, what on earth makes you think I give a fuck?

you've got no idea how delicate and fragile those bloody state houses are

Take your pills son.

avgas

2nd October 2013, 09:47

heh, all 500 over the next 4 years. That should keep 10's of thousands of people in a job across the country for like a billion years.
Don't see why not - I have seen the same piece of road repaired in Northland every 2 months..........the roading vehicles double the number of cars on it in that period.
(It's 100m from boys homes.....and they don't like to travel to where the road is actually damaged because then they won't be home by 5........and govt pays regardless)

avgas

2nd October 2013, 09:50

Certainly keeps my boy busy. Very busy in fact, you've got no idea how delicate and fragile those bloody state houses are, you can kick holes in the walls! And the windows break at the slightest stone!
When raising pigs. It's best to leave them in their mess so they no not to mess it up in future. True story. My Kunekunes were some of the tidiest animals I had.

Ocean1

2nd October 2013, 13:36

When raising pigs. It's best to leave them in their mess so they no not to mess it up in future. True story. My Kunekunes were some of the tidiest animals I had.

My daughter owns her home for the first time a while ago, it'd been a rental and the tennants had left it a bit untidy. So the boy gave her a hand to redo the bathroom, and she's painted doors and wallpapered a few rooms.

And NOW she understands. I turned up the other day with crayons for the resident rugrat, and you could see the anxiety immediately :laugh: She couldn't say a word, at not much older she'd painted her own bedroom walls with some enamel she found in the garage. She's actually careful not to drag the vacuum cleaner hose around the doorframes, and she gets upset when I laugh at her. :laugh:

Brian d marge

3rd October 2013, 02:50

mashman

11th October 2013, 09:20

Could always buy a house for a quid in Liverpool. (http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/owner-first-1-home-gets-074932441.html)

Ocean1

11th October 2013, 14:18

Could always buy a house for a quid in Liverpool. (http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/owner-first-1-home-gets-074932441.html)

K'nell, you bleat about expensive housing in Orks, that's hideously overpriced!

mashman

11th October 2013, 18:22

K'nell, you bleat about expensive housing in Orks, that's hideously overpriced!

:rofl: that city produces a by far better class of citizen ;)

Ocean1

12th October 2013, 07:46

:rofl: that city produces a by far better class of citizen ;)

Aye, better to stay in that city.

The only useful scouser I ever met was a sparky. I taught him to read.

mashman

12th October 2013, 08:17

Aye, better to stay in that city.

The only useful scouser I ever met was a sparky. I taught him to read.

And leave all of that knowledge in a single city? Bit silly.

I'm more than happy to take you for a pint :D. Thanks for teaching a fellow scouser to read... in return I'll teach you how to be a real human being.

Jantar

12th October 2013, 09:18

any jobs coming with that "get out of town" bonus?

There is a much greater chance of getting a job by moving out of Auckland. According to http://dol.govt.nz/publications/lmr/reports/regional-mar-13/index.asp the unemployment rate in the various regions are:
Northland 9.9%
Manawatu 8%
Gisborne Hawkes Bay 8%
Auckland 7.6%
Bay of Plenty 7.4%
Wellington 7.1%
Waikato 6.1%
Canterbury 5.2%
Nelson Malborough 5%
Taranaki 4.8%
Otago 4.8%
Southland 4.4%

So there are only 3 regions with a higher unemployment rate than Auckland, and 8 regions with a lower unemployment rate. In general, the further you move away from Auckland, the better chances of finding work. Add to that the fact that you can buy a house in Southland outright for the same price as the deposit on a house in Auckland, and it isn't house prices that are causing the issue, its the blinkers that Aucklanders are wearing that stops them looking south of the Bombay Hills.

Ocean1

12th October 2013, 13:51

And leave all of that knowledge in a single city? Bit silly.

I'm more than happy to take you for a pint :D. Thanks for teaching a fellow scouser to read... in return I'll teach you how to be a real human being.

I didn't fuck with the sequence of that wee bit of history, dude, the man was a qualified electrician BEFORE I taught him to read, in London.

And nice guy that he was I'd suggest that the way he learned his trade stay where it was invented, right along with your ideas about what constitutes "Human".

Ocean1

12th October 2013, 13:53

There is a much greater chance of getting a job by moving out of Auckland.

Exactly. There are other "welfare towns", to be sure, but Orks is by far the largest.

Indiana_Jones

14th October 2013, 07:39

....its the blinkers that Aucklanders are wearing that stops them looking south of the Bombay Hills.

Isn't it just ocean south the Bombay Hills?

-Indy

mashman

14th October 2013, 08:13

I didn't fuck with the sequence of that wee bit of history, dude, the man was a qualified electrician BEFORE I taught him to read, in London.

And nice guy that he was I'd suggest that the way he learned his trade stay where it was invented, right along with your ideas about what constitutes "Human".

Wasn't suggesting you did and ain't surprised he learned the trade before reading at all.

Bwute.

Voltaire

14th October 2013, 14:17

Isn't it just ocean south the Bombay Hills?

-Indy

Can you get a Latte at these Bombay Hills you speak of?

Banditbandit

14th October 2013, 15:33

Isn't it just ocean south the Bombay Hills?

-Indy

Naa .. there's just a big grey smokey mess North of the Bombays ... until Orewa ...

Ocean1

6th November 2013, 18:56

Really? :wait:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/9367678/Building-material-competition-limited

mashman

6th November 2013, 19:00

Really? :wait:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/9367678/Building-material-competition-limited

Read that earlier and had a good chuckle. I wish them well with their goals :killingme

Brian d marge

6th November 2013, 19:42

It would still need permissions. 600 easily for a drain to be certified ( the cheque is in the post chch council)

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

Ocean1

7th November 2013, 06:15

Wonder if we'll ever see lower costs arising from this review...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9370859/Building-industry-needs-shake-up

HenryDorsetCase

14th November 2013, 15:16

I was interested in this article.

http://www.fastcoexist.com/3017309/this-impeccably-designed-20000-house-could-soon-be-yours

Winston001

14th November 2013, 19:03

Good find ma man. There are a few simple house designs available in NZ but they don't seem to get any traction. I'm flummoxed as to why.

http://www.dbh.govt.nz/simple-house-acceptable-solution

Edit: one reason I can think of is modest people feel uncomfortable in them. Habitat For Humanity built a clever eco-design house in Christchurch and the family chosen to buy the house turned it down. Why? The house looked futuristic in their eyes and much too flash - all of their friends and relatives lived in boxes. They feared being shunned. (http://www.dbh.govt.nz/simple-house-acceptable-solution)

Indiana_Jones

17th November 2013, 19:44

On that note, I have looked into container houses as an option. I'd be tempted to build one, but the council red tape costs far too much; Well far too much for a family on a single income.

-Indy

Winston001

17th November 2013, 20:13

Yes and that is tragic Indi. Local authorities are behind the curve when it comes to innovative buildings and I'm not sure how we can change that. Building inspectors 95% of the time see standard house specs and that is what they are used to dealing with - its what they know.

4% are architectually designed buildings and the architects realise they have to provide engineering specs so they do. The 1% of weird stuff they have no idea how to assess. But every council office knows about leaky buildings so the emotive response is refusal.

In large countries (by population) odd-ball designs such as container homes are known about and there are existing standards. So its not an impossible task to go ahead.

Frustrating eh.

Winston001

17th November 2013, 20:23

Some years ago we had a McRaeyway kitset home built and that proved to be an excellent choice. However the council insisted on an engineers design report for the roof trusses despite having already approved at least 30 houses with the same design in the last 5 years.

What a load of old codswallop.

This was a known and popular design from a reputable kitset manufacturer which had dealt with the council many times. I was bloody livid but lived with it because getting the house built was the most important thing.

Brian d marge

17th November 2013, 20:42

I ve always wanted an alternative home such as acob or earthship, but ,well try explaining that to a vogon
I take full responsability if it falls down

Stephen

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

Winston001

17th November 2013, 22:06

Ah yeah - but thats not much help to the person who buys it from you. Houses are supposed to endure through multiple generations of inhabitants. Otherwise they are called a tent.

Brian d marge

17th November 2013, 22:52

Ah yeah - but thats not much help to the person who buys it from you. Houses are supposed to endure through multiple generations of inhabitants. Otherwise they are called a tent.

not here they aren’t , you buy the land and the house is an extra

most of the house is recyclable and they are set up to bull them down and rebuild STILL cheaper than a leaky nz home !

I have some photos somewhere to a building they are pulling down ( near the size of Buckingham palace and not a whisper of dust or noise , but it will be gone and the ground levelled soon enough!!!

Stephen

Indiana_Jones

18th November 2013, 19:29

"Think tank the NZ Initiative is proposing the taxpayer - rather than developers and home buyers - pay councils for providing water and sewerage services to new houses as part of a suite of measures to improve home affordability."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11159041

-Indy

Brian d marge

18th November 2013, 20:28

BMWST?

18th November 2013, 21:09

jesus we already pay...twice,as taxpayers and ratepayers!

Indiana_Jones

18th November 2013, 21:54

Pretty much, you're still gonna end up paying for it, just not directly lol.

-Indy

kevfromcoro

18th November 2013, 21:58

jesus we already pay...twice,as taxpayers and ratepayers!

plus GST.......

Woodman

18th November 2013, 22:09

jesus we already pay...twice,as taxpayers and ratepayers!

Three times if you take into account our property values going down because of the increase in cheaper houses.

Brian d marge

18th November 2013, 23:08

Got to hand it to them, they can fk better than my wife, well and truely fked by the time they have finished
Stephen

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

superjackal

30th November 2013, 18:18

This may have been covered but cost to build is the heart of evil at the moment not house prices. You're better off shifting than improving. Fucking nuts.

98tls

30th November 2013, 18:30

This may have been covered but cost to build is the heart of evil at the moment not house prices. You're better off shifting than improving. Fucking nuts.

My partner and i have been doing up an old place for years,best thing i ever did was years back become a member of the local working mens club at a cost of $25 a year,since then theres been a constant trail of retired builders/plumbers/electricians tilers etc that have a lifetime of experience and are happy to work for $20 an hour and a cuppa.:niceone:

mashman

8th December 2013, 17:48

Ocean1

8th December 2013, 18:49

Plans for incredible $10b 'floating city' (http://nz.totaltravel.yahoo.com/news-opinions/news/a/-/20168481/plans-for-incredible-10b-floating-city/) How to make property more affordable in 2 years? If supply has to outdo demand before house prices become maintainable, then you need lots of houses quite quickly. Build 4 of these around Auckland, but build offices. It'll free up most business premises for housing conversion.

Not economic. The idea's been around for a while, mostly as a sort of super cruise ship with long term tenants, for which the costs almost stack up.

They stack up better if you declare it an independent state and manage to make it stick. That way your tenants aren't paying tax in two places at the same time.

mashman

8th December 2013, 19:15

Not economic. The idea's been around for a while, mostly as a sort of super cruise ship with long term tenants, for which the costs almost stack up.

They stack up better if you declare it an independent state and manage to make it stick. That way your tenants aren't paying tax in two places at the same time.

No doubt. But practical as offices and for addressing several other issues. I think they call it speculating to accumulate or some such shit. China's doing it.

badlieutenant

9th December 2013, 14:44

Im not surprised Fletchers didn't reply to the news article. As i understand it they own much of the building sector supply chain. Firth concrete. placemakers, (cant remeber the name ) large plywood manufacturer and winstone to name a few.
I worked on the waitakarei hospital and was talking to one of the high-ups in fletchers interiors and he commented that fletchers interiors never made a profit. Its a write off for tax and they make their margins on the materials thru other companies they own. To ensure its their suppliers they undercut any tender for the work.
As for these kick backs to builders Im missing out dammit. I suspect its for the big developers. These developers screw builders down on price. I wont touch them if i can help it. We call most of them shit boxes. They meet requirement but there is bugger all quality to them simply because you would be working for minimum wage if you did do things like straighten bents studs for example.
I like to build like its my own house.

Ocean1

30th December 2013, 08:56

So, now the that problem's become an election issue who's got the better answers?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/business/9562845/Election-stoush-building-over-housing

neels

30th December 2013, 09:43

There are some things there that are significant.

Overseas money is a big factor, we just sold a house in chch and the 3 offers we got were from asians, and were all dependent on them getting their money from overseas. That's money coming into the market that locals don't have access to and can't compete with.

Cost of compliance is a huge factor and getting bigger all the time.

Christchurch is a big influence and also a bit of an anomoly at the moment, due to the number of houses that have literally disappeared both for people to own and rent, only time is going to fix that.

mashman

30th December 2013, 11:32

So, now the that problem's become an election issue who's got the better answers?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/business/9562845/Election-stoush-building-over-housing

Me.

Can't wait to see how it unfolds... and can't wait to piss myself laughing when neither party delivers.

Ocean1

26th March 2014, 19:26

I want their profits for that year, distributed to their customers by way of reimbursement.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9870527/Carter-Holt-fined-for-price-fixing

mashman

26th March 2014, 21:49

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9870527/Carter-Holt-fined-for-price-fixing

:yawn:... why would anyone do such a thing <_<

badlieutenant

26th March 2014, 22:21

gee, fletchers must have been shamed by carter holts poor methods >>>>> "Fletcher Distribution, operating Placemakers, reported the scheme to the Commerce Commission in January 2013 under a cartel leniency program."

Ocean1

27th March 2014, 07:37

:yawn:... why would anyone do such a thing <_<

Because they want something they haven't earned. World's full of them. Cunts.

Voltaire

27th March 2014, 10:29

Its reassuring knowing that Nick Smith is on the case :facepalm:

Do the 10 000 houses build themselves or are there lots of tradies currently sitting around waiting for the PO to come thru?

And if they do come to Auckland really want to pay $450 a week for a 2 beddie....thats if you can find one.

mashman

27th March 2014, 11:28

Because they want something they haven't earned. World's full of them. Cunts.

Surely they're allowed to charge what they like for their product?

Ocean1

27th March 2014, 11:38

Surely they're allowed to charge what they like for their product?

In a free market, yes. And if they charged those pricers in a free market they'd sell absolutely nothing.

Given me druthers no commercial entity should be able to own interests in more than 25% of any given market.

mashman

27th March 2014, 12:21

In a free market, yes. And if they charged those pricers in a free market they'd sell absolutely nothing.

Given me druthers no commercial entity should be able to own interests in more than 25% of any given market.

I guess their ain't much chance of that given what it would take to break into their market. Maybe the govt could put some competition together :killingme

BoristheBiter

27th March 2014, 13:34

Surely they're allowed to charge what they like for their product?

Telecom tried that and look what happened to them.

Now carters is falling fowl of the CC.

Funny, the common thread here is Fletchers...........hands in back pockets much?

mashman

27th March 2014, 16:24

Telecom tried that and look what happened to them.

Now carters is falling fowl of the CC.

Funny, the common thread here is Fletchers...........hands in back pockets much?

Oh noes, you means that approach doesn't work either, go figure <_<

Ocean1

27th March 2014, 17:29

I guess their ain't much chance of that given what it would take to break into their market. Maybe the govt could put some competition together :killingme

I like the idea of a govt getting commercially involved in a market that's become artificially manipulated.

It seemed to work with Kiwibank...

merv

27th March 2014, 17:52

Woodman

27th March 2014, 18:33

Voltaire

27th March 2014, 18:43

I just want house values to keep on an upward trend with no silly hiccups.

I still argue we bought our first house in the 70's on about a 10:1 ratio price to salary and me and Mrs were paying about half our take home pay in mortgages, so why can't people do that now instead of bitching about prices? Oh that's right, they've gotta have all the bells and whistles and have a house way better than their parents had with all the mod cons and landscaping done etc. Back then we got a few mates around instead of getting a bloke in and paying him and enjoyed the process.

My Son was bleating that his car has peeling paint ( its a Toyota) and the electric window sticks and he needs a Subaru..... I told him about my cars, $200 VW's that barely passed a wof, Holdens I had to fix a lot, $500 Renaults, an old Kombi ute, and that was when we had kids. I'd loved a 1994 Levin they are an awesome car.
I've never owned a nice car, past caring these days.

Winston001

27th March 2014, 19:43

I've never owned a nice car, past caring these days.

Yeah, funny init. In my 20's I lusted after old Mk II Jaguars or the V8 Daimler version and there were still quite a few around then. Later on when I could afford to buy one, it just didn't seem that important.

Same with the Norton 850 Commando. Sex on a stick. Nearly bought a new Thruxton as a substitute, but ended up with a Ducati and that was the right decision.

Indiana_Jones

27th March 2014, 20:29

Brian d marge

27th March 2014, 23:59

Yeah, funny init. In my 20's I lusted after old Mk II Jaguars or the V8 Daimler version and there were still quite a few around then. Later on when I could afford to buy one, it just didn't seem that important.

Same with the Norton 850 Commando. Sex on a stick. Nearly bought a new Thruxton as a substitute, but ended up with a Ducati and that was the right decision.

life summed up right there

teeenage , 850 pistons flying around at light speed. An inch from blowing me load. In me thirties , Drank a shit load of juice but looked stylish doing it ( MkII Jag ) , 40s , the Ducati . I had learnt the trade and was a machine.

Now ... Royal enfield tappets a bit rattly , slow reliable and in the right light a sex machine

Stephen

avgas

28th March 2014, 01:55

Plans for incredible $10b 'floating city' (http://nz.totaltravel.yahoo.com/news-opinions/news/a/-/20168481/plans-for-incredible-10b-floating-city/) How to make property more affordable in 2 years? If supply has to outdo demand before house prices become maintainable, then you need lots of houses quite quickly. Build 4 of these around Auckland, but build offices. It'll free up most business premises for housing conversion.
Do we have a lack of land? Or is it just poorly used.

No need to fix a hole with a cement truck if all you need is dirt.

Delerium

28th March 2014, 15:45

I just want house values to keep on an upward trend with no silly hiccups.

I still argue we bought our first house in the 70's on about a 10:1 ratio price to salary and me and Mrs were paying about half our take home pay in mortgages, so why can't people do that now instead of bitching about prices? Oh that's right, they've gotta have all the bells and whistles and have a house way better than their parents had with all the mod cons and landscaping done etc. Back then we got a few mates around instead of getting a bloke in and paying him and enjoyed the process.

Actually there is a lot wrong with this statement. Spending power has decreased as wages have not increased at the same rate as inflation.
The houses that people are buying now are further from the cbd, more time and money spent commuting.
all the bells and whistles.. are you kidding? 3 bedrooms and space for a garage in the future will do. avondale is now a $650,000 suburb.
in the 70s the average house price wasnt 10 times the average wage. Auckland is in the top 10 for unaffordability of housing, hence the declining home ownership rates. And people trying to buy now are generally lumped with a student loan as well. No more free education.

Brian d marge

28th March 2014, 16:09

Actually there is a lot wrong with this statement. Spending power has decreased as wages have not increased at the same rate as inflation.
The houses that people are buying now are further from the cbd, more time and money spent commuting.
all the bells and whistles.. are you kidding? 3 bedrooms and space for a garage in the future will do. avondale is now a $650,000 suburb.
in the 70s the average house price wasnt 10 times the average wage. Auckland is in the top 10 for unaffordability of housing, hence the declining home ownership rates. And people trying to buy now are generally lumped with a student loan as well. No more free education. Inflation has killed spending power
As well as wages not keeping up
Also if i can add to that speculation as bank are more willing to lend on brricks and motar. ( cheap interest rates havent helped )

I notice now the trend towards "tiny homes " , and I have to say , if you are a cashed up oldies , what better place to live than NZ !

Stephen

Ocean1

28th March 2014, 17:40

Actually there is a lot wrong with this statement. Spending power has decreased as wages have not increased at the same rate as inflation.
The houses that people are buying now are further from the cbd, more time and money spent commuting.
all the bells and whistles.. are you kidding? 3 bedrooms and space for a garage in the future will do. avondale is now a $650,000 suburb.
in the 70s the average house price wasnt 10 times the average wage. Auckland is in the top 10 for unaffordability of housing, hence the declining home ownership rates. And people trying to buy now are generally lumped with a student loan as well. No more free education.

There's fuck all wrong with it.

Houses then were 100 sq metres, now they're 230. By that measure houses are cheaper now than then, size has more than doubled and yet the price has simply gone from 5 years income to 9. So wrt housing your spending power hasn't decreased at all, has it?

Want affordable housing? get the monopolies out of the equation. Start with getting local govt fingers out of the fucking till and then boycott any supplier that can be shown to be charging more than 20% over cost-to-market. I can see a buyers co-op doing quite nicely...

mashman

28th March 2014, 23:27

Do we have a lack of land? Or is it just poorly used.

No need to fix a hole with a cement truck if all you need is dirt.

I'd happily go for poorly used. Yet I don't see the problem with building office in the middle of a harbour if it frees up real estate that can eadily be converted into apartments where real estate is at a premium.

I'd settle for common sense.

mashman

28th March 2014, 23:30

I can see a buyers co-op doing quite nicely...

Me too... until one decides he's putting in more effort than another and decides that he should have more of the profit than anyone else. Seems to be the way of the world given the conversations I've had with a few people and the experiences I've had.

Brian d marge

29th March 2014, 01:10

I'd happily go for poorly used. Yet I don't see the problem with building office in the middle of a harbour if it frees up real estate that can eadily be converted into apartments where real estate is at a premium.

I'd settle for common sense.

The Beehive should have been relocated to the middle of cook straight, ( would free up prime land for residential.)

I could also ( when parliament is sitting ) lent out to NPO such as the Australian air-force , or the Fijian navy

for target practice

Stephen