Hometrack Publish Bearish Report

[Converted Lurker]

Weaker growth over second half of 2006 expected

House prices rose by 0.6% over July taking year on year growth to 3.2% according to the latest national house price survey from Hometrack, the housing information business. Whilst the strength of the market in London continues to flatter the headline results, the July survey provides clear evidence that levels of house price growth and market activity are starting to slow, a trend which is expected to continue over the rest of the summer and into the autumn

http://firstrung.co.uk/articles.asp?pageid...articlekey=2505

How do reuters and the guardian manage to translate the above as?:

British house prices continued to climb in July, rising at their sharpest annual rate in 1-1/2 years, but the gain was largely due to strong growth in London, a survey showed on Monday. Property consultant Hometrack said house prices rose 3.2 percent in July compared with a year earlier -- the fastest rate of growth since October 2004 -- helped by strong growth in London, where prices were up 7.3 percent year-on-year.

In June, house prices were up 2.4 percent on the year -- also a 1-1/2 year high.

Edited July 31, 2006 by Converted Lurker

[benjamin]

uh, wasn't expecting this, this of all weeks.

[Casual Observer]

Property: 3.2% up = BORING, at best.

Having seen the "best" it has to offer, shall we soon see the "worst" emerging?

Property is a place to live, FFS. How can it be boring?

[Casual Observer]

haha

Boring returns, even losses.

You can live in rented properties too- and live better for the same cost.

With the joys of homeowning (at current prices), come alot of financial headaches too.

TRAPPED BY DEBT, is a phrase we will hear more and more, by those who geared up "to get on the ladder"

Enjoy your slavery to debt?

I have absolutely zero debt. I also own the house I live in.

Your use of the term "boring" indicates that you only view property in terms of the money you can make from it. Quite sad.

[Realistbear]

With BTL yields at the lowest for 5 years and possibly falling further due to employment issues and affordability (rising fuel costs, travel, petrol etc.) leaving precious little for rent it is long past time where other investments would be more attractive and risk free. 5% Savings account for example.

IMO, the turn in the commercial viability of BTL heralds the start of the serious downside moves.

While I agree that the house you live in is not "boring" houses as investments would appear to be so if they are returning less than 5% or, dare we say it, negative returns. A more thrilling ride might be building stocks-if you like losing money that is.

Edited July 31, 2006 by Realistbear

[Casual Observer]

With BTL yields at the lowest for 5 years and possibly falling further due to employment issues and affordability (rising fuel costs, travel, petrol etc.) leaving precious little for rent it is long past time where other investments would be more attractive and risk free. 5% Savings account for example.

IMO, the turn in the commercial viability of BTL heralds the start of the serious downside moves.

While I agree that the house you live in is not "boring" houses as investments would appear to be so if they are returning less than 5% or, dare we say it, negative returns. A more thrilling ride might be building stocks-if you like losing money that is.

It will be a very good thing for the rampant speculation in property over the last 6 years or so to come to an end, IMO. Houses are for living in.

Problem is, it is clear from some posts here that as soon as property looks like an attractive "less boring" investment again, the likes of some posters on here will dive back in. These people don't appear to have any sympathy for the priced-out families, just want to make a quick buck.

[since the beginning]

It will be a very good thing for the rampant speculation in property over the last 6 years or so to come to an end, IMO. Houses are for living in.

Problem is, it is clear from some posts here that as soon as property looks like an attractive "less boring" investment again, the likes of some posters on here will dive back in. These people don't appear to have any sympathy for the priced-out families, just want to make a quick buck.

What are you talking about? You’re a homeowner that bought years ago - therefore a home is a place to live in. For people making decisions today you can't ignore the disparity between buying and renting. I am not prepared to pay say 50% more just to have the 'privilege' of owning rather than renting. For anyone thinking about buying at the moment the cost of houses and the future movement should be a massive influence it could be the difference between able to afford future annual holidays, pensions etc or not.

[Converted Lurker]

Guys, just reverting back to the original thread for a mo. the press release from Hometrack has been published verbatim on Firstrung and it reads bearish, yet Reuters Guardian etc. report "good news house prices just keep on going up, last month was a record..." Have we have now entered the land of fiction were the mainstream media is concerned, as nowhere in the press release is the mention of "biggest rises since 2004" etc? Before they simply embellished, now it appears they write what they want, irrespective of the evidence before them Truly shocking.

Edited July 31, 2006 by Converted Lurker

[Killer Bunny]

Your use of the term "boring" indicates that you only view property in terms of the money you can make from it. Quite sad.

You won't be saying that after 5 years and your house value has gone down 40%.

[Casual Observer]

You won't be saying that after 5 years and your house value has gone down 40%.

I couldn't give a toss about the value of my house. It inflated from 180k when I bought it to about £700k now, and I didn't bat an eyelid, or benefit from it any way. I can't get my head around people who would get excited by it.

You have no real idea what will happen to prices, it's just wishful thinking on your part.

. I am not prepared to pay say 50% more just to have the 'privilege' of owning rather than renting. For anyone thinking about buying at the moment the cost of houses and the future movement should be a massive influence it could be the difference between able to afford future annual holidays, pensions etc or not.

Then don't! No-one will criticise you for it! But you missed my point, which was that even if prices fell or stagnated, there is no shortage of cold-blooded investors waiting to make a quick profit - just read some of the posts on this thread, made by people who clearly view a house as an investment, not a home!

When I first bought a house 30 years ago I didn't think of it as an investment, just a place of my own. It's different today - property speculation is far more prevalent. Just look at how many dived back in after last year's .25% IR cut.

Edited July 31, 2006 by Casual Observer

[moneymad]

With BTL yields at the lowest for 5 years and possibly falling further due to employment issues and affordability (rising fuel costs, travel, petrol etc.) leaving precious little for rent it is long past time where other investments would be more attractive and risk free. 5% Savings account for example.

IMO, the turn in the commercial viability of BTL heralds the start of the serious downside moves.

While I agree that the house you live in is not "boring" houses as investments would appear to be so if they are returning less than 5% or, dare we say it, negative returns. A more thrilling ride might be building stocks-if you like losing money that is.

How does the correlation of employment issues and cost of living rises equate with peolpe renting? if you're renting and worried about unemployment and the cost of living does this mean you give up renting and buy a house? If you mean the affordibility of property will becoming down then will people really buy if unemployment is an increasing risk?