Saturday, Aug 29, 2009
One Of The Main Reasons House Prices Have Risen
FT: London sales of £1m-plus homes leap
The number of homes sold for more than £1m in London soared in August as buyer confidence returned on the back of a fifth successive month of rising prices.
Sales of such prime London homes rose by 234 per cent this month compared to last year, according to Knight Frank, the upmarket property consultancy, reflecting both the depth of the slump last summer and a significant recent increase in activity.......
For all you wavering HPCers..........This is proof that the cash rich are tilting the figures......cash rich means anyone who can afford a deposit today.....the average Joe can't and until he comes back to the market its still crash time.
Come on guys your running scared of a few house price rises in low volumes tilted by the rich and Uber rich.
7 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. new_order said...
I have lived in many places on this island.
The best way to understand London is to see it as a separate country. It does afterall have a higher population than Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Iceland put together. The cultures, the people, the languages, the prices of things, the severe difference in living conditions.
Therefore, saying that such a thing is happening in London has no consequence for any other part of England.
Who cares? Let the bull-shitters and knuckle-draggers down there get on with it.
2. wiltshire said...
New_order, I always refer to it as The Economic Republic Of London.
3. debtfree said...
@1 new_order
"It does afterall have a higher population than Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Iceland put together. "
Are you sure about that?
Denmark = 5.3 million
Norway = 4.8 million
Sweden = 9.2 million
Iceland = 0.3 million
That makes a grand total of 19.6 million.
4. alan said...
TC,
People are still dying.
The legacy of grannies and grandads goes to form deposits for the younger generation in many close families. They are not "Uber rich", but a bungalow in Essex sells cheap (especially if it hasn't had work done in the last 10 years) and provides a deposit for several grandchildren.
Doesn't it work like that in Wales?
5. titaniccaptain said...
@Alan
Interesting point.....
Trouble is by the time Grannie has been in a home for 6 years all the equity in her house is gone.
Then that is divided between siblings......after a hurried sale for a lower price
The bank of Mum and Dad is more prolific as a source for deposits....but still nowhere near enough to kickstart a genuine recovery for FTBers and average wage workers.
In Wales it is soooo clear that the mountains sing songs of impending doom....my doctor tells me not to listen to the voices singing economic certainties to me but I am not taking advice from a man who's head lights up rotates 360 degrees then settles back down....huh and he says I need treatment.
6. new user 2007 said...
Are these houses included in the Land Registry figures? I know that some of the Indices smooth their samples by removing certain categories. If more of the sample includes these more expensive houses then the Index will be skweed upwards.
7. Jayk said...
Hang on a second, you can't simply dismiss the recently-reported national rises by claiming that some sales of prime property in central London have skewed the national data upward, when the reported 20% falls over the last two years have been heavily skewed by the collapse in inner city flat developments in the likes of Leeds and Manchester and do not accurately reflect the rest of the market across both stock type and geographical area.
If you want us to accept the former, you have to accept the latter - otherwise it's just selective data reading and hypocritical: if these rises are not a true reflection of the overall market, then neither were those falls (and the falls in flat prices were far bigger and far more numerous than the rises in prime central London property).