Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
reddog

Could living in an expensive property in a city start being seen as a negative?

Recommended Posts

2 unrelated articles:

 

Residence boarding up their properties to protect from the Nottinghill Carnival:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6097491/Notting-Hill-Carnival-expect-one-million-revellers-organisers-gear-Caribbean-feast.html

 

Another where New York residents in a high rises (admittedly not super high end) are being shot at from across the river.

https://www.insideedition.com/who-sniper-shooting-new-york-city-high-rise-46112

 

Just got me thinking that maybe living in a visibly expensive property in the middle of a city might not be such a good idea in the future.

 

Thoughts?

Edited by reddog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, reddog said:

Residence boarding up their properties to protect from the Nottinghill Carnival:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6097491/Notting-Hill-Carnival-expect-one-million-revellers-organisers-gear-Caribbean-feast.html

Thoughts?

My thoughts are - why are violent criminal thugs being described as "revellers" in that article?

Shocking and appalling. Call them what they are. The term "revellers" should be reserved for the law-abiding, peaceful carnival-goers.

I hope everyone who goes to the carnival enjoys the carnival. I will always call it the carnival because it's a carnival. I'm always baffled (bordering on annoyed!) by people dropping the definite article when talking about the carnival each year. :D

 

edit: one of the comments sums it up "It shouldn't be called a carnival, it's just a riot with a soundtrack."

 

Edited by mrtickle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the event had any other background it would have been stopped years ago. 

The fear of cries of "Wacism" is strong with this one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts.... People are looking for a different way of living, a city environment is not so appealing, concrete and pollution, people having to share resources Inc space, water, parking, light etc .... With technology it will mean people will have better choices, but one could be to move out of high density crowded expensive areas.... A room with a view not a brick wall. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, reddog said:

2 unrelated articles:

Residence boarding up their properties to protect from the Nottinghill Carnival:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6097491/Notting-Hill-Carnival-expect-one-million-revellers-organisers-gear-Caribbean-feast.html

Another where New York residents in a high rises (admittedly not super high end) are being shot at from across the river.

https://www.insideedition.com/who-sniper-shooting-new-york-city-high-rise-46112

Just got me thinking that maybe living in a visibly expensive property in the middle of a city might not be such a good idea in the future.

Thoughts?

 

Not so sure. There has been increasing city density globally. I suspect most cities have a few powerful freeholders who can get the ears of central governement more easily then regional centres (particularly when they detect their assets are deflating) . The increasing money spend on pedestrianisation and cycling routes within Central London could make it more desirable. I suspect London has "concentration of freeholders" - meaning a few foreign or local parties own swathes of the residential/commercial properties leasing to consumer/companies- whereas that regional areas probably have individual residential owner-occupiers who are freeholders of their patch - this changes the ability of the area to transform. On the flip side, increasing transportation options into central hubs (cross rail) and digitisation (video conferencing) may make central areas or presences within them less of a requirement.

 

 

Share this post


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

My thoughts.... People are looking for a different way of living, a city environment is not so appealing, concrete and pollution, people having to share resources Inc space, water, parking, light etc .... With technology it will mean people will have better choices, but one could be to move out of high density crowded expensive areas.... A room with a view not a brick wall. ;)

People want to live in cities.

Share this post


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

People want to live in cities.

Not Sure Peter - Born and bred in the middle of London - don't live far away now 22 miles, 35 mins on slow train to The City. Once you have a family you want to be able to 'use' a big city  (I hate provincial shopping/nightlife used to work behind Selfridges so spoilt) New technologies help either by making services cheap like Uber or giving you flexible working ability so not stuck in rush hour

Of course a 25 year old wants to be in a city but my observation is when in Hoxton or Shoreditch they are all born and bred in the Shires and London is like Disneyland to them, I have always found that amusing

The problem is areas with excellent access are expensive and therefore the choice is live miles away or live very central and subsidise your 4 foot square flat by cycling to work 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, reddog said:

2 unrelated articles:

 

Residence boarding up their properties to protect from the Nottinghill Carnival:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6097491/Notting-Hill-Carnival-expect-one-million-revellers-organisers-gear-Caribbean-feast.html

 

Another where New York residents in a high rises (admittedly not super high end) are being shot at from across the river.

https://www.insideedition.com/who-sniper-shooting-new-york-city-high-rise-46112

 

Just got me thinking that maybe living in a visibly expensive property in the middle of a city might not be such a good idea in the future.

 

Thoughts?

If you go to a poorer country the type where anything nice not tied down is nicked almost instantly you cannot help but be amazed by the UK and London.

For example there are not many bars in windows and walking about parts of London you have multi million £ houses with sash windows a couple of taps with a hammer and you  are in there.

You have cars 50/100+ grand parked on the street surprisingly not keyed that often by the jealous or folks whom may be thinking that bit of trim or wing mirror is worth 500£ on ebay.....it happens sure but not as much as it might.

Would people in many parts of the world pay 5+ million for a seemingly undefendable terrace house?

If crime seriously gets out of hand I can see places becoming much more undesirable again.  I already see private police forces being offered for wealthy roads.

Notting hill used to be quite rough back in the day........david cameron paid £130K (1992) for his first flat there.

Maybe if they paid value based council tax London could have enough police to look after their property/deposit box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, GregBowman said:

Not Sure Peter - Born and bred

The populations of the world have moved to cities, they have voted with their feet.They might commute to work, but thats basically the same as living in a city - the suburbs

Share this post


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

The populations of the world have moved to cities, they have voted with their feet.They might commute to work, but thats basically the same as living in a city - the suburbs

They have moved to cities because they have had to move to cities.

The ever increasing mobile working / working from home move will reverse this. Imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Peter Hun said:

People want to live in cities.

Not everyone, not everyone always.... Many who buy in cities do not actually live there or live there always......technology does allow people better choices..... and for growing numbers city living is not always the most favorable ever or forever. ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that if you are an immigrant (either legal or illegal) with little resources and going to any developed country and you are not proficient in the language, then the capital city is the obvious place to go.

There will be plenty of people in the same position as you, maybe some from your own land.

There will be a system in place. You will get the right forms to fill in. They will tell you where to go.There may be translation services. Even free language courses. You will not be so much of an outsider as you would pitching up in a small provincial town asking at the Post Office and starting from there.

That's why the capitals are always a draw for migrants - it's not 'city living' it's more to do with 'admin' .

 

Edited by frankief

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree that people tend to move to places where they see other people similar to themselves, where they don't  stand out in a crowd, they have a connection, something in common with others can speak the language, will fit in. ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Fromage Frais said:

If you go to a poorer country the type where anything nice not tied down is nicked almost instantly you cannot help but be amazed by the UK and London.

For example there are not many bars in windows

The bars on windows in Spain might make you wonder.

Though it could be as much to do with climate as crime. They leave the windows open downstairs so cooler air circulates upwards throughout the house. They need the bars on the ground floor to be able to leave the windows open - just in case!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Fromage Frais said:

 

Would people in many parts of the world pay 5+ million for a seemingly undefendable terrace house?

If crime seriously gets out of hand I can see places becoming much more undesirable again.  I already see private police forces being offered for wealthy roads.

Notting hill used to be quite rough back in the day........david cameron paid £130K (1992) for his first flat there.

Maybe if they paid value based council tax London could have enough police to look after their property/deposit box.

Good post, this is actually the sort of thing I was thinking off.  You have a very expensive asset that is basically undefendable if the brown stuff hits the fan.

 

In the middle ages if you had a £5 million asset, you would build a moat around it and have a team of archer's, rich people now seem to assume the good times will go on forever.

Edited by reddog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Peter Hun said:

The populations of the world have moved to cities, they have voted with their feet.They might commute to work, but thats basically the same as living in a city - the suburbs

Not sure it is a leafy suburb with detached houses is hardly a city as most people know it 

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.

  • 150 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.