Monday, Aug 02, 2010
HAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAH hahahhaha
Express: HOUSE PRICES TO RISE BY 20%
''HOUSE prices are set to soar by almost 20 per cent in the next four years, according to experts. This will lift thousands of households out of negative equity, with the average family home gaining more than £30,000 in value. The forecast defies doom-mongers who predicted Britain would face a double-dip housing recession. Martin Gahbauer, chief economist at the Nationwide building society, said: “It’s not a double dip and it’s not a massive boom, which would not be good for the market.''
Posted by hpwatcher @ 08:40 AM (2858 views) Add Comment
56 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. hpwatcher said...
Yes, you read it right folks! One month of negative growth in those house prices and the propaganda now comes thick and fast. Expect many, many more articles like this - until sentiment has turned in favour of house prices.
House prices are now the UK's No. 1 form of currency.
2. Dazza said...
It states at the top of the rag it costs 30p. Do you really have to pay for it? Who would buy it? Did they report nationwide drop last week. Oh no they must have forgotten or there must have been more news on Diana.
3. mrflibble said...
Less of the negativity there hpw, you need to spare a thought for the hard working mortgage payers as you live out your life in serfdom.
4. Major Des Aster. said...
Sounds about right. Everything else will be about 40% dearer in 4 years time.
5. sibley's love child said...
Nice to see that HPC's ex-resident uber-bull, Sibley, has 'done an Elvis' by reappearing on the Express' comments page. Still spouting the same tripe I see.
Nice article by the way, is this a classic example of a contrarian indicator then?
6. charlie brooker said...
What a bizarre juxtaposition on the news-stands this morning. The Daily Excrete expelling its usual logicwang, and the FT with the sobering headline "Chinese data add to global recovery fears".
Captcha : Kauffman earlier
7. uncle tom said...
I think we've been here before..
http://i39.tinypic.com/auzjwy.jpg
8. another alan said...
What's the rationale?
I really don't want to be clicking on the express's website.
9. house said...
I was not going to comment for fear of someone picking on my missing words. You know who I mean but if you spare a second thought though you will realise that the 20% increase is over 4 years ie. approx. 4.5% per annum cumulative. I thought the RPI was in this region. Therefore from now on they are expecting prices not to go down but keep up with RPI. Any thoughts on this.
10. uncle tom said...
"What's the rationale?"
It all rests on CEBR's very obviously flawed model for forward price projection.
Flawed because -
a) It fails to understand the change in public sentiment towards house prices, and the new recognition that high house prices are a problem, and not a good thing. Speculative investment in housing has all but come to an end.
b) It fails to understand that everyone needs somewhere to live, that housing is not an optional luxury. That government has to reduce its spending on housing benefit (along with everything else..) and in doing so reverse a trend line that has been firmly upward.
c) It fails to understand that while the household on average income can just about afford a home, the heavy skew on household incomes means that most households bring home less than average income, and a great many cannot afford housing at current valuations.
Anyone who doubts that should bookmark this bar graph: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=334
11. brickormortis said...
This is f**king brilliant. Two gems:
1) "The growth is due to continue with a 5.4 per cent increase in 2013 followed by a 3.9 per cent rise in 2014." How the f**k can you calculate in such times 3.9% in 2014? That's 4 years down the line! If there is one thing we know about regressional forecasting, it is that it is not an easy science to apply and with such asccuracy - wow!
2) "The figures suggest the housing market will weather the storm of public spending cuts, which had raised concerns that the sector could face another downturn". How did they work that one out? Flipping a coin?
Now what's it to be on Thursday? Rate rise?
12. mark wadsworth said...
Nope. House prices will drift dowards for ten or twenty years like in Japan.
13. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
14. charlie brooker said...
@brickormortis
Have they actually bothered to attach probabilities to their estimates?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoregressive_conditional_heteroskedasticity
15. uncle tom said...
"House prices will drift dowards for ten or twenty years like in Japan"
Mark,
I've chewed this one many times, and I think not.
So many details are different between the Japanese way of doing things and ours that you can't begin to draw parallels; but on the core question 'will UK prices slide slowly down, crash and level, or crash and rebound before settling?' - I still favour the third scenario as being by far the most likely.
For prices to drift down there needs to be a general affordability in the market; a point that was passed here a long time ago. We have many millions living in houses that they can only afford because they bought them when they were far cheaper.
As there is no reason to expect the next generation to be intrinsically higher earning, and a likelihood that only a minority will be able to obtain family assistance with their home purchase, there is clearly an instability in the market; one that I believe is too great to correct gradually.
As prices are seen to fall, probably quite slowly at first; the reluctance of lenders to offer easy deals will be reinforced, and joined by an increased reluctance on the part of potential FTB's and potential upsizers to play their hand.
I envisage a significant exodus of BTLers, and the shortage of rental property to become acute; possibly pushing nominal yields to 10% or more in some districts. Young people will stay with their parents on an increasing scale, and new govt restrictions on HB spending will further contract the demand side of the market.
Taken together this presents a buyer's market that is likely to lead to increasing price falls. The last govt's measures to delay repo's will reach the end of the road, and repo sales will start to define the market.
The first dip of this downturn did not see a general capitulation on the part of vendors; it was perceived that the banking crisis had caused the dip, and that normality would return once that had been sorted.
Now, I think, we will see gathering price falls leading to capitulation. Why? Because people will not blame the downturn on external factors, but on the over-pricing of the market itself.
At some point prices will fall low enough for some wealthy opportunists to play their hand, and chase the market some way back up again, but then I expect a further drift down to lower levels still, maybe a further recovery, and then another low..
..what happens then depends very much on how successful this govt is on population control, and on getting new homes built.
Overall though, I see a downward zig zag - not unlike the inflation adjusted gold price after it's peak in the early 80's (but on a longer time scale) or the Dow Jones in the early thirties.
16. thebulltrap said...
"Return to normal"
17. hpwatcher said...
House prices will drift dowards for ten or twenty years like in Japan.
I think the point is that they will increase - but only due to inflation.
18. mark wadsworth said...
UT, that seems plausible, but all in all I'd refer to that as a steady downward drift :-)
"..what happens then depends very much on how successful this govt is on population control, and on getting new homes built."
Surely you mean:
"..what happens then depends very much on how successful this govt is on population control, and on PREVENTING new homes FROM BEING built."
19. uncle tom said...
"and on PREVENTING new homes FROM BEING built"
You're an eternal skeptic Mark - I'll wager that when this govt's term is up, we'll have seen more living space constructed than in the previous five years.
Look at the post-war history of construction in this country - Tory governments build loads of houses, while Labour ones have an obsession with knocking down houses and building cr*appy flats..
20. mark wadsworth said...
UT, that would be nice, but I think you are rewriting history.
From 1945 to about 1970, completions were between 300,000 and 500,000 a year, but this tailed off rapdly once Home-Owner-Ism became the dominant political-economic philosophy in the 1970s, and since 1980 new completions were 200,000 a year or less. It is estimated that this year will be a hundred year low at about 100,000 completions (and the Tories promised this long before the election - no more garden grabbing! No more concreting over the hallowed Green Belt! No more pressure on local services! etc etc).
Change of government between Blue and Red Wings of the Home-Owner-Ist Party (or in earlier times, between Blue and Red WIngs of the Homebuilders' Party) appear to have had little impact one way or another.
21. uncle tom said...
Mark,
The post-war Labour government had grand plans to build Soviet style mega apartments, but in the event did little more than build loads of pre-fabs.
The next Tory government then gave us most of the New Towns.
Then the sixties Labour government became obsessed with slum clearance, replacing them with buildings that quickly became high rise slums.
When the Tories were returned to power, they called a halt to the slum clearance schemes (where homes were effectively confiscated, with compensation levels that were sometimes less than £50 per house) - but carried on building.
The next Labour government made no big initiatives on housing, and construction levels dropped by a third.
Then the Tories returned, and while construction levels remained static, demolition all but came to a halt; and the quality of property, both new and old, rose dramatically. During this period, most new homes had three beds or more.
Then Labour came back, failed to make adequate provision for new development land, and encouraged urban tower blocks; counting one bed flats as being statistically the same as a three bed house. The construction industry was bombarded with new regulations, pushing up the cost of construction. Meanwhile Prescott, with his ill thought through 'pathfinder' scheme, proceeded to knock thousands of houses down, without really knowing what was going to replace them
Now we have the Tories are back...
So, which party has the better track record on housing?
22. monty032 said...
"We have many millions living in houses that they can only afford because they bought them when they were far cheaper." Hit the nail on the head, Uncle Tom. I'm earning twice the median salary and yet the median house price in my village in East Yorkshire is five times my salary. The only house type I could buy is the cheapest two-bedroomed bungalow. This is not a stable situation.
For what it's worth I'm with you rather than Mark Wadsworth on the shape of the coming house price decline. More importantly than what any of us think, we're not going to get a choice. The price dynamics of the multi-trillion pound housing market are beyond even the Government's control, especially a cash-strapped Government that has already reduced interest rates as far as they can go. In fact I'm more extreme. I think that even we on HPC will be begging for it to stop before it's over.
23. Rental John said...
Regurge from the Daily Star... www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/147113/House-price-crash-is-over-say-economists/
24. techieman said...
UT @ 12 - classic Elliott!
Have you converted? Even uses "zig zag"...... I am assuming this is all in nominal terms?
ReC: philospohical whatnot
25. techieman said...
But UT : "I envisage a significant exodus of BTLers, and the shortage of rental property to become acute; possibly pushing nominal yields to 10% or more in some districts. "
If thats the case that underpins things, if / when yields get that high. However i wonder what will happen with the repo'd BTLs themselves, will banks turn to the Lettings market, in which case yields wont necessarily rise.
26. mark wadsworth said...
UT, there is a lot of truth in what you say (even though I suspect you exaggerate).
So let's split it down the middle and say all things considered, under the Tories slightly more larger homes were built and fewer old ones were demolished than under Labour? My point is that the biggest observable difference is between the pre-Home-Owner-Ist era and the Home-Owner-Ist era, i.e. before 1970 and after 1980.
FWIW, the last Labour government were the most extremely Home-Owner-Ist government yet, as it happens.
27. sibley's love child said...
Martin Gahbauer, chief economist at Nationwide, said: "It will take several more months to establish whether house prices are now simply oscillating around a flat price trend or whether a period of downward prices may be in store." (Mortgage Solutions link posted by debtfree)
or
Martin Gahbauer, chief economist at the Nationwide building society, said: “It’s not a double dip and it’s not a massive boom..." (Express article)
28. Caravan Lover said...
I always believe everything I read in The Daily Express...
29. uncle tom said...
techie,
I doubt the banks will try to let out their repo's - so much easier to liquidate and close the book..
Mark,
The paradox of modern politics is that many of the left-right stereotypes are going into reverse - we have got rid of an arrogant, snobbish, unprincipled Labour govt that worshipped the god of personal greed, and have voted in a Conservative coalition that is proving to be the complete opposite..
30. wiltshire said...
I like the juxtaposing of the front and back pages, says it all really - http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/ourpaper/view/2010-08-02
31. hash browne said...
Well going by their previous track record, this is a good indicator that we're heading for another crash.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/1850/House-prices-to-soar-again
I particularly love this line "They are estimating that the average price of a house will go up from £187,000 today to £225,000 in 2010."
So the "doomsayers" are wrong are they? We'll see.
Does anyone have a MyExpress login?
Mine won't work for some reason and I've been dying to post this link on there!!
32. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
33. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
34. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
35. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
36. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
37. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
38. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
39. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
40. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
41. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
42. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
43. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
44. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
45. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
46. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
47. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
48. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
49. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
50. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
51. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
52. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
53. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
54. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
55. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
56. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.