Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
ItalianV6

October Land Registry -0.5% MoM

Recommended Posts

-2.0% MoM for the NW, quite a change in direction for an area that's seen huge property investment as London has levelled off due to perceived "bargain prices" and the draw of Manchester, to be sustained?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ItalianV6 said:

[Mr Burns]Excellent[/Mr Burns] :D

 

56 minutes ago, PerfectCircle said:

Looking at trendsetter, London is down -0.9% MoM, and up 2.1% YoY. It is largely evidenced now that prices have stopped rising for the last 12 to 24 months depending on how central you look.

What is this "trendsetter" of which you speak? Sounds like a useful resource..

 

53 minutes ago, Barnsey said:

-2.0% MoM for the NW, quite a change in direction for an area that's seen huge property investment as London has levelled off due to perceived "bargain prices" and the draw of Manchester, to be sustained?

Indeed.. those of us who subscribe the "ripple effect" expect to see growth in places distant to the SE epicentre to be short-lived and relatively small - could this be the start of growth reversal already in the north? 

Edited by ftb_fml

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, LetsBuild said:

I will update the ripple thread later today, looking forward to seeing the results!

I wasn't aware there was one - will look forward to it :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, ftb_fml said:

What is this "trendsetter" of which you speak? Sounds like a useful resource..

20M+ people are gravitating around London, prime prices dictate the premium/discount associated with the proximity to the center. Prime is down since end of 2014, central locations are pointing south for 12 months (Islington, Camden, etc), peripheral authority should be the next dominoes to fall as people find better value inner london.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, PerfectCircle said:

20M+ people are gravitating around London, prime prices dictate the premium/discount associated with the proximity to the center. Prime is down since end of 2014, central locations are pointing south for 12 months (Islington, Camden, etc), peripheral authority should be the next dominoes to fall as people find better value inner london.  

'value' and 'London' are not words I expect to find in the same sentence...unless 'poor' is also to be found.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Keep an eye on the revisions to previous months too... I use the Forex factory website and it clearly shows them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"  as there are signs of excess supply in London "

Howz that happened then??  :rolleyes:

 

       
 
Property status            Average price August 2017    
New build £288,931    
Existing resold property £221,972    
 
                  
 ******ing scary just how distorted the cost of a new build place is due to Help to buy

schemes etc.           

    
                   
 
   
     

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/12/2017 at 11:20 AM, ItalianV6 said:

Amazing how this site has changed over the years. A decade ago this thread would have been about 10 pages long after a day, not just replies.

what does that say about how we view the property market?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Warwick-Watcher said:

A decade ago this thread would have been about 10 pages long after a day

think you answered your own question there. A decade waiting for the crash to come.
10 YEARS.

we are all very jaded, and thats a chunk of life lost to this bubble.
Im starting to wonder if the crash will come, im now starting to think seeing the most moronic of the BTL's going bust is the best victory we can get, although a pyrrhic victory at that.

i think the odds of a real crash say 40% outside of london is probably 1 in 10 now.

But you can structure your life so that housing costs others much more damage and you can out-save price rises so you do end up better off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jiltedjen said:

think you answered your own question there. A decade waiting for the crash to come.
10 YEARS.

we are all very jaded, and thats a chunk of life lost to this bubble.
Im starting to wonder if the crash will come, im now starting to think seeing the most moronic of the BTL's going bust is the best victory we can get, although a pyrrhic victory at that.

i think the odds of a real crash say 40% outside of london is probably 1 in 10 now.

But you can structure your life so that housing costs others much more damage and you can out-save price rises so you do end up better off. 

What about the 10 years of people telling me that I'm bad for not having sympathy for buyers/homeowners? (for imminent hpc)

And still getting those posts to this day;  "the bad person doesn't have sympathy for when house prices fall."

Ridiculous to issue sympathy to homebuyers vs  9 years of HPI++ reflation measures and casting all buyers as idiots/lacking -when so many on good money and others with considerable financial assistance to buy (BOMAD / Inheritiance), who simply chose to pay more than others were willing to in the market, and so many very happy with their choices... far better off than renters for their choices.

Seen sympathy given for homebuyers who've sold it 5 years later for £300,000 more than they bought it for (in Bath) and so many other examples.

Why would I weep for someone with £200,000 BOMAD for example.  If it were to happen it's a matter of fact and degree, not blanket sympathy.  Why would I weep for Blair's son for example if his super expensive parental money house falls in value?  All been Operation Human Shield / Operation Unwarranted Superiorness -Constantly Wrong.

Quote

Some people earn more or have inheritance or bomad.  They don't mind paying more to buy a home.  They're not idiots, they're not uninformed, they just made a different choice. The self-righteousness on here can be suffocating at times.

 

Edited by Venger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jiltedjen said:

think you answered your own question there. A decade waiting for the crash to come.
10 YEARS.

It came and then followed by 'They just wanted a home' / 'collective responsibility' / 'no other Central Bank saw risks' (runaway HPI/BTL), to furious global GE and other policy meaures to protect vested-interests, and in so many places, begin new furious HPI+++++++ and a crazy/greedy BTLer double-down.

Crunch?  Ipassed by so many older owners who happily post in Daily Mail how their homes worth x50+ more than when bought in 70s, 80s and 90s... expecting more HPI, and telling the young how they moan about nothing + ipads and stop eating sandwiches/do without holidays/work harder.

Quote

Twitter:  That's what you get when you live in a state corporatist closed shop walled citadel of protectionism for the elites. It has ****** all to do with free market Capitalism. Nothing at all.

h/t Jesse Columbo

DQ78CB_UIAYygoG.jpg

Quote

 

HPIer/bouncing around in Bentleys from birth/love of HPI/no hard struggle in his life to retirement +love of the glorious HPI++++:  

CBs are appointed by govt. They are answerable to govt. When they buy domestic assets they are in govt denominated currencies.

Bank of England bought £375,000,000,000 of UK govt sterling denominated bonds. Nobody died.

-----------------------

HPCer Meerkat:

 ..on the back of artificial credit expansion. These people would need to find a more useful service to the rest of society. You can't have the cake and eat it, something has to give. To me you seem to be trapped into the notion that central planners can decree away market realities - if it were possible, there would be no Cuba, Venezuela, Zimbabwe and even the USSR would have turned out to be an economic miracle. And Charles Fourier would have succeeded in turning seas into lemonade. Heck, even the Roman empire would have survived.

Indeed, but is this a question of death? Or about ensuring market participants bear consequences of their decisions without any artificial fiddling that makes the final reckoning much harder and destroying the standards of living of large swathes of the populace along the whole process.

No, you said nothing about your beliefs explicitly indeed, but I can read between the lines.

 That "nobody died" argument is another one from that league where bureaucrats can make arbitrary decisions of whom needs bailing out at the expense of whom and for what underlying purpose...

 

It's also made millions of older homeowners/ and 'business people' (BTLer idiocy in supply and afforadability crisis they only make worse for taking limited supply) think life is super easy (h/t Dorkins) and seen them embrace a selfish view of society... 

The reckoning has already been 10+ years and longer for those who resisted Societally Destructive Policies - no need for final reckoning (and so much doubt one coming anyway) - it's Gen Rent and 5 houses for my elderly landlord multi-million+ of HPI profitz and then near 20 years of Rent coming to him and his wife (his adult kids went to same school we did.).  20 years of ease, early retirement, up late, pottering around, holidays, cars - while younger tenants work and work and work to pay rent vs years of HPI++++++++ and prices 40% higher than 2007.

I laughed and mocked them 15 years ago - and still do to this day - for their greed and HPI worshipness (wanting houses to get more expensive.. do something productive instead of treating homes as speculative investments) - their selfish societally destructive ways (BTLers/HPIers), but it's been a hard fight and they've taken so much (more HPI+++ more homes to BTLers / all the rent vs their BTL mortgage rates getting flatlined).  Still fight for younger generations.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Venger said:

....... so many older owners who happily post in Daily Mail how their homes worth x50+ more than when bought in 70s, 80s and 90s

Not sure about x50 or about reading the DM but big deal to those who talk like that.  They going to live in a tent or something?  Or downsize?  Hardly any do and how?  Fact is they'll never going to see that money so all that's happened for that illusory moment of vainglory is a bunch of young kids can't start a family and have a stake and a life.  Pretty pathetic.  No, the only ones who'll see that money are those who built it, sold it and gave 'em the seed debt to buy it 'cause they've already got homes.  You don't see 'em yapping 'cause they've got the smarts and the real dosh.  You've been conned you plonker.  You've got a home that's all.  You can price it anyways you like but it's still only a home.  It can't be any more if you've got to live in it and indeed you have to.  Or live in a cave and talk about your precious.  Surely there can't be that many thickos out there.

Edited by Fence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Fence said:

Not sure about x50 or about reading the DM but big deal to those who talk like that

It matters because by their position you know they take pride in it - and have very different view to house prices than so many pushed out by BTLism and housing financialisation. 

It also shows life has been far easier for them with housing costs.

Quote

Daily Mail

Average UK house price to hit £780,000 by 2040, says leading think tank

Kilo Charlie, My World, 9 hours ago
We purchased a property in 1983 for £72,000.........today it's worth £650,000 plus. It's certainly possible and quite likely.

Sam, Bucks, 3 hours ago
Bought house in ,74 for 16k added extention about £8k now valued at £480k you do the maths?

 

39 minutes ago, Fence said:

Fact is they'll never going to see that money so all that's happened for that illusory moment of vainglory is a bunch of young kids can't start a family and have a stake and a life.  Pretty pathetic.  No, the only ones who'll see that money are those who built it, sold it and gave 'em the seed debt to buy it 'cause they've already got homes.  

It's a nonsense - they mostly all know how much their homes are worth and it has real meaning to them.  Very few people can ignore the value of their homes.

And that housing wealth to extremes is a reality vs GenRent.    It's a nonsense that it's illusion - it can be sold/MEWed to money, or just give one a feeling of high smug bliss / doing so well / worth it.

So it's just a bunch of "young kids" are just having "a moment" where they can't afford housing??????   That's all it comes down to?  :rolleyes:

True some newbuild developers making big profits, but millions of older homes built in Edwardian times/Victorian times, are not seeing the money/profits going back to the builders of those homes. Many older owners owned for years... or upsized many years ago..... they are sat on housing wealth.  Not those who they bought it from.

I don't know your position on matters, but I think you're deluding yourself here, or deliberately trying to delude me/others, about the differences.

Those older homeowners who've seen HPI to extremes, along with so many BTLers, are HPI wealthy/reaping the rental flow... and that is a very different position to those priced out in Gen Rent, no matter how you spin it.  In this reality right now - it's a marked difference.

My landlord with a home worth £750,000 - £1million pounds in this market, and then 5 BTL homes each worth £400,000+ in this market....

That's a very very different position to my own, paying best part of £9,500 a year in rent (and have done for years) to an elderly landlord, vs a years more BTLer double-down buying spree, rates floored, global QE galore, FLS, term funding scheme and on and on and on, with house prices 40% higher than 2007 in main areas I track, and lot more in London. 

Where he took early retirement and has had absolutely no concern about money.   Where we've struggled to get a simple repair on one occasion (couldn't even get them to come in and look at it, and then decided not to push it, for they could try charging us more).  It would be a very different position if he just owned that one home (and not all the other homes he bought from 1999 onwards, that have basically trebled and more in value and that he rents out)

It's a reality when younger family (with babies/young children) have to both work/graft toward paying the rent up to him (vs more HPI++++) and older landlord only had a lower-level employment position when he did work, yet now has 6 houses, worth way over £1million+ and retired early - with credit crunch passing him by and no money worries at all.   When younger renters always on edge about their position going forward on a insecure housing tenancy where can be given notice and have to leave in 2 months were landlord to choose.

It is a big deal for it's the reality.  Many gatherings I've been to where older owners talk about their mad-gainz vs renting loser.  It's a reality.

It's a total misrepresentation of reality to come in claiming it's not real/doesn't matter.

 

I reject it the win side is all 'meaningless' - and those who claim it's not real, and play it down with "it will all go to squablling greedy sons and daughters in the end who won't be happy / on care home fees" (so it's all an illusion and just suck it up and be happy renting for it's all a done deal and you lost and the mad-gainz outright owners who've seen house prices x10+ and BTLers haven't really gained much anyway").   

That's just ridiculous misdirection from the reality.  Perhaps my BTLer landlord already helped by their son and daughter (my age, and I actually know them - they are close to their parents) their homes or put big money towards it in BOMAD, and put one or two of the BTLs/rental flow into their names. 

Regardless; it is not all meaningless, nor "an illusion". 

My issue isn't what they have (to extremes) - it's those who claim it's a nothing, and mostly on the young who are so hard-done by against it all, when they have to try and make their own way vs HPI++++/BTL and all the other props (QE/FLS) that have gone into supporting/reflating, and even more BTL lending from 2008 to 2017.  I saw a chart of BTL lending from 2009 just the other day... crazy new BTL lending double down, by BTL landlords who choose to take more homes in a housing supply and affordability painful squeeze/grab on the young, to turn would-be owners into more renters.

jI3u1oT.jpg

 

54 minutes ago, Fence said:

They going to live in a tent or something?  Or downsize?  Hardly any do and howFact is they'll never going to see that money so all that's happened for that illusory moment of vainglory is a bunch of young kids can't start a family and have a stake and a life.  Pretty pathetic.  No, the only ones who'll see that money are those who built it, sold it and gave 'em the seed debt to buy it 'cause they've already got homes.  You don't see 'em yapping 'cause they've got the smarts and the real dosh.  You've been conned you plonker.  You've got a home that's all.  You can price it anyways you like but it's still only a home.  It can't be any more if you've got to live in it and indeed you have to.  Or live in a cave and talk about your precious.  Surely there can't be that many thickos out there.

It's a reality in many ways - they feel richer for it... it's lot different to forever renters, some of who are no longer that young, extremely priced out by so many policy measures, long wave HPI, BTLers, and then all the other measures such as SMI (and those so happy to tell young to sofa-surf now so 'plight' and 'losing homes' fearmongering if some policies are less generous going forward).  

 6 to 7 out of 10 homeowners who own their homes outright/no mortgage debt.  

What's the 'go live in a cave' point to?   I've already seen so many housing VI try to tell younger priced outs they are incredibly entitled to want a home, and tell them they could be happier/fulfilled by 'sofa-surfing'.      So it's "only a home" - we're here on this forum because of housing financialisation.  Not all priced out renters, but been plenty of happy BTLers and happy HPIers too.

My position about some who should look to downsize = "how?"  and "living in a cave" and "house prices are all an illusion" - it's total misdirection - either honest misdirection to yourself or you have a VI in trying to distort it here.  

No one is saying they should downsize, but the money/value is real, and it can be cashed in.  So they can downsize.  That's how.

Oh so it's "just a home" and that's all. 

If price didn't come into it then I wouldn't be here pushing back against extreme housing financialisation, but prices are REAL.

I guess all the £10,000 s of rent I've paid out over the years is an illusion to you as well ?????  It's no illusion to me, and nor has been BTLers doubling down to buy millions more homes, at very high prices.

agtZPNq.JPG

Just an illusion / money doesn't matter / not real ???

What did Nick-Someone from Crimewatch sell his home for a few years ago in London?  £millions in profit.  That's cash money mad-gainz to him.  Don't tell me it isn't all real.  It's very real, and the young (no Bomads) carry it, along with millions of priced out GenRent.

On 21/09/2015 at 1:38 PM, BuyToLeech said:

The idea that older people don't see their homes as investments is a ridiculous self-serving platitude.

If that were true, the age demographics of landlords wouldn't be what they are, the daily mail wouldn't print the house price of every serial killer and murder victim, and house prices probably wouldn't be an issue.

Very few people can afford to ignore the value of their home, whatever their age, it's a key factor in everyone's decisions about housing.

I'll repeat my earlier point, in the hope that reading comprehension wasn't just a passing fad from my youth.

We live in a market economy, of sorts. The selling point of a market economy is that selfish decisions should lead to an optimal allocation of resources.

The distribution of housing is not optimal. Why?

The elderly ought to downsize. Not that they should be forced to, like in a command economy, but that it ought to be the outcome of their selfish decisions, and it isn't.

That is a fact that needs explaining.

I claim that this can be explained by looking at the lack of incentives to move. Retired people don't downsize because:

1. They don't pay the costs of their decision, other people do.

2. Homes are investments, and the financial incentives beat the real economic incentives.

In other words, we don't have a free market for housing.

An alternative position is that we do have a free market, but free markets don't work for some reason.

'Some older people are poor' isn't an alternative argument.

Nor is individual psychology, the relative mentality of demographic groups (as if such a thing even exists) or how anyone feels about anything.

 

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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 407 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.