Places that don’t have many high income people competing don’t see this kind of appreciation.
Hell, lots of times newer homes are more shoddily built then older ones.
I can guarantee you that electric wiring from 1970 is something different than that from 2010 (personal experience, sockets slowly failing).
Old apartment/house is definitely an additional maintenance cost and possibly tons of other inconveniences, and should be priced accordingly.
There’s always significant uncertainty in construction: timelines, permits, cost overruns, contractor vetting, etc. In addition, two years you spend building are two years of rents that you don’t collect. As a result, there’s usually a premium, sometimes a significant one, for having something already built.
The amount of the premium varies depending on how those factors interrelate in a given market, and of course speculative appetite in that market also comes into play.
It's somewhat insane that houses are automatically assumed to appreciate. They have lived in the house for a decade, and it's no longer brand new. Why should the purchase price now be half a million more than the construction costs were?