Rics Confusion

[Biriani]

Apologies if this has already been discussed, but I saw what I thought was a misleading FT article on the RICS survey yesterday, and only got a chance to check it online today.

This is in the RICS press release, and repeated verbatim by the FT:

"The number of chartered surveyors reporting price falls for September dropped again, to 21 percent, down from 25 percent in August."

But, unless I'm mistaken, the RICS figure is the balance of suveyors reporting a rise/fall.

And if you look on their more detailed report, you can see that this balance has shifted from -25% to -21%. Looking closer, you see that around 30% of surveyors are reporting falls, less than 10% reporting rises, and the rest are saying no change.

This kind of reporting is bad enough when it comes from the mainstream media, but for RICS themselves to make the mistake is terrible.

Or am I the one that's wrong?

Edited October 19, 2005 by Biriani

[VacantPossession]

Apologies if this has already been discussed, but I saw what I thought was a misleading FT article on the RICS survey yesterday, and only got a chance to check it online today.

This is in the Looking closer, you see that around 30% of surveyors are reporting falls, less than 10% reporting rises, and the rest are saying no change.

This kind of reporting is bad enough when it comes from the mainstream media, but for RICS themselves to make the mistake is terrible.

Or am I the one that's wrong?

No you are not the only one. I am surprised not to have seen a more vigorous reaction here, but perhaps I missed it. Channel 4 and BBC news gave the distinct impression that RICS concluded house prices actually rose in the last month. Of course no mention was made of counter statistics, or analysis of the RICS so-0called "figures". Again, a classic example of TV and Radio news serving up whatever the VI's tell them with no hint of their own analysis.

VP