Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Belfast Boy

Nationwide Q2 2011 - Up 1.7% QoQ, Down 4.1% Yoy

Recommended Posts

And that is where in the thread title?

Which section of the forum are you on? That might give you a clue.

Anyway back to report.....Helen Carson will no dobut have a field day with this :rolleyes:

Edited by pajd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the detailed report the NI average price seams to have increased 3% from £119,913 to £123,547.

This means the falls in the last 24 months has been 6%. The previous 2 years had falls of 40%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the detailed report the NI average price seams to have increased 3% from £119,913 to £123,547.

This means the falls in the last 24 months has been 6%. The previous 2 years had falls of 40%

Yet UUJ says 15% drop in 12 months to March? And the average is about £25k higher.

Edited by Shotoflight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont credit the nationwide report with too much merit when looking at their figures.

They have such a small percentage of the NI MTG market that I would question how they come up with their figures tbh. Most of their NI MTG book is from MTG's over 10/15yrs ago.... :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont credit the nationwide report with too much merit when looking at their figures.

They have such a small percentage of the NI MTG market that I would question how they come up with their figures tbh. Most of their NI MTG book is from MTG's over 10/15yrs ago.... :huh:

7% of the UK market. I would imagine the NI percentage is much much lower.

Looking at the figures it seems Belfast prices dropped and the west increased. Nothing really to see here.

6% drop over 24 months is still significant. 3-6K drops means for me renting is still much cheaper than buying.

Also the topic title says 1.7% up mom. Is it not quarter on quarter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont credit the nationwide report with too much merit when looking at their figures.

They have such a small percentage of the NI MTG market that I would question how they come up with their figures tbh. Most of their NI MTG book is from MTG's over 10/15yrs ago.... :huh:

Main board stated something like 7% of the total market in UK overall. NI market share data of all mortgage suppliers would, perhaps, help when discussing the reports. UUJ however, would seem to report on sales that include mortgages from all sources. Still, would like to see some consistency - certainly doesn't paint a picture of a market 'on fire'.

Yesterday was the last day to impact on the UUJ Q2 report, so if you bought today - too late! Where I am - a trickle of sales - worse than ever from what I can see, though EAs (all over) claim sales are up. Certainly some at the very bottom of the market, the very odd new build and a few repos have turned over but not many, and little else above the odd terrace ie semi, detached, higher value. The few that sold had dropped - been dropping or were realistically priced, very close to or at RV or with builder 'incentives' attached.

From last year, the UUJ report whose data is provided by EA's, which is sponsored by a bank and headed by a professor in property investment (are your antennae twitching yet?), will appear at the start of Sept. Looking forward with interest to updated graphs, hopefully, to be pinned at the top of this page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also the topic title says 1.7% up mom. Is it not quarter on quarter?

Well the actual figure is just over 3% Q to Q, but we will not quibble over that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From last year, the UUJ report whose data is provided by EA's, which is sponsored by a bank and headed by a professor in property investment (are your antennae twitching yet?), will appear at the start of Sept. Looking forward with interest to updated graphs, hopefully, to be pinned at the top of this page.

Yes, it would be much better if these reports were complied by members of, say the Health Service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry BVI but I have to agree with Shotoflight. These reports need to be completed by a competent Land registry which we don't have here. No political will for it either.

I have never objected to that and I don't believe the industry is in any way against it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it would be much better if these reports were complied by members of, say the Health Service.

Or here's an idea, alternatively the actual figures could be provided by an independent land register. That way we could get a more accurate figure from a larger sample size and not have to take at face value figures compiled by organizations whoes survival depends on HPI. Open, transparent and actually useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it would be much better if these reports were complied by members of, say the Health Service.

That would be a start.

The Audit Office would be my preference, though probably outside its remit - NIHE involvement may arouse interest though, in terms of image, impartiality and an appropriate use of taxpayers money.

Edited by Shotoflight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the detailed report the NI average price seams to have increased 3% from £119,913 to £123,547.

This means the falls in the last 24 months has been 6%. The previous 2 years had falls of 40%

By my calculation, you have understated the falls in the Nationwide index from Q2 2009 to Q2 2011 by 50%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By my calculation, you have understated the falls in the Nationwide index from Q2 2009 to Q2 2011 by 50%.

Technically I might have to concede on this. The point I was making is NI has, based on Nationwide, seen falls from peak of 46%. This can be split, roughly 40% for the first 2 years and a further 6% for the latter two years.

Figures:

Q3 2007 £227,950

Q2 2009 £135,862 (40.4% drop from Peak)

Q2 2011 £123,547 (45.8% drop from peak)

The % difference between Q2 2009 & Q2 2011 is 9.1%, as you have pointed out, but its not relative (if that's the proper mathematical term). (DFS are the masters on this)

When we are on this perhaps someone could explain how the 'reported increase of £3,634 on the previous recorded average of £119,913 can be reported as a 1.7% increase.

(By the way I agree with BB on the relevance of all this)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically I might have to concede on this. The point I was making is NI has, based on Nationwide, seen falls from peak of 46%. This can be split, roughly 40% for the first 2 years and a further 6% for the latter two years.

Figures:

Q3 2007 £227,950

Q2 2009 £135,862 (40.4% drop from Peak)

Q2 2011 £123,547 (45.8% drop from peak)

The % difference between Q2 2009 & Q2 2011 is 9.1%, as you have pointed out, but its not relative (if that's the proper mathematical term). (DFS are the masters on this)

When we are on this perhaps someone could explain how the 'reported increase of £3,634 on the previous recorded average of £119,913 can be reported as a 1.7% increase.

(By the way I agree with BB on the relevance of all this)

I know what your point is, but it cannot mathematically be expressed in the way that you did. You could say that from Q2 2007, prices had fallen by 40% by Q2 2009 and from Q2 2007 had fallen by 45% by Q2 2011 but it would be misleading (and mathematically incorrect) to split the falls into 40% for the 1st period and 5% for the 2nd period. To do so understates by 50% the actual reduction in prices over the past 2 years as recorded by Nationwide. That would be nearly all of a FTBer's 10% deposit (if they had managed to get a mortgage on this LTV) being wiped out and now approaching negative equity. Perhaps this explains your conveyed sentiment that prices are just bouncing along at the minute and why it's relevant to point out that it could be a misguided view on the rational presented.

The reported increase of 1.7% is the quarterly increase in the seasonally adjusted index. The increase in price from £119,913 to £123,547 represents a 2.9% increase in the non-seasonally adjusted prices. Clearly the way the data is being presented is causing some confusion and I don't know why they mix-n-match on the same table without highlighting this more.

Edited by lolacarrascal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what your point is, but it cannot mathematically be expressed in the way that you did. You could say that from Q2 2007, prices had fallen by 40% by Q2 2009 and from Q2 2007 had fallen by 45% by Q2 2011 but it would be misleading (and mathematically incorrect) to split the falls into 40% for the 1st period and 5% for the 2nd period. To do so understates by 50% the actual reduction in prices over the past 2 years as recorded by Nationwide. That would be nearly all of a FTBer's 10% deposit (if they had managed to get a mortgage on this LTV) being wiped out and now approaching negative equity. Perhaps this explains your conveyed sentiment that prices are just bouncing along at the minute and why it's relevant to point out that it could be a misguided view on the rational presented.

The reported increase of 1.7% is the quarterly increase in the seasonally adjusted index. The increase in price from £119,913 to £123,547 represents a 2.9% increase in the non-seasonally adjusted prices. Clearly the way the data is being presented is causing some confusion and I don't know why they mix-n-match on the same table without highlighting this more.

I take your point on the presentation. We, and the media, for that point seem to measure everything from peak. At some stage we will get away from that hopefully will one day be measuring from the lows!. (I will hide for a wee while now).

I certainly was not trying to misrepresent anything in the way I was presenting figures. If prices were to fall more (which the very well could) to say 50% below peak I would see that as a further 4% fall. I think, until prices finally turn, most people will read it that way. The 3.03% rise from £119,913 to £123,547 (if it happened) is more a reduction in the drop to date from 47.4% to 45.8%. Its just a statical blip or bounce when there is little movement in price. We cant always blame volume as there has been 10,000 house purchases in the last year (probably less than 1,000 of them captured in this report) but these reports were all able to capture the massive drops in prices in 2008 when there was even less volumes. The Nationwide is showing a 1.7% drop for the first 6 mths of this year and a 4% year on year drop. Whilst still drops they are a fraction of what we were seeing a few years ago. All I am trying to do is point out the dramatic levelling off in the declines, if I can put it that way. From the 2nd half of 2008 through to mid 2009 we seen annual drops of 30%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take your point on the presentation. We, and the media, for that point seem to measure everything from peak. At some stage we will get away from that hopefully will one day be measuring from the lows!. (I will hide for a wee while now).

I certainly was not trying to misrepresent anything in the way I was presenting figures. If prices were to fall more (which the very well could) to say 50% below peak I would see that as a further 4% fall. I think, until prices finally turn, most people will read it that way. The 3.03% rise from £119,913 to £123,547 (if it happened) is more a reduction in the drop to date from 47.4% to 45.8%. Its just a statical blip or bounce when there is little movement in price. We cant always blame volume as there has been 10,000 house purchases in the last year (probably less than 1,000 of them captured in this report) but these reports were all able to capture the massive drops in prices in 2008 when there was even less volumes. The Nationwide is showing a 1.7% drop for the first 6 mths of this year and a 4% year on year drop. Whilst still drops they are a fraction of what we were seeing a few years ago. All I am trying to do is point out the dramatic levelling off in the declines, if I can put it that way. From the 2nd half of 2008 through to mid 2009 we seen annual drops of 30%.

Perhaps it suits the construction industry generally or maybe its sales patter to relate everything to the peak as a way of minimising to punters what's currently happening. Your message seems to be 'most of the big falls have already happened, what's to worry about another 4%/6%/8%/10% fall relative to the huge 40% fall just after the crash'. My feeling is that most people (and without a doubt everyone posting on this forum) now recognise the madness that the bubble was, the illogical state the market got it self into, the total unsustainable position of paying more for a flat at the top of the Belmont Road than on Seven Mile Beach in Grand Cayman. In looking for a reference point upon which to base opinions about where the market is now headed, I would suggest most people in the general population have moved beyond peak prices and 4 years later on, they are now getting back to thinking more about yr/yr changes (maybe even Q/Q movements) and comparison with pre bubble prices e.g Q1 2005. You also seem to have misinterpreted the view that I and others have expressed to the effect that price falls are again accelerating. This is not with reference to the peak of 4 years ago, but with reference to the far more recent (and arguably more relevant) trend now which has developed since prices reached their brief rally point in 2009 following the immediate low point after the crash. The peak has come and gone, to make sense of current prices we now need to relate them to a point in time when the housing market from top to bottom was operating effectively and in more normalised economic conditions.

You're going to have to let the peak go sometime BVI or you run the risk of telling us soon that prices never fall, sure they're the same as they were 5 years ago :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps it suits the construction industry generally or maybe its sales patter to relate everything to the peak as a way of minimising to punters what's currently happening. Your message seems to be 'most of the big falls have already happened, what's to worry about another 4%/6%/8%/10% fall relative to the huge 40% fall just after the crash'. My feeling is that most people (and without a doubt everyone posting on this forum) now recognise the madness that the bubble was, the illogical state the market got it self into, the total unsustainable position of paying more for a flat at the top of the Belmont Road than on Seven Mile Beach in Grand Cayman. In looking for a reference point upon which to base opinions about where the market is now headed, I would suggest most people in the general population have moved beyond peak prices and 4 years later on, they are now getting back to thinking more about yr/yr changes (maybe even Q/Q movements) and comparison with pre bubble prices e.g Q1 2005. You also seem to have misinterpreted the view that I and others have expressed to the effect that price falls are again accelerating. This is not with reference to the peak of 4 years ago, but with reference to the far more recent (and arguably more relevant) trend now which has developed since prices reached their brief rally point in 2009 following the immediate low point after the crash. The peak has come and gone, to make sense of current prices we now need to relate them to a point in time when the housing market from top to bottom was operating effectively and in more normalised economic conditions.

You're going to have to let the peak go sometime BVI or you run the risk of telling us soon that prices never fall, sure they're the same as they were 5 years ago :P

As I said in my post it is the media and most in here who link prices back to the peak. Almost every report will also use the % drop from peak as their main measure. I would be only too glad to stop talking about the price a relatively low number, or mostly investors paid in Q1 & Q2 of 2007 (reported in Q3 2007 figures). The vast majority of people out there, who own a house didn't pay anything close to those prices for their property and I would suggest that the majority of the people who did are going thro or at the other end of the repossession process.

It is regularly reported here that the fall in house prices is increasing. I disagree with that. When the average price totally stops falling (which is some way off) then new measures will be struck. And even then if prices were to jump 10% in a year people will (correctly) point back to the peak prices to show where we are in relation to that. EA's may want people to forget that but I think it keeps everything in check. Yes the froth on the peak prices was madness. Real house purchasers pulled out long before that its a measure that will be quoted for a long long time. Particularly in here.

Your last point doesn't make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said in my post it is the media and most in here who link prices back to the peak. Almost every report will also use the % drop from peak as their main measure. I would be only too glad to stop talking about the price a relatively low number, or mostly investors paid in Q1 & Q2 of 2007 (reported in Q3 2007 figures). The vast majority of people out there, who own a house didn't pay anything close to those prices for their property and I would suggest that the majority of the people who did are going thro or at the other end of the repossession process.

It is regularly reported here that the fall in house prices is increasing. I disagree with that. When the average price totally stops falling (which is some way off) then new measures will be struck. And even then if prices were to jump 10% in a year people will (correctly) point back to the peak prices to show where we are in relation to that. EA's may want people to forget that but I think it keeps everything in check. Yes the froth on the peak prices was madness. Real house purchasers pulled out long before that its a measure that will be quoted for a long long time. Particularly in here.

Your last point doesn't make sense.

As far as I can see, there has been a clear shift in here to debating house prices and value by reference to RV (which we already know you don't put much faith in) rather than the peak. Most of the quarterly house price reports that I read generally lead with either yr/yr or Q/Q or even month/month price movements in an index rebased to 100 at some point in the past. Occasionally I see reference being made to the peak in the analysis given in these reports, often to provide emphasis in the narrative. Which report uses the % drop from peak as their main measure?

I tried to explain why there is a view that the rate of price falls is increasing. The simple fact is that from the rally point reached in 2009, the data from the main indicies indicated that the rate of falls had again picked up over the past 12-18 months. Perhaps this trend will level out again, maybe a little spring bounce, only time will tell. But the recent trend in the rate of price movement had been down, not level nor flat nor bouncing along. You've disagreed without really explaining why so I will assume you just prefer your 40/6 two years way of looking at things as being a more positive outlook for someone with a vested interest to have.

My last point was maybe too subtle, a tongue in cheek joke about making statistics say what you want them to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.