shedfish Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 I thought that EAs were claiming it is the other way around - prices going up because of a shortage of a available properties? Oh well, time to print this out and wave under the nose of your nearest arrogant EA! absolutely - i was just going to post much the same... this report from RM seems to fly in the face of everything the pump monkeys have been saying all summer in the media i wonder, with all the meddling, does the RM asking price survey still function as a loose (and i mean very loose) leading indicator? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Realist Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 I think the majority of EA's & EA staff have BTL property, so they don't want prices to fall even if it costs them their jobs as they are relying on the hpi from multiple BTL's EVERYONE'S been at it this time, that's why EVERYONE is fudging & lying. It IS that bad. It's a depression remember. all IMHO of course. I am not in position to rebut your suggestion about EAs and their BTL properties but it does not sound probable. There are thousands of EAs and even if some are letting their own interests influence their advice to vendors I can't see how they can change the national picture. The most obvious explanations are usually the correct ones. House prices are holding up better than expected because non-distressed house owners are refusing to market or sell their house at what they regard as a 'reduced' price. You don't need conspiracy theories to explain it. Also IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grumpy-old-man-returns Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 (edited) I am not in position to rebut your suggestion about EAs and their BTL properties but it does not sound probable. There are thousands of EAs and even if some are letting their own interests influence their advice to vendors I can't see how they can change the national picture.The most obvious explanations are usually the correct ones. House prices are holding up better than expected because non-distressed house owners are refusing to market or sell their house at what they regard as a 'reduced' price. You don't need conspiracy theories to explain it. Also IMHO. why ? even the window cleaner is in to BTL. I know people who didn't have a job that bought BTL. UK ninja has been alive & well for many years. Edited August 17, 2009 by grumpy-old-man-returns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awaytogo Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Not much evidence of obvious bias! Anyone seen this on the bbc or there website yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drat Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 The most obvious explanations are usually the correct ones. House prices are holding up better than expected because non-distressed house owners are refusing to market or sell their house at what they regard as a 'reduced' price. You don't need conspiracy theories to explain it. You just need a few distressed properties, then anyone who wants to upsize and buy that at a reduced price will be happy to reduce the price on their's to get a sale. All in the chain yo, all in the chain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willy Weasel Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 House prices are holding up better than expected because non-distressed house owners are refusing to market or sell their house at what they regard as a 'reduced' price. That would mean that the only sales are distressed sales which should result in prices falling faster. It really makes me laugh when the bulls trot out this idea that non-distressed homeowners who decide not to sell somehow prop up the market. If the houses aren't on the market then they are utterly irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grumpy-old-man-returns Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 No, and it never has done. It failed abysmally to give an early warning of the 2007 peak. In fact, the Rightmove index peaked about 6 months after Nationwide and Halifax. By then the market was down at least 10%. I also use the single pass method, but with the 'eyes, ears & common sense' method, linked with experience & talking to other people around the country via this website. This enabled me to realise that Q1 2007 was the peak (varied slightly in some areas/property types) going against all the VI stats at the time, which stated that hpi was still happening......strange that. not too sure about the X12 ARIMA stuff though as I haven't got O' Level Mafs, I got me English one though. you don't need stats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 That would mean that the only sales are distressed sales which should result in prices falling faster. It really makes me laugh when the bulls trot out this idea that non-distressed homeowners who decide not to sell somehow prop up the market. If the houses aren't on the market then they are utterly irrelevant. Try telling our little troll from Maidstone... 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.