Kootenai Brown Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 You're only right because it takes time for rising approvals to have an effect on prices. You'd be more convincing if you had put this theory forward when approvals were falling. Like this? You know it makes sense.... Mortgages granted were 33% down on March 2008 levels. Let's see what happened to the market in the months following the March 2008 approvals shall we? HBOS MoM % change March 2008 -2.1% April 2008 -1.5% May 2008 -2.1% June 2008 -1.9% July 2008 -1.7% August 2008 -1.8% September 2008 -1.3% October 2008 -2.4% November 2008 -2.7% December 2008 -1.6% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AteMoose Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) LOL bear spin Has anyone got the link to the graph which plots house prices against approvals? Show it to this man! http://www.houseprices.uk.net/articles/pro...y_transactions/ my pleasure anything below 80-90k a month historically means falling prices 39k a month means 20% falls PA for at least the next 6 months however due to the extreem of the crash we need approval levels of 55k to get level prices, anything below this level will cause prices to continue to fall. Edited May 14, 2009 by moosetea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbga9pgf Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) Stands at 2.2 million at the momenthttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8046128.stm At current pace of job losses we will not hit 3 million at year end. SO i guess that makes you a bit thick? You really are a f*cking retard. Q1 job losses = 244,000 annualised 976,000. from your own posted linky cockmunch: "The standout numbers are the big increase in the unemployment rate at 7.1%," said Brian Hilliard, chief UK economist at Societe Generale.I fear that the unemployment rate... is certain to deteriorate much further Brian Hilliard, chief UK economist at Societe Generale Has the recession bottomed out? "We had been looking for 6.9% so that is a really sharp acceleration." In another sign of the severity of the economic slowdown, average earnings including bonuses were 0.4% lower in the first three months of 2009 than they had been in the same period of 2008. 'Pretty awful' Average earnings had not fallen since records began in 1991. The ONS said it was "mainly due to lower bonuses in the financial sector". Excluding bonuses, average earnings grew by 3.0%, down 0.2% from the previous period. "The smaller than expected rise in the UK claimant count in April is good news, but the rest of the labour market figures are pretty awful," said Vicky Redwood from Capital Economics..... "I fear that the unemployment rate... is certain to deteriorate much further. We're looking at figures of 10% around the turn of the year," Mr Hilliard said. Current unemployment 2.22 million @ 7.1% unemployed 10% by end of year = 3.09 million. Are you f**cking thick or what? recession is not due to end possibly until MID next year, as we know, unemployment rises well into the recovery phase... Rinoa, go f*ck yourself love. Edited May 14, 2009 by mbga9pgf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonToManchester Posted May 14, 2009 Author Share Posted May 14, 2009 You really are a f*cking retard. Q1 job losses = 244,000annualised 976,000. from your own posted linky cockmuch: Current unemployment 2.22 million @ 7.1% unemployed 10% by end of year = 3.09 million. Are you f**cking thick or what? recession is not due to end possibly until MID next year, as we know, unemployment rises well into the recovery phase... Rinoa, go f*ck yourself love. Bear with a sore head? Truth can be painfull! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbga9pgf Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Bear with a sore head? Truth can be painfull! Yeah, it can be when you are given the smackdown off your own posted links you retard! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casino75 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 In the same vein an interesting survey with some stats from the mortgage broking community. Seems to contrast markedly with todays CML report. Mortgage Broker Opinions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kootenai Brown Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Bear with a sore head? Truth can be painfull! This? This is your reply? Pathetic. Your views have been shown to be wrong time and time again. You are a disgrace to the old bulls on this forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellerkat Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 This? This is your reply? Pathetic. Your views have been shown to be wrong time and time again. You are a disgrace to the old bulls on this forum. They must be mad or un(der)employed. PUT THEM ON IGNORE. (All except Sibley who, every so (not very) often, shows a glimmer of thought.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rinoa Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Like this? You know it makes sense....Mortgages granted were 33% down on March 2008 levels. Let's see what happened to the market in the months following the March 2008 approvals shall we? HBOS MoM % change March 2008 -2.1% April 2008 -1.5% May 2008 -2.1% June 2008 -1.9% July 2008 -1.7% August 2008 -1.8% September 2008 -1.3% October 2008 -2.4% November 2008 -2.7% December 2008 -1.6% You're contrasting last year with this year when house prices are around 17% lower, and interest rates markedly lower. It's logical to assume there is a point at which house prices become attractive again to the masses. A 29% increase in house purchase loans in one month suggests that point has been reached. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kootenai Brown Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 It is rather amusing trying to educate current bulls every once and awhile... like teaching a monkey to ride a unicycle... Good times... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timm Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 From the CML report: First-time buyers on average borrowed three times their income and 75% of the value of their property in March. Both these average measures were unchanged from February. Very strange that these figures come out the mill, and that they are unchanged. I mean if you were a lender and wanted to continue lending, but at reduced levels and only to ultra good risks, how would you limit your risk? I'd guess by limiting lending to those who have got a 25% deposit and don't have to borrow more than 3x income. I suppose these are average figures, so some will be higher, some lower, and it's all just a coincidence. But one could be forgiven for looking at this and leaping to the conclusion that all current lending to FTBs was on these terms... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buytoilet Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 In the same vein an interesting survey with some stats from the mortgage broking community. Seems to contrast markedly with todays CML report.Mortgage Broker Opinions As a mortgage broker you can see there will be no recovery as there are no mortgages avaliable for 1st time buyers unles they have huge deposits. No self cert no BTL with out 25% deposit and rental income of 125% and no sub prime mortgages Most punters I speak to think we are at the bottom or nearly, but you can blame the press for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kootenai Brown Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 You're contrasting last year with this year when house prices are around 17% lower, and interest rates markedly lower. It's logical to assume there is a point at which house prices become attractive again to the masses. A 29% increase in house purchase loans in one month suggests that point has been reached. It suggests nothing of the sort. If approvals increased from 1 to 2 in March the rise would be 50%. Does that signal the market is going to turn? It's still much to low when the amount of supply is considered. I do agree with you that there is a point at which house prices become attractive again to the masses. 31,000 does not reflect the masses and takes no consideration of supply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ʎqɐqɹǝʞɐɥs Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Again unemployment is not rising as fast as people initially thought it would we are no longer expecting to hit the 3 million mark by year end. It's already over 2.25m with another circa 250,000 expected this summer as newly qualified graduates struggle to find jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeTrader Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 From the CML report:"First-time buyers on average borrowed three times their income and 75% of the value of their property in March. Both these average measures were unchanged from February." Very strange that these figures come out the mill, and that they are unchanged. I mean if you were a lender and wanted to continue lending, but at reduced levels and only to ultra good risks, how would you limit your risk? I'd guess by limiting lending to those who have got a 25% deposit and don't have to borrow more than 3x income. I suppose these are average figures, so some will be higher, some lower, and it's all just a coincidence. But one could be forgiven for looking at this and leaping to the conclusion that all current lending to FTBs was on these terms... Here's the LTV chart for FTBs. Meanwhile, the average mortgage for FTBs continues to fall - now down to £105,000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MississippiJohnHurt Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 It's logical to assume there is a point at which house prices become attractive again to the masses.A 29% increase in house purchase loans in one month suggests that point has been reached. come on son, even you can do better than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swissy_fit Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Guys this debate will rage while interest rates remain low. Prices might even rise MOM occasionally. When (not if IMO) rates rise, then watch. I now believe the bulk of the (inflation-adjusted) falls are to come. The bulls will vanish. No country without the strongest military in the world and the global currency can sustain the debts we now have, it's as simple as that. Even the US may fail if the East asserts itself. All this armageddon and global systemic failure talk, I don't know, I think probably it won`t happen. However prospects for the UK look bleak. We`ll be paying for Gordy and co for a long time to come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rinoa Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 come on son, even you can do better than that. Yeah, but 29% eh? And if there had been a 29% fall we'd have been on page 38 by now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namaste Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 You're contrasting last year with this year when house prices are around 17% lower, and interest rates markedly lower. It's logical to assume there is a point at which house prices become attractive again to the masses. A 29% increase in house purchase loans in one month suggests that point has been reached. No, as said in my previous post, it means we've gone from Winter to Spring. Nothing more. Lowest approval rate in history and probably forever last Winter, and into Spring approvals rise, shock horror. Simple as that. The actual numbers (not percentages that obviously provide the WOW factor you're being suckered into) are still way, way low. Over 30% lower than last March which was a pitiful time of year, being well into the credit crunch. "The masses", as you say, are still largely priced out of the market because they can't get suitably sized finance from banks. And they can't get suitably sized financed from banks, based on LTVs and multiples, because house prices are still too high. Just imagine how excited you'll be this coming Winter when perhaps approvals are 100% higher than a year earlier. But that would mean about 50,000 approvals and house prices would still be falling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sybil13 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I still can't see where the money is going to come from for lending. Economists agree there needs to be 60000 - 70000 approvals a month before the market will start to stablise . However, lending levels are already down nearly 2/3rds. Pre- crash nearly 2/3rds of mortgage lending came from mortgage backed securities. That market is now closed. One reason for this boom in cheap home loans was the rise in 'residential mortgage-backed securities' (RMBS). These were bonds made up of parcels of mortgages which were sold to major investors, such as pension funds and insurance companies. Alas, as the US and UK housing markets started to slump, the value of these mortgage bonds dived and the market froze. The effective collapse of the RMBS market means that this one-off credit event may not return for years, if not decades. I assume this is why the CML and BOE say, "the green shoots have no roots"? And why Hometrack said: that although the slowing rate of decline is a sign that estate agents are more optimistic following increased levels of market activity, it is still too early to call it a recovery.Richard Donnell, director of research at Hometrack, warns: "This suggests to us that the recent pick-up in demand is largely seasonal and unlikely to be sustained over the rest of the year." There is therefore no way to plug this funding gap and without this funding lenders are going to have to rely on deposits which is why I assume there has been concern about mortgage funding "drying up" . RBS said yesterday it was seeing little sign of green shoots. Continued weakness may prevent the increase in lending that ministers are desperate to see, and dash hopes of a pre-election recovery for Labour. The Bank of England is also worried that continued stresses in the global financial system will suck money out of the UK as cash-starved international banks bring money back home. Foreign banks are thought to be withdrawing funds from Britain once loans expire, rather than roll them over. Low interest rates are encouraging savers to put their money elsewhere, councils are having to withdraw funds due to the Moodys downgrades and overseas investors are bailing out. So how can approvals go back up to a level that can indicate recovery , (recovery meaning stabilising at sustainable levels) without property losing 2/3rds of the value they gained from 2003 - 2006 when property valued trebled from £1.2 trillion to £4 trillion? Surely there just isn't going to be the money around to lend. Yes of course loan to income ratios are important. BUT money seems to be the big one, if you can only lend what you have in deposits then either approval levels will remain 2/3rds down or prices have to give. I am not sure this has been the case in any of the other crashes, the RMBS market is fairly recent isn't it? Historically I assume lenders did lend only what they had to lend not some fantasy projection into fantasy la la land? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rinoa Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 No, as said in my previous post, it means we've gone from Winter to Spring. Nothing more. Lowest approval rate in history and probably forever last Winter, and into Spring approvals rise, shock horror. Simple as that. The actual numbers (not percentages that obviously provide the WOW factor you're being suckered into) are still way, way low. Over 30% lower than last March which was a pitiful time of year, being well into the credit crunch. "The masses", as you say, are still largely priced out of the market because they can't get suitably sized finance from banks. And they can't get suitably sized financed from banks, based on LTVs and multiples, because house prices are still too high.Just imagine how excited you'll be this coming Winter when perhaps approvals are 100% higher than a year earlier. But that would mean about 50,000 approvals and house prices would still be falling. It's a sign of the times when bear after bear has to rely on comparing stats to 12 months ago. You'd be wise to consider the direction and rate of increase rather than focusing on the rear view mirror. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lone_Twin Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Bear with a sore head? Truth can be painfull! You get absolutely urinated over and this is the best response you can come up with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timm Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 First-time buyers on average borrowed three times their income and 75% of the value of their property in March. Both these average measures were unchanged from February. Same quote, different point. If lenders are insisting on 25% deposits, does this indicate they may be expecting further falls? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namaste Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 It's a sign of the times when bear after bear has to rely on comparing stats to 12 months ago.You'd be wise to consider the direction and rate of increase rather than focusing on the rear view mirror. Okay, how else do you say 31,000 approvals is f*ck all??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MississippiJohnHurt Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Yeah, but 29% eh? And if there had been a 29% fall we'd have been on page 38 by now. I'm not so sure it would - this transaction data is really volatile both ways, and not everyone is as sure as you bulls that one person's data re the correlation of transactions and prices, constitutes the house price equivalent of the laws of physics. But anyway, that argument is fruitless because you are clearly very sure that there is a magic number of transactions that will magically lead to rising prices. I was being polite in refraining from mentioning that these figures are 33% lower than this time last year, when prices were also falling. 33%, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.