Sydney Mortgages Higher Than London or New York
#151
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sydney Mortgages Higher Than London or New York
Apologies for not being specific enough on Manhattan v NYC v NY County. And for not being specific enough around wages v income, and mean v median.
But coming back to the title of the thread, can you put up some numbers that show that houses are more affordable in Sydney than in Manhattan (or NYC). Then we can at least not get confused around definitions.
But coming back to the title of the thread, can you put up some numbers that show that houses are more affordable in Sydney than in Manhattan (or NYC). Then we can at least not get confused around definitions.
The one thing that has been confirmed by this, is that oranges and apples are still being compared.
#154
Forum Regular
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 252
Re: Sydney Mortgages Higher Than London or New York
To find a like-for-like, I went back to the Demographia survey (http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf). I know they have an axe to grind, but the data & analysis is generally recognised as consistent.
"Among the major markets, Vancouver is the least affordable, with a Median Multiple of 9.3, followed by Sydney (9.1), Melbourne (8.0), Adelaide (7.4), London (7.1), New York (7.0) and San Francisco (7.0)"
Now the thing that strikes me here is, what are Vancouver and the Australian cities doing in a list like that? In fact, if you look at the full ranked list you will see that its dominated by Australian towns/cities (Wollongong, Mandurah, Bundaberg and Darwin all make the top 20).
Now I would expect wealthy cities (e.g. NYC, SF) to be unaffordable as a general rule, with large numbers of high-earners pushing up prices of desirable homes. I can't see how one can make that argument for most Australian cities, even Sydney and Melbourne?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_GDP
So what are the other factors that are justifying those property prices?