The premium on new construction is around 20% vs existing structures, so you arent saving any money, just paying up front (and financing it to boot).

Plus many people want to live in an already established neighborhood.

I’m not so sure about that. My brand new house in the Portland metro was cheaper than comparable older houses. I do get screwed a bit on taxes but they’re still lower than they were at my house in California for the same price. Overall I’m saving money. Going on three years and the only expense I’ve had in upkeep is air filters.

Also both new homes I’ve bought were in existing neighborhoods. Not all new homes are in new developments. I’m fact, I would avoid those like the plague. HOA hell + possible mello roos if in California.

You can be as "not sure" as you want, data doesn't lie

https://www.trulia.com/research/new-home-smell/

Portland happens to be among the metros with the smallest new house premium at 14%. Thats still $28,000 premium on a 200,0000 house.

Sure "not all new homes" are in new developments, but the vast majority of them are. Most neighborhoods simply don't have empty lots to build on, they don't exist, any new homes are teardowns.

I’m guessing trulia is looking as asking price because that’s definitely off based on actual experience shopping around. Because of property tax being much lower, older homes can ask a lot more. Sure new developments here are asking 600k+ for a tiny condo but they’ve all been reducing prices. In my part of town my house was more than 50k lower than an almost identical copy of my house down the street that’s been here for 10 years.

Besides, I never said all new homes were cheaper so I’m not sure why you’re even trying to argue it. Shop around and you’ll find a deal.