Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ebull

  • Rank
    HPC Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Pretty sure that you could pick any threshold and the percentage of people that will always have much less than that will say tax the people far richer than me. 61% at 750k excluding pwoperdee and pensions sounds likely. Why on earth would you exclude pensions [or main home]. Some folk may have a chunk of savings / investments to live from in old age, others may have a pension. Why discriminate.
  2. Those pictures of the interior and view to rear and fire escape "balcony' are just depressing. A place to die? If you weren't half dead already you will soon be feeling like you are. Don't care if its 1350k, 1000k or even 100k, it's still nasty. The front of the building is nice so maybe a listing that should only have one photo.
  3. Trouble is we haven't had that. We've just had a severe [global] overreaction to something a bit worse that a bad flu year where a strain was missed from the vaccine for the vulnerable. On another thread someone compared it to HIV/AIDS. In the first years of that if you got aids, chance of survival longer than 6 months was less than 5%. Covid number for that measure is somewhere in the 90's %. Not comparable. If you want to scare people, start musing what we're gonna do if we eally get something as nasty as aids that spreads the same way flu does? We've already blown all the $$ on this nonsense.
  4. IMO the more important and likely effect of the FSCS limit is that money above that amount is available for bank bail-ins if [when?] that happens. Probably not so important with Nationwide but should the mainstream banks all fall over like a pack of dominoes the rules were passed into law in 2016 and you will get anything above 100k e. partially cobverted into worthless shares so the bank can be recapitalised.
  5. Hmmm it's taking a position that you think the current crisis [the part caused by lockdown not by the virus] is an overreaction. You seem to be suggesting oilies have another 45% to fall or 90% of where they are now. Just wondering why? My guessing - watching from the sidelines for decades - is/was that oilies are so big and produce something that will continuew to be consumed they are likely to bounce back, I don't see the long term permanent decline for another decade or two. Banks on the other hand can all disappear and no-one will die. Hence a lower allocation. But they're mostly hot air, making a percentage and the upside is there whilst govs all fiddle things for a bit so it ticks over. Perhaps even lower allocation for banks and more for foods / utilities. If the correction by inflation and QE happens as I am thinking the turnover of those will increase. You haven't [yet] convinced me that oilies are other than lower risk than the rest at current prices.
  6. Well banks seem to vary. If you'd got the bank shares at the start of 2009 somewhere within a month of the bottom then you would have had fequent opportunities to sell at 100% profit plus any divis. LLOY are the only one of the three I mentioned that fell 95%, HSBC stayed roughly within it's sine wave. BARC in between. LLOY has a special one-eyed-loon effect which I don't see happenning now. Commercial [any] investment property is not attractive. Especially as a REIT. All the downside - should prices collapse you will get the big hit whilst the property-%-Professional-services get the guaranteed upside. And amazon-the supermarkets may need the space and have the cash to pay but will they still insist on a rent-haircut if they have they chance? Not keen on general trackers is partly emotional - do I want a share in housebuilders, countrywide and rightmove. Ugh. Let alone weapons manufacturers. Global trackers .. would I like a slice of facebook and M$. Not keen. Nevertheless some trackers are probably sensible. I remain unconvinced that the strategy I described would not work - aiming for a 100% gain at any point in the next decade, hopefully before HPs have risen any from where they are now so earliyish [2-4yrs] if possible. I also see no other strategy and am convinced that holding cash has an outcome of nothing. I am also convinced that I will never get a current-priced-1.2M [ie asking 1.35M] house for 500k plus whatever interest I get from savings. Hmmm do I have the cojones though? What's the potential downside if I don't plan a stop loss? Surely less than 100%.
  7. If interest is 2.5% that only gets you an extra 200K interest only and you need to repay the capital somehow. Banks will affordability assess at 5% so 100k extra IO. The price differential at that location is at least 500K. [I completely agree avoid these type of leasehold - big SC/GR like the plague which is why I haven't bought one]
  8. I was defining normal price as looking at a 10 year trend that's something like a sine wave and normal is the line through the middle. Of course some stocks show a 10 year decline and some [US markets esp] are still somewhere just slightly down from the top of a 10 year upward trend to the stars. UK stocks look better value if you don't want to buy stuff that has just increased 500% without a similar change in turnover or profit. The 50% off has only appeared post lockdown. The view is that that risk is priced too much of a drop or at least will recover in time. If those shares were priced correctly last year they are now likely to recover, depending on how quickly demand recovers. On the structural / decline of oil issue I thought those big names were heavily gearing up for renewables anyway. Which sectors DID [or do] offer the bargains? Admit I don't know what I'm doing but I have one thing I'm fairly sure of: If I just sit on cash in savings, I will not achieve the aim descibed and that 500k will be pretty worthless in time or at least won't buy anything I want to buy. Buying any sort of investment property seems a very bad idea. Any get-rich-quick scheme where someone nicked it would upset me much more than trying to achieve something/making a bet on shares and losing it. Don't seem to be in a better position than OP. [Think/]Know: Cash is [will be] trash. But: what would be better?
  9. So the young are no longer going to **want** to spend their first 10-15 working years in London? I agree London could easily drop more and parts have dropped 20% nominal already but the type of house I'm looking at isn't going to drop 50% or more nominal from here and I am old of course so decades are in short supply. Even if I did wait a decade I don't see a good outcome on my aim. For those that have [some] power, lots of helicopter money and a real crash but not much of a nominal one is sooo much easier. If peoples mortgages are propped up I suspect there won't be much of a nominal crash [except in value of cash].
  10. Something I am thinking about the last days-weeks: Have 500k in savings accounts. Would like to use it for an upgrade on my place in centralish pleasantish part of London. Stuff I like starts at 1.2M, stuff I really really like starts at 2M if not 5. Those are freehold houses. I also like some flats priced at around 700/800k, will maybe be able to get those for 550k by picking the right time. But regardless of price paid they come with a 5k+ a year service charge/ground rent for stuff worth 500 at most [for the part I would buy otherwise]. So OnTopic for this thread and site. [Some sector] Blue chips are 50% or more off where they have been in recent years. Since I will not be forced to sell and can wait for a better price why not put the whole 500k in shares that have dropped and can be expected to go up. Eg BP/Shell have commonly traded at double current prices so 1/2 in oilies. Banks are at 40% recent prices for more risk so split across 5 or 10 shares another 1/4 HSBC, Barc, LLOY, etc all under 50% of recent "normal" prices. Another 1/4 in selected retail - widely spread or utilities [but they are not at 50% discount] or ?? Seems it's all risk and taking your chances. Some possibilitie outcomes: A. If the HPC in nominal prices happens as some here predict, I may have to wait to get the money out of the stocks at par and "miss the boat" [first ever use of that expression - maybe the only use approved of here]. B. If significant parts of those companies held are bankrupt then game over / lost that pot [I have other pots so would not be happy but also probably not potless]. C. If the crash is with nominal prices drifting down with not much more than 20% off for freehold houses in zone 2 London over 3-5 years whilst the economy goes through it's recession [due to lockdown measures] and after that the prices of those blue chips eventually go back to where they were in the last decade or even more due to currency devaluation caused by QE towards the end of that period, that makes my 50k into 1M, more if I'm lucky and I'm close to getting something I like for it. I'm guessing chance of B is non-zero but under 10%, C is the most likely outcome and A [even though I join folk here in wishing for it] is not likely in the area I'm looking at. For my specific aim, there is zero chance of getting what I want if I leave the 500k in cash. So, agree cash is trash but what's your strategy at a time there is possibly an opportunity.
  11. The reasoning that there is a limit to negative rates WHILST CASH NOTES EXIST was published in research done by ING bank a few years ago and picked up - pushed at the media. The simple common sense calculation was that a strong room and secure transport would cost ca 0.7% to store the notes they needed to hold overnight. Therefore if CB rates are less than 0.7% negative, the banks can use that option rather than keeping money at the CB. In the 5-6-7 years since then, 1-month-euribor has stayed negative but never gone below about 0.5%. Happen ING were right. If we allow them to ABOLISH CASH [ya know because it carries a virus or summat] this limit is also abolished. Use cash for everything people! It's a way to quietly dissent.
  12. Is there not a possibility that HMRC will argue that if the banks have accepted fraudulent forms and not checked they bear some of the costs? Is it not so that the guarantee applies to companies who had 200k of whatever - turnover? - but not to those who don't?
  13. ttps://www.gofundme.com/f/support-for-the-family-of-rajesh-jayaseelan Now 85, rising at over 12k an hour. .... Linked in that article and comments there mention a guardian article. Will it get to the 1M ?
  14. OK those two questions and reactions were my second thought about this story: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52413431 My first thoughts were a. Could I bung the family a few quid so they could lose the loan on the land and build a house [then I checked the fundraiser page which is currently 73k so I think that's covered provided the fundraiser is not a scam ... and provided the whole story wasn't made up a la jounos for so called BBC and the guardian today consider normal] b. Why the hell does London need Bangladeshis driving fecking Ubers [OK I admit I drive in central London and therefore hate Ubers]. [Most likely everyone here thinks at least one of those so no interest in discussion really] So ignoring those two points, does anyone here know: Is it a crime under the new covid laws to evict a lodger? How could a campaign to get the scumbag LL who evicted him in the first place done for it go about things? Is demanding 4k upfront for a new presumably scummy rental room which it sound like it was, some sort of extortion made illegal by corona? [Pretty sure the answer to that one is yes and assuming it was a not very nice == uninhabitable unless you have Bangladeshi standards is the non-market level of price enough to get interest from plod and/or a conviction. I am assuming the defence will be that was the going rate. ] How could one get action from plod, assuming some real details can be had from journos [which assumes they exist].
  • 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.