polarbear

Good suggestions- surely much easier to leave website up at least so we can see market prices (even if we have to close on the phone). Totally understand why you don't want to post prices on public website. I'm not bothered as its only the same as posting unmatched bets on Spreadfair- I was putting mine up just to find out if they offered you these same prices on the phone. I don't think they have really thought this through. As I understand it, if you don't get a match by Friday they will continue to match bets (with usual commission) so you don't have to hold till expiry. And just for the record, if anybody does want to negotiate the prices, no obligation, "subject to contract" etc! I'm willing to meet somewhere in the middle just to get my money out..

below the market yes,which is why I hadn't closed it already..I've had that short position for a long time and have watched the market come all the way down from the top. Do you have a long for Q4 10? Do you want to post an indicative price? I would come closer to 122 to close for Friday;I would wait till Dec2010 as I think it will go this low, but definitely would rather have the money safe this week. Obviously if you run to the end you close at the actual HBOS level when published , assuming Cantor really are good for the money for two years.

Ok Essexboy, Earl and anybody else who has open positions with Spreadfair- we need a strategy. Firstly, you can get through on Customer Services 08000111441 . They can put you through to a trader and if you read the email they are offering to close your positions commission free. It would seem sensible to at least give them the price you would be willing to close at. I did this today, so they should give you back some prices in the same way the website worked. As I understand it they are only matching punters as before, not offering their own quotes or mid-market prices. Secondly, it wouldn't do any harm to post here the prices we give them that we are willing to close. I don't mind doing this for a start so we at least have a record of the market . NB They told me all previous unmatched bets are off My prices to them are: Q4 08 SELL @ 165.5 (to close my long position) Q1 09 SELL @ 156.5 " " " Q4 09 BUY @ 131.5 (to close my short position) Q4 10 BUY @ 110 " " " All are in reasonable size of at least £100. Anybody else want to offer their closing prices just for the record? Personally I'm back on the phone first thing tomorrow to see if there are any matches and to get my money out.

I got through to a trader via the customer services number. He did actually ring back; assured me they were closing, not going bust. I gave them closing prices- awaiting other punters to match. Apparently transferring current balance to me tomorrow. What's your feeling-is this just a closure from lack of business (there was very little volume recently)? Is our money safe?

All very interesting.. but DOES ANYBODY ELSE ACTUALLY HAVE OPEN HOUSE PRICE POSITIONS AND HAVE YOU GOT THROUGH TO CANTOR SPREADFAIR TODAY?

Anybody have actual information on the situation with Spreadfair? I got the email and found the number hasn't been answered all day, but got through twice on 08000111441. They took instructions to close my house price positions (pending other punters posting matching bets), and said they would transfer cash outstanding. Just spoke to them again and assured me they are closing this part (Spreadfair) but Cantor Index continues; I know Cantor is a very large outfit and Spreadfair was a small part of their operation. They say they are closing, definitely not bust, and will wind down all bets, but accept no new bets etc. Anybody have experience of this today?

OK so you can obviously show me a bank with 80% return on capital... just one will do. (Or do I have to accept this conspiracy theory hook, line and sinker to be allowed on this site.) Just going out. I'm sure you'll have that bank's name for me by the morning because of your superior understanding of the banking system.

Luminist thank you for taking the time to explain this point of view (finally!). I can't say I agree with it all, but just to show I'm not a closed mind I think the idea of banning usury is a fascinating one. I suspect that people are mainly willing to give their money (wealth) for lending because they receive interest, but the Islamic position does have some moral sense. Personally I think the idea Rothschilds control of the B of E is a ridiculous. Are they supposed to pass it down by inheritance or something? Has this conspiracy never been exposed in 400 years? And the Federal Reserve- the Rockefellers I suppose? What about Chinese central banks, India etc- aren't these more important than the B of E? Are they under control of Rothschilds, or do they just go along with the conspiracy? Where I do agree is that fractional reserve banking has been unbelievably sucessful (not only for the banks). Our whole world's economy is predicated on it. And I'm glad someone is maintaining the stability of the system and preventing a run on the banks. So if you take away the idea that "someone is behind it all" apart from the democratically elected poiticians and the banks shareholders (i.e. every pension fund in Britain, i.e. you and me) , what exactly is the problem? [ There are so many glaring mistakes and exagerations in the first half hour already. The general tone seems to be a long description of history, followed by a brief innaccurate summary inferring conclusions that do not derive from the facts previously outlined. e.g. "The banks charge 8% on their money, but they can lend ten times the original sum so they really earn 80%". Show me one bank in the world that earns 80% return on capital. Or better still if you really think this can be done, I have some money (sorry , thin air) from my STR-lets start a bank and we'll be millionaires in three years.

YouTube, Google whatever. So I take it you believe all 2 hours 40minutes as gospel? As I already said I don't have time to see more than the first 30 minutes right now. I will watch the rest later. Fortunately instead I have my own ideas, something you conspiracy theorists are always professing, but then I find you quoting other people verbatim without acknowledging sources. So back to your point that I am too stupid to understand. "Money is created out of thin air"- but surely it is backed by deposits i.e. fractional reserve banking. How else do we get interest on our money? Now no doubt the banks charge too much on loans and give too little on deposits, but that's a different thing. I can spend the interest the bank pays me on real goods- what's the problem with that? Look around you and see people employed, buying , selling, exporting, importing, buildings built, businesses growing, hospitals and schools running. All on this "thin air " money. Pretty impressive. And by the way I still haven't got any answers to what this has to do with house prices.

Ok so I got about half an hour in to this video link (total 1 hour 40mins x 2 parts!). Long enough to see that you have copied verbatim the phrase "the bank of england, purchases government bonds, with money it is authorised to manufacture from nothing." He was describing the 18th century Bank of England (inaccurately). I will endeavour to sit through the rest at some point. How money comes into existence? As you have seen the video, I presume you understand fractional reserve banking and how the paper money system works- it is backed by deposits or reserves, not manufactured from nothing. Or do you mean wealth creation generally? What's to discuss- is there any dispute over a basic description of how banking works? I am more interested in your conspiracy theories. Sorry for putting it together for you- I would still prefer a clear exposition from your side, but let me summarise so far: The Rothschilds and the Rockefellers are involved, as are the Bank Of England. They benefit from cycles in the economy so they can buy assets in a bust . They "buy politicians and control both political parties". Is this correct- I don't want to be accused of putting words in your mouth. Maybe you could flesh it out/put it in your words (not those of a YouTube video).

In fact human nature wants to see a controlling hand in everything. When we are children someone is controlling everything for us, our food, shelter, comfort. The scariest thing as we grow up is the thought that someone is not in control , that bad people, events or forces of nature could just be there uncontrolled. This leads to a little thing called religion. The demise of religious faith has seen the explosion of alternative beleifs, including conspiracy theories. There is something slightly infantile about imagining a controlling hand behind all these events; the language used is all about big dark forces (father figures) pulling the strings. Whats worse is trying to get an intelligible theory out of CT s. Who does it benefit, how exactly- these are mere details. What is important is the existence of the dark force itself which like God can never be proved one way or the other and can be theorised about ad infinitum.

Hey look I specifically said I am not accusing you of anything and asking for your opinion. Thats why I don't want to go to another site and then associate those views with you unless you say they are indeed your views. You say that The Rothschilds and the Rockefellers are the most suspect in the global banking conspiracy. And that booms and busts help transfer wealth to the banking system away from individuals. I would say that the banking system and capitalism generally transfers wealth to the owners of capital. Money makes money. But I don't see where the conspiracy is or indeed why any rich person needs a conspiracy? They make enough money without one. I don't believe a handful of families control this wealth. I think capital markets are the most powerful influence, then governments. The way markets are set up anybody trying to influence the market away from where it wants to go will get arbitraged out by a hedge fund before they can profit. On the Bank of England I am wrong in saying it does not buy bonds. On occasion it does buy back bonds. However you said "the bank of england, purchases government bonds, with money it is authorised to manufacture from nothing." I don't think this describes the way it buys back bonds. It can intervene to control the money supply, swap long and short dated or actually pay back money if the PSBR is positve. But this is an excess of tax revenue over spending, not printing money. I still don't see how the central bank is a part of the conspiracy. I would still like a clear exposition of this theory. I'm not asking for evidence , full arguments or details- just lay out your theory please. I now know that you think two prominent families are involved and the B of E- can you tell me, just roughly , how it works?

Could you perhaps sumarise for me who you think it is. I'm not being lazy . its just that there are a lot of different opinions about- Is it a few families, or the banks, or both? Those families wouldn't happen to be Jewish would they? I'd like to know what you think. Dr. Doom I promised I would be polite, so I will answer your second part purely factually. The Bank of England sells bonds when the govt. needs to borrow money. It does not buy bonds, so the govt. does not need to borrow money for itself. The Bank is supposed to be independent of the govt. No doubt there will be a theory about this. But my question remains what hidden advantage is there to the "world government" of low interest rates and HPI , except for the same advantages to the general public? I would really like a clear theory here please in a few sentences- we can argue the detail later. e.g (and I know we are not talking about 9/11) "Bush blew up the twin towers so he had an excuse to go to war". Thanks

Obviously I can't help whats in my frontal lobes as I'm not in control of my mind. No doubt then you eat the filfth they pass off as food Only if its sugar coated..

Thank god for some sanity - I thought I was going mad. Can I give you the secret freemasons handshake online?

Ok so lets say on 9/11 we differ in opinion. As you rightly say it has been debated to death elsewhere. So could you tell me- who are the network of elites? I lay my cards out here and say the reason I don't like this World Government stuff is because it reminds me of the Jewish conspiracy theory propogated by the Nazis. I'm not accusing you of saying this, but just asking who in your opinion are controlling things? And more specifically what is the advantage they are getting through easy money and HPI?

Dr. Doom you just accuse 9/11 "deniers" of resorting to ad hominens - guilty as charged- but you then call them yuppies! I could equally say that whatever event happens there will be a group of people who will see some "hidden agenda". Their psychology is to see all authority as lieing and conspiring against them maybe because they haven't done very well out of the "system". So seriously, I would like to debate without ad hominems I promise, exactly what you think happened on 9/11 and what its relation to house prices is. I honestly do not know what this could be and will take seriously any suggestions even if I might disagree with them.

According to you I subscribe to "chaos theory" and "sugar coated reality". I have to confess I thought chaos theory was a branch of theorectical physics, and as I am only an economist I will have to ask you to explain it to me. As for "sugar coated reality" what is sugar coated about seeing and beleiving there really are Islamic terrorists prepared to fly a plane into a building the centre of a city? Surely it is more comforting and infantile to beleive that someone is controlling all events we see on the news. By the way where does Tesco Metro fit into the conspiracy- are they part of the World Goverment too? As for the www..king I'll leave that in your hands.

Again you haven't really answered the point about aggregating the notional equity. Mr. and Mrs. Average do not have 66% of their house as equity. About a third own outright (100% equity). About a third have been in their house for long enough to have a small mortgage. But the ones we are interested in for HPI/HPC have a relatively high mortgage. All the stats point to the fact that the trend is for record proportions of income being used to service these mortgages. Prices need to keep going up to keep Mr. and Mrs. Average feeling good and MEWing. If they even stagnate people stop borrowing, spending and BTL and we are in a downward spiral.

Yes people are given confidence by notional equity. And its true no-one is forcing them to borrow. Unfortunately they have used this confidence to borrow massively above the level that their income stream would justify. This makes a crash more likely. Or if prices doubled from here and total borrowings doubled (on the same incomes) would you feel comfortable that this was totally sustainable ? Because that's what happened in the last six years.

Of course this perceived wealth affects people's behaviour, and of course lots have borrowed cheaply on the back of this equity. That is a description of how we got to where we are today. The issue is where do we go from here? Borrowings are several times where they were 10 years ago and rising month - on month faster than the incomes used to service them. Most of this has not been used for business investment but to improve property, pay for HPI,buy more property or just for consumption. This is the very definition of a pyramid scheme. No doubt it is easier to go bankrupt/IVA than it was. This just fuels the likelihood of a crash. For each homeowner's bankruptcy there is a forced sale and a loss to the bank which feedbacks into higher interest rates or more cautious lending This is why the banks are squealing at all the IVA's and are having to draw back from their sub-prime lending. Also most borrowers are unlikely to calculate that our low inflation rate means they will be paying a large chunk of their income for years to come. In the 1980's your income would race ahead just with inflation so if you could pay the mortgage for the first couple of years you were generally safe taking out a very big loan. The opposite is true now, but people are only looking at the initial low interest rate. Unfortunately debt is not dead, but you may be before you pay it off.

Cletus while I agree that the market is hot on the ground right now, I think it actually makes a crash more likely. What we have now is a "perfect storm" of bonuses, immigration, cheap money and of course speculation which has created incredibly inflated prices. But that means its going to be very hard for prices to stay up there, let alone get better. As soon as we see any change it will have a negative effect. E.g bonuses next year slightly lower than this, small IR rise, immigration topping out. We have to distinguish between what is happening now to cause high prices and the trend in the future. A lot of people are instinctively nervous that we are at the top of the cycle. I'm sure you saw the YouGov poll showing 28% of Londoners expecting a crash within 18 months, more than the rest of the country. Also from the same report "the London market was shown to have seen the greatest impact as a result of November's rate rise with 35% delaying house purchase plans". It really remind me of the dot com bubble- as we neared the top there was a real polarisation of views with each incremental rise confirming the bull's opinions, but actually making the bursting of that bubble ever more likely.

Hmm.. I wonder who had to use a dictionary to look up that word..But my apologies for getting personal. I don't want to get into the whole 9/11 thing here as I know there is already a huge thread on the subject. I first came here to discuss house prices. Personally I find it depressing when a thread starts off about an aspect of property prices and ends up with someone going on about conspiracy theories/"world government" controlling us all etc. To me this is nonsense and the reason I don't like it is that it ruins the credibilty of the HPC argument. This is why I was trying to ridicule your argument. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the conspiracy theories it is a fact that most serious people consider them beyond the bounds of credibility. I think the HPC argument needs to stand on its own merit and not be attached to a load of unrelated paranoid speculation.

You'll have to explain further (I'm too ignorant to understand your reply). BTW does your moniker mean you are an Onanist with a stutter?

This "equity" figure reminds me of the statistic in the late 80's that the "value" of the Imperial Palace grounds in Tokyo was more than all the real estate in California. For some reason the Emperor couldn't get the swap done despite all the commission involved...