Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Kinky John

Members
  • Posts

    223
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kinky John

  1. I've known somebody commute from Scotland before and if you fly it's not a bad commute. It's not that you have to fly - just that the bank has to believe it and obviously you'd need your name all over the bills/council tax etc. Seems a bit pointless though unless you spend quite a bit of time there or intend to move there later. Nothing wrong with buying anywhere for your own consumption - enjoy having legal rights and somewhere to live. If a loss of around 50% would be a regrettable incident of life altering importance then it's too much risk for you to stomach. I'd be very cautious when speculating on property as the overheads are HUGE and the markets highly local thus favoring those with fewer principles and local knowledge. If you got 10,000 pounds for every fool that's crossed your path who couldn't work out post-cost performance then you'd be a moron because they never make any money and you can make way more than that out of them.
  2. This of course is entirely correct ... last I heard (which was a couple of years ago) MBS were shaping up to be proper carry (i.e. money for nothing) as the governments were trying to maneouvre the embaressing shit off their books but had absorbed most of the actual losses with time and ZIRP bailing out a lot of the rest and in many cases the government fully underwriting any future potential loss resulting in a dead cert win for the investor (a lot of the trades I've seen are basically fraud). That's why you could never ever invest in something like Cerebrus main fund because it's exclusively for the insiders insider (they will however have some dodgy fund investing in sludge you can put your money in if your a normal hedge fund investor I'm sure) ... free money like that doesn't get handed out to the proles, but you are allowed to see it as a lure to attract investors. The name is familiar though ... and I can't remember why!
  3. Whilst that is technically true the lack of space is created by arbitrary constraints on planning regulations. For example, London is the flatest major city in the world and is constrained by a generally hideous green belt. Granted the odd small section of the green belt is genuinely worth protecting, but the rest is just grade 1 listed storage units and abandonded warehouses. The rest of the country is similar .. a succession of spineless governments unwilling to be accountable for their own actions has led to planning by no-decision ... those of you who are capable of actually doing things (or god forbid have done things), will realise that no decision is as much a decision as any other. The atrophy and self interested belief in the atrophy is astounding.
  4. The sharks are circling the shoals of mackerel while the mackerel dream of being sharks. Some sort of karma thing is going on here ... good find!
  5. I guess scumballs are a universal constant wherever you are in the world .. even if the exact nature of the scumballiness or the area of endevour to which it is applied does vary. Out of interest do you have the same housebuilding problems in Australia as in the UK? if not then there would be good reason to hold at least a glimmer of hope some sort of sanity might be restored through official channels as it would indicate a basic understanding of the moral and ethical consequences of actions ... something clearly hidden behind self delusion of the worst sort in the UK. Useless investment properties designed to be held in offshore containers rather than lived in .. and priced well out of normal people's range blight the skyline while basic housing is not built to avoid blighting the skyline ... you couldn't make it up!
  6. Agreed .. and what's all this "will impoverish" guff .. surely it is "has impoverished."
  7. Use your capitalist rights to self determination in selecting your own bankruptcy lawyer ....
  8. Property there is remarkably different to here because they live on a small island where traditionally houses lasted for a few years until the next typhoon, tsunami, earthquake or war destroyed it. They have a vast number of abandoned houses because they place less value in second hand homes and the market is dead as hell because it was so overpriced. All those bad investments were simply ignored rather than purged .... a wonderful demonstration of the utterly unforgivable stupidity in encouraging land price bubbles vs other assets (it's best to make up a new asset e.g. a tech company). Read a wonderful article on that recently I cannot for the life of me find (probably in the FT). I think the average wealth of a Japanese person has declined but averages are the equivalent of politicians ... they tend towards the most neutral answer and lie about the true distribution plus depending on which average you pick you can get a completely different and contradicting impression of the same world. I wouldn't even bother looking at them myself. In practice they've been through what we've been through but much more drawn out and with a much longer period where those who could borrow at the Japanese interest rate made out like bandits selling the loan abroad to large investors in other countries that couldn't borrow at that rate (in individuals case this would only have been a tiny proportion of the top 1%). Of course I find that anology very rude to bandits because of course bandits do an honest days labour for their dishonest days wage in a brutally meritocratic organization and with a personally short life expectancy. In my experience bandits that have been in the game for a while and are still alive are far more interesting and easier to work with (no ego flattery required ... just money).
  9. Got to hand it to them .. that is a very legally safe way of getting rid of the new recruits and doing it so cheaply it will flatter this quarters net profitability by reducing bonus and payouts. Now that's how to do maths!
  10. This is a direct product of the low interest rate environment and Chinese insiders running carry trades using commodities as financing (it bypasses the currency restrictions). Since it is a direct product of central bank policy quotas, tarrifs and restrictions are ENTIRELY appropriate.
  11. Good find .. it's great to see that reports like this still get written; and hopefully used to insult the relevant politicians. I've certainly set it aside for such a purpose. Personally, I look at that level of incompetence and my first thought is fraud - at least some of the sales will be going in cushy little backhanders because given the lack of records we'd be unable to assess the value achieved after exploiting planning permission and the value sold.
  12. Anybody got an example of this, or (awesomely) a hard link. Not trying to be one of those people who has to fact check and then insult everybody for missing off fact 3 ( b ) - this just sounds so unbelievably crazy that I find myself believing it. edited for auto-insert of smiley.
  13. I love "reports," like this. Let me translate ... amazingly ... bailing out all our massive investment mistakes and allowing others to enter into the same investment mistakes appears to have suppressed economic growth. AMAZING! sounds exactly like the conversations I had with the IMF in 2007 .. although I was trying really really hard not to think "you are a retard," throughout those I am no longer capable of such feats of self denial.
  14. How thoroughly unpleasant - you have my sympathies and I really hope you get all your money back. I remember trading forex as being the utterly lawless wild west of trading and even these days it's probably still standard practice to do things like front run your clients into trades and manipulate markets on Sunday evening. The odd multi-million dollar light slap form the regulators won't have done shit. Your best bet will probably be to lean on the UK forex trader who will probably be subject to our consumer laws. Give citizens advice a go - it's free and they'll quickly tell you whether you have anything to go on or not. I definitely see it as the forex traders job to protect you from this sort of ******** which is why they get to collect a massive fat spread on the trade. Bearing in mind actual forex trades at a spread of pips or around 0.00001 units they get a relatively fat cut to covert all the dodgy stuff that happens in the curve. I remember the amount of work I used to have to put into avoiding getting ripped off by intermediaries and even after halving the trading costs the traders were still getting presents at christmas that said "we f****d you". Good luck!
  15. That is a wonderfully succinct summary that I think deserves a succint answer. The current interest rates must only go lower environment is most alike in my mind to the slow collapse of the comunist state where price fixing resulted in ever decreasing functionality of the markets. Lots of predictions I made about the past from that - liquidity crises, price imbalances, civil unrest (I'm thinking arab spring from mis-pricing of the forward curve in commodities) ... they're all checked off. The end game will take as long as the fundamental resources of the economy can be pitted against reality - unpredictable, but slow, grinding and very unpleasant. Read about the Russian markets if you want more.
  16. I think it's more likely that those who made out like bandits pre-2008 and just after weren't as stupid as the government and so limits on lifetime/annual pension allowance didn't stop them stuffing as much money as possible in their pension to avoid the 50% tax so they want to take them away. Pensions are unnecessarily complex and generous so this could turn out to be worthwhile tax simplification, but you'll forgive my cynicisim on presuming it will more likely be a failed attempt to recoup already spent tax whilst at the same time pandering to populist sentiments and not caring about the exploding uncertainty and ridiculous numerical instabilities in the tax system. Not that this government have many priors on that ... well, except for almost every policy I've ever heard of course.
  17. This is basically the entire story of my life, and so my insight may not translate that well; but hey - it helps to share this sort of shit. This pattern is a common problem when somebody more powerful than you is driving a self re-enforcing belief by affecting the world in a way where they see the benefits and you see see the problems. The cycle didn't start that way as nobody probably cared that much either way and they wouldn't have done what they do now then - but because their side has more power they have driven the cycle until the secondary effects of their self interest cause significant problems. They can't deny these problems and can only accept them by understanding they come from their own actions or by finding a reason to believe they are unconnected or unimportant. At extremes this may become a reason not to care about the people and effects they have effected as they value you less than the effects (wars start when you run out of powerless people to blame). Generally cycles like this continue until the world kicks back harder enough to destroy the power of the morons that perpetuated it. There is no guarantee you will be alive to see that of course ... just be happy it will happen. When strongly committed to a self re-enforcing cycle most people will become very aggressive when exposed to reality as it threatens something of great value to them (obviously). You'll usually only a find a very small number of people who really are that dissonant and most people will be less powerful so value hurting you less than the benefit to somebody more powerful. It is a fantastic opportunity to undermine the power of the morons if you have a lot of patience by not agreeing or arguing on the point with the worst offenders, but spreading doubt. However, you commonly find they have enough power to ignore the escalating consequences for longer than you expect - 2008 is a wonderful example. This makes the consequences far far worse for you and makes you certain the cycle is their fault ... but their pain is still deferred.. Of course, you can't win short term against the more powerful or they wouldn't be behaving like that - so don't try. If you must - Sarcasm is your friend here .. try saying things like "Of course everybody wants to own a house because they only go up in value .. but I just can't afford a house" and see if they are susceptible to the obvious flaw in the argument. If not they've got an excuse and already think badly of you because you don't own a house and are willing to beat you with their power any time (they may pretend to sympathise with you - but if the cards go down I guarantee they don't). If they do then you have somebody you can confront right up to the "you think I'm worthless argument." which most people have been taught to fear because it is the first sign of a fight. Watch out though - any successful attempts at undermining more powerful people will have their cause and effect misunderstood so don't get the knives out till your sure it's worth the risk or they won't realise they are wrong until after they destroy you. Well, I feel better - I hope your not confused - I just usually have to play this game completely alone and even when I win - it's horrible when I get power because I hate the people I got it from so have be "nicer," than they were. No wonder people plant bombs.
  18. Rabidly socialist article but a good read and I completely agree with the socialist solution. Totally with you on European integration being a rushed, botched and over-idealistic approach but that's more a fault of the lack of understanding about how to design such large systems - I don't think complex social and economic systems scale well under centralised democracy due to the need for localised solutions that contradict central policy. It's not even a question of morality of countries ... it's about the owners of capital having excessive influence on central policy and using it to accumulate assets and farm the plebs which then results in consumer deflation and further asset price growth. Hardly a leap of faith - that has been noticed as the mechanism of economic vandalism that dominates and destroys most great civilizations. I actually wrote down why I think this and it's fairly long and involved and could be accused of being off topic/conjecture. I do believe the principles at least as I've not had to change my economic beliefs to explain the observable world since the late 90s and I ran money and used my beliefs to successfully predict and risk manage futures markets from 07-12 (I quit as soon as possible as it's immoral with that belief system if you're good at it). The vested interests and excess capital in assets need to be removed .. they are distorting prices to the point of creating huge free money trades for the select few which changes prices in their favour and winds up imbalances through price. It's like communism turned out .. but without any of the good bits.
  19. The important point for risk management is that these are OTC derivatives. With some specific exceptions such as currency forwards or standard options that have very transparent pricing I would never trust most derivatives as far as I could kick them. You'll likely get away with it but it's usually cheaper and safer to do it yourself. A good rule of thumb is see who banks are hiring lots of at big money and then stay the **** away from whatever they are doing. Couple of years ago it was all flow for hedging index derivatives - i.e. that's probably basically front running you. 1.) Because some contracts aren't standardised you can't transfer them somewhere else or safely hedge the exposure in an emergency if your counterparty goes bust. 2.) The structure is sometimes bespoke (i.e. point at which it expires) which makes it much harder to track standardised costs and seasonal effects. Price can come in non-standard bits! 3.) Lack of transparency means that they are designed in such a way as to disadvantage you to the benefit of the bank e.g. spreads, charges, yield, etc. - they will scalp them all if you let them. 4.) Silly leverage can produce weird shaped pay-offs in extreme underlying moves, decreases stability and increases hedging errors but lets them charge you more whilst setting aside the same capital (it is classed as a hedged trade). 5.) Unpredictable behaviour at critical events as the bank is often using the derivative to sell off some crap residual exposure in bulk or has some underlying they game. There's often nasty previously unseen tails hidden in it. 6.) Publishing the exact time and markets the derivative will be based on so people can "pre-hedge," the market and make sure you get a terrible price. Goes with (5) obviously. Easy to make a few million a year with good market access and a linear regression algorithm on many funds or ETFs. 7.) Pricing often quoted to you based on a model and a spread rather than based on actual trades ... the actual payoff can detach from this unpredictably and you need to run and understand the model yourself. 8.) No independently verified and audited measures of liquidity and open interest, but will clearly be linked to underlying. Gives the broker a big informational edge on the specific market. Absolutely none of the above apply to nicely standardised exchange traded contracts with short/long origination by any broker, and a deliverable underlying such as Futures .. I never used to loose sleep when counter-parties went down, as they are a thing of beauty. Obviously ... they are broken by ZIRP, as there is still time risk but it isn't really priced in yield!
  20. The first victim in central planning is liquidity ... don't stress it! this is normal. Be careful about who you think should take the blame ...
  21. I'm sorry to maybe go a little out of context here .. but that is the most appropriately amusing sample image I've ever seen on a youtube video ... autonomy ... barclays ... thomas cook! paragons of virtue!
  22. Most daily data providers give either the dividends or adjusted prices as you need them to correctly calculate returns from holding the asset. Yahoo give a nice simple list of dates and values for dividends (the ex-dividend date is obviously when you have to account for it). Just look at the historical prices and you can select dividends. This link should work for GSK.L http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=GSK.L&a=06&b=1&c=1988&d=01&e=13&f=2015&g=v Google just gives adjusted prices which are less useful and you have to reverse out the dates and dividend amounts by comparing them to raw prices. There are many other free providers, and it shouldn't be too hard to find income adjustments for pretty much every exchange traded asset. If it's not clearly stated for an asset (or worse .. if it's a formula) then it is a very good sign you are being ripped off.
  23. Glad to see somebody else picked up on the wheels :-p I thought that was an awesomely amusing way to get away from planning disputes in a worzel-gummage type fashion. I can just imagine cruising down the hill at 3 mph with my mid didget in the air! Problem is three mates would come round and you'd put some music with repetitive beats on and it'd get repo'd cos you're all smelly travellers ...
  24. Ha! an interesting thought and one of those simple expressions that's I rate more highly thatn some ridiculously hard math! Maybe I can answer to your satisfaction. There never is actually a risk free rate - for example in a free market if debt was trading at 0% then you can be pretty sure the money is highly likely to be useless soon (so the seller wants out and the buyer wants a punt), or it's such a sweet deal you it goes upp at 200% tomorrow or was all given to some banker instead. Gold is another good example - it's worth a fortune, it's heavy, and it's bloody obvious you've got it. Gold (like all wealth should) has a cost of carry. I like the idea of a balanced credit market and it could go to a nice place (I think) ... but If I were to tell you about it I'd start swearing at the bank of england and be scary. Don't forget this applies everywhere. Even that banker who has leveraged 4x GDP or everybodies money to bet on two strippers he's paying to have a knife fight is ultimately going to lose his job if they run off with it or draw (of course his boss will take the winner ... and we can only hope it ends like Carmen). Like most things in economics - take the meanings of the words, turn them around, look at the world like a new-born child that still thinks houses are for living in, and then gaze in bewordment at how it all runs the other way around! That's a modern phenemone but should be f*****g obvious as markets are reactive and the BOE has done the same thing for 30 years. In summary, the 0% is a relative rate because the participants expect money to be worth less shortly (either to them or to both) to the point it is benefecial. It also makes for a confidence trick due to people's centering on 0 as a win/lose emotional pivot
  25. Wow! I gotta get me to Davos. I've never been able to afford enough crack to believe my own horse shit like that. There is obviously the overwhelming repeatable experimental evidence that small groups work better if they co-operate than if a dictator tells everybody what to do (the mediators do not need to be "superior"). Then of course, there is also the historical evidence that the greatest leaps forward in human civilization have all occurred when there was great social inclusions and not just after a massive dictator killed lots of people then made himself a massive palace out of gold. Funny that.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.