Beary McBearface

Bland Unsight's List Of Btl Bullshitters

Recommended Posts

OK, so I need my reference material to be dependable and at hand, so I'm going to try to keep a list of posters who are have stated that they are BTLers and who have also made posts which suggest that they have not yet achieved a complete mastery of the elementary aspects of capital asset pricing methodologies.

A thread here keeps it at hand. A public record might make it dependable - i.e. if people will show up and debate why they shouldn't be on the list, and other posters will stand by them, that would at the very least cast some doubt over my choice to put you on my list.

Crucially, you are innocent until proven guilty. Being on the list is harmless fun. A reluctance to show up and argue your way off indicates that perhaps there was a cap that fitted and you had been wearing it heretofore, were wearing it presently and intended to continue wearing it hereafter....

Edited by bland unsight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I contend that Milkshock is a BB.

Evidence:

Except that OO's are losing their cashflow on a monthly basis as they have no return on their mortgage which apart from being potentially 90% LTV is also likely double that of a similarly indebted BTL due to being forced into repayment mortgages - while BTL's are (at least in the case of the 25% down new entrants of which there are ever increasing numbers) turning a profit

Source: Post

  1. The defendant cannot employ a space between cash and flow, indicating that they have never seen it written down, and thus do not know that is it always written with a space, for reference the prosecution presents FAS 95.
  2. The defendant does not know what a cash flow is, and suggests that is possible for someone to be "losing their cashflow (sic)", (suggesting they STRGL to understand the difference between cash flows and capital gains and losses).
Edited by bland unsight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for getting the semantics wrong - but I think the maths/meaning is pretty clear - OO's pay their mortgage and get no monthly return on it. At potentially 90% LTV they are also forced to repay the capital of what may or may not be a declining asset. Hardly the most secure basis.

The only thing interesting about this is that you are trying to argue the semantics and not the issue which in my book is a sign that you know I have a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...OO's pay their mortgage and get no monthly return on it. At potentially 90% LTV they are also forced to repay the capital of what may or may not be a declining asset. Hardly the most secure basis...

So are you IO then?

...while BTL's are (at least in the case of the 25% down new entrants of which there are ever increasing numbers) turning a profit. Of which I count myself among their number. +1.5k PCM on 100k down for me on a repayment mortgage and I'm happy with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for getting the semantics wrong - but I think the maths/meaning is pretty clear - OO's pay their mortgage and get no monthly return on it. At potentially 90% LTV they are also forced to repay the capital of what may or may not be a declining asset. Hardly the most secure basis.

The only thing interesting about this is that you are trying to argue the semantics and not the issue which in my book is a sign that you know I have a point.

This would get you on the list too, so don't even think about trying to bring an appeal until you've worked out why the idea of "losing cashflow (sic)" by paying down the mortgage is beyond mental.

Now to proceedings.

Two possibilities exist:

  • You know what you are posting is complete nonsense and are just a troll trying to wind people up and waste their time
  • You don't know that what you are posting is complete nonsense

In either case, you go on the list

For what its worth, the essential difference between what happens is this:

Cash flow side:

BTLer - Rent in, interest charge on interest-only mortgage out, (difference, after other cash expenses, is net cash flow from BTL)

OOer (as operator of property investment, repayment basis) - Portion of wages allocated to mortgage in, interest charge out, repayment of mortgage out.

Capital gain side

Essentially no difference on the calculation of the extent of gain/loss which depends on price level, market price move and extent of leverage, but OOers must sell and move into a south facing bin in order to realise the entire gain. OOers can capture a portion of the gain by downsizing. As a BTLer is not living in the supposed investment vehicle, they can capture the entire gain by taking possession of the property and selling it, inconveniencing the tenant, a matter about which they care not one bit.

P&L side

The idea that a OOer could have a P&L for their house is fatuous. Anyone trying to compare BTL profits to OOer profits is a "out of their element".

The fact that, for you, cash flows, profits and capital gains are undifferentiated proto-concepts can't be swept aside as semantics. When a child calls a sheep a dog, it's not semantics - it's ignorance. This isn't a big deal, it's just me publicly stating my opinion about you and supporting that opinion with some evidence. If the impression I've got from your posts, which is that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, is ill-founded, then you'll keep up the posting, make valuable contributions to the board, clearly and accurately expressed, and all will be well.

I'm going to close the file on this one. You're going on the list.

Edited by bland unsight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You make a good point, but for the present, I wasn't seeing him as a poster. It's not as if he's turning up regularly and running a seven page OT thread on buying a new kettle! But maybe I'm being unfair on Mr Alexander, so yes for the list of BTLers.

I haven't given this any thought so if you shoot me down for disagreeing, go easy, but regarding his posting on the Dedicated Landlord Property @arsehole portal thread Marky Mark was just a grim tosser pimping his crap @rsehole portal. Whilst much of what he posted was objectionable he didn't (on my reading) post anything that was wrong in a sub-idiotic pwoperdee mad way which would indicate that discussing anything with him was pointless, hence presently a no for for the list of BTL BSers on my reckoning. Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't given this any thought so if you shoot me down for disagreeing, go easy, but regarding his posting on the Dedicated Landlord Property @arsehole portal thread Marky Mark was just a grim tosser pimping his crap @rsehole portal. Whilst much of what he posted was objectionable he didn't (on my reading) post anything that was wrong in a sub-idiotic pwoperdee mad way which would indicate that discussing anything with him was pointless, hence presently a no for for the list of BTL BSers on my reckoning. Thoughts?

I think you know what I think. If magical thinking isn't BS then what is? He wears his reasonableness like a mask IMO but if the main point of this thread is to specifically highlight financial BS then no, he shouldn't be on that list, he's demonstrably doing very well for himself. For now.

You make a good point, but for the present, I wasn't seeing him as a poster.

You're probably right. Oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I contend that Mark Alexander is a BB

Evidence:

If you focus on what you do want then in my experience you are far more likely to find it. In fact, I would go so far as to say that you are more likely to find what you focus on the most. My advice, therefore, is that you focus on what you really want a lot more than you focus on what you really don't want.

If you really do want a House Price Crash then by all means focus on that. Be careful what you wish for those. I accept that there will be further house price crashes in my lifetime, my focus on on surviving them. So far I have survived two.

Source: Post

Argument:

Magical thinking

mark%2527s%2Bspoon.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see I'm already on the list. I have a vague understanding of Capital Asset Risk Management, no deep understanding of the various formulas used to determine the risk premium that would be applied. I found MBA Bull Sh1t ******** on youtube an interesting (gettit :) ) refresher with various topics on finance.

However this does not detract from my application of marginal costing principles to the assertion that a BOE base rate tracker becomes unprofitable when Central Bank base rates fell to historically low levels. Provided the loan generates a higher rate of interest than the tranche of funds used to provide the loan it must generate a contribution. Really the argument then comes down to which tranche of funds is used to provide which strata of the loan book and what provisions are set against them.

This must generate interesting (see done it again <_< ) discussions between the actuaries and auditors, to the delight of the regulators.

The problem as I understand it is the clever bankers matched long term loans with short term funding and investors took fright at the risks the banks were taking and curtailed investing in the banks. Even so from a quick view of interest rates available from major banks and building societies there are a significant number of savings accounts with very low interest rates.

Edited by sleepwello'nights

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see I'm already on the list.

No you aren't.

You're currently just a declared BTLer but my recollection of your posting is that it tends to be reasonable and, if memory serves, not needlessly antagonistic to others on the other side of the trade, so you're not in the bullshitter category. There are two categories, BTL BSer and BTLer, you're in the second category, but obviously I need to keep track of the BTLers in order to identify the BTL BSers amongst them!

I have a vague understanding of Capital Asset Risk Management, no deep understanding of the various formulas used to determine the risk premium that would be applied. I found MBA Bull Sh1t ******** on youtube an interesting (gettit :) ) refresher with various topics on finance.

Apologies, the link to the JustYield post is a subtle dig at in JustYield's direction, alluding to the fact that whilst some buy-to-let investors might indeed be guided by rational investment principles, the possibility exists that a material proportion, possibly the overwhelming majority, aren't.

However this does not detract from my application of marginal costing principles to the assertion that a BOE base rate tracker becomes unprofitable when Central Bank base rates fell to historically low levels. Provided the loan generates a higher rate of interest than the tranche of funds used to provide the loan it must generate a contribution. Really the argument then comes down to which tranche of funds is used to provide which strata of the loan book and what provisions are set against them.

This must generate interesting (see done it again <_< ) discussions between the actuaries and auditors, to the delight of the regulators.

The problem as I understand it is the clever bankers matched long term loans with short term funding and investors took fright at the risks the banks were taking and curtailed investing in the banks. Even so from a quick view of interest rates available from major banks and building societies there are a significant number of savings accounts with very low interest rates.

Having got the clarification that you aren't on the list and my apologies for the misleading link to JustYield's post in as an amuse bouche, I'll come back on the directly above, (though perhaps the discussion belongs on the on the original West Brom thread).

What you've written directly above is possibly list-worth, but you've shown up and posted temperately, so it seems bad darts to promote on the basis of what you've written, so you can stay 'on watch' for the time being.

The idea of matching tranches of funding on the liability side of the balance to funding the 'historic' loan assets on the asset side seems to me to be completely bonkers for the stock of on balance sheet loans, and the idea that an actuary would be involved in these imagined discussions is also a little bizarre, so the idea of these actuaries chewing the fat with the auditors on how the loan assets had been linked to the liabilities sounds decidedly off too.

Matching short term funding to longer term lending is pretty much what a bank does full stop, so linking it to a drive-by bit of banker bashing is also an odd choice.

Turning finally to the actual alarm bell on thread, long and short of it, applying an analysis of marginal cost, which is a way of thinking about proposed or possible future increments to the level of existing production, or I guess in this instance lending, seems a completely wrong headed way to examine the profitability of existing lending as the regulatory and market environment shifts.

Your argument, as I understand it, also clashes with the presentation Nationwide have been making in relation to the notional 'costs' of not breaking their BMR guarantee, which behaves at the lower rate bound exactly like a tracker. As this presentation is used in their audited annual report there's some prima facie evidence that it is a reasonable way to look at the performance of mortgage back books of this character. (Also, one would expect Nationwide's funding costs to be lower than West Brom's, for a variety of obvious reasons, so whatever is true of NW might, at first glance, be expected to be more true of WB.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I contend that sleepwello'nights is a Buy-to-let Bullshitter

Evidence

Whereabouts are you?

Where I am in North Hampshire lower priced properties are selling very quickly. To give an example a two bedroom terraced house sold in 2013 for £180K. The identical house next door sold last month for £230K. Apartments at under £200K don't stay on the market for long.

It has now been rented for £1000 per month. That's a 5.2% yield, no letting agent involved and maintenance costs on a 10 year old house are unlikely to be very high. If the new owner has financed it themself that's a much higher yield than cash on deposit. And its an investment as safe as houses.

I know you lot will flame me, but this is the mindset you are disparaging. So far this has prevailed over your hopes for an HPC. If the owner is looking at the investment as a future pension then in 16 years the cost will have been recovered, in nominal terms. Thereon it looks to be a better investment than letting the financial services industry pick your pocket. Even if the capital value falls there isn't really a problem as long as rents stay in line with RPI or CPI.


Source: Post

Argument

As per my post on the thread itself

This is actually the daftest post I have read in a long time. I just love the idea that it is the mindset of the aspirant BTLer that is holding the bottom of the market out of reach of MMR constrained aspirant owner-occupiers. Not emergency Bank policy rate, not the low gilts rates of the QE driven bond bubble, not the impact on funding costs of FLS and not the failure to regulate the BTL lending. "It was the BTLers wot won it." :huh:


[Edit: typo corrected 'content' for 'contend', h/t sleepwello'nights who appears to offer the full package of both a reading age above twelve and an ability to borrow money to buy houses]

Edited by bland unsight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I content that sleepwello'nights is a Buy-to-let Bullshitter

I think you mean contend. Although with my gains I am content.

content1/kənˈtɛnt/

adjective

in a state of peaceful happiness.

contend/kənˈtɛnd/

verb

struggle to surmount (a difficulty).

assert something as a position in an argument.

Edited by sleepwello'nights

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you mean contend. Although with my gains I am content.

content1/kənˈtɛnt/

adjective

in a state of peaceful happiness.

contend/kənˈtɛnd/

verb

struggle to surmount (a difficulty).

assert something as a position in an argument.

That's what you've got - a typo. FFS.

The idea of giving you a forum where you have a right of reply, rather me just keeping the list privately is not so you can make this worse for yourself!

I feel bad, on a number of levels.

I feel bad for pointing out that you are ignorant, because it looks like you are happy being ignorant and not inclined to alleviate the your burden of ignorance, hence pointing it out to you is unhelpful to you.

I feel bad because it looks like memory served poorly and that you are in fact the worst kind of BTLBullshitter; the kind who trots up with a load of nonsense conventional wisdom, that appears to have been distilled from overheard conversations between Daily Mail readers, and then seeks to escape the psychological harm that a personal revelation of their idiocy might engender with some BS about the "gains".

This tendency of some BTL posters to run behind the idea of their gains, like a child runs behind its mother's legs, is a big part of the reason I started this this thread and you use the argument on this thread. Irony detector non-operational, I assume.

I contend that you are not content. Why? A buy-to-let investor with 2,000+ posts on a forum called housepricecrash who chose the display name sleepwello'nights? Seriously? Unhinged by implication and as you've so ably just demonstrated, unhindered by knowledge.

I'm all done here; it's like punching a Labrador puppy in the face - it makes me look bad and I can't see what purpose it might reasonably be expected to serve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is absolutely awesome! :lol:

And yet no love for my 'so bad it's good' MS Paint work on Mr Alexander.

Am I supposed to be getting by here on an internal sense of self-worth?

[Note to sleepwello'nights - you can check both your satire and sub-text detectors at this point, if you wish]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is absolutely awesome! :lol:

And yet no love for my 'so bad it's good' MS Paint work on Mr Alexander.

Am I supposed to be getting by here on an internal sense of self-worth?

[Note to sleepwello'nights - you can check both your satire and sub-text detectors at this point, if you wish]

I thought fru-gal had already given you enough of an ego boost to be getting on with!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.