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

E A Haart Admit London House Prices Are Falling

Recommended Posts

http://www.mfgonline.co.uk/story.asp?story...sectioncode=110

FTBs return to market
8 August, 2006
haart estate agents has revealed a return of first-time buyers (FTBs) to the property market.
London house prices have fallen by 1% in July to £245,017
Buyers
typically receive a 3% reduction
in asking price
• The level of first time buyers in the market has risen by 2% up to 28%
The latest data from haart estate agents reveals that the average London house price has fallen by a further 1% in July to £245,017 from £247,703 in June. However, prices are 8% higher than they were this time last year.

Flies in the face of NuLabour's NuLandRegistry stats. Could Haart be trying to stimulate a dead market by getting prices down so that people actually buy a house?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.mfgonline.co.uk/story.asp?story...sectioncode=110

FTBs return to market
8 August, 2006
haart estate agents has revealed a return of first-time buyers (FTBs) to the property market.
London house prices have fallen by 1% in July to £245,017
Buyers
typically receive a 3% reduction
in asking price
• The level of first time buyers in the market has risen by 2% up to 28%
The latest data from haart estate agents reveals that the average London house price has fallen by a further 1% in July to £245,017 from £247,703 in June. However, prices are 8% higher than they were this time last year.

Flies in the face of NuLabour's NuLandRegistry stats. Could Haart be trying to stimulate a dead market by getting prices down so that people actually buy a house?

Good spot, RB.

I looked at the LR figures expecting to be disheartened but that wasn't the case when it came to London. Westminster and K&C falling last quarter, other trendy areas looking sickly. But we were told that the "bonus effect" had created a another boom - what tosh.

From what I can see, buyers and investors are desperately scrabbling around for a few 'undervalued' areas which has pushed up the overall figures.

Looks like Fred Harrison was right after all! (05-07 winner's curse).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once the EAs realise that the market is stagnating they will go quickly into reverse gear because the one thing an EA needs is TURNOVER. Rising prices are great if they can keep their percentage the same but they still need houses to sell to make a commission. You might find EAs turn bearish very quickly to encourage buyers back to the market once the BTL crowd disappear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk about selective interpretation of stats.

Let's revisit this, shall we?

haart estate agents has revealed a return of first-time buyers (FTBs) to the property market......The level of first time buyers in the market has risen by 2% up to 28%
So that will further support the market. 7.7% more FTBs. That's a significant increase.
London house prices have fallen by 1% in July to £245,017....
BUT ...
However, prices are 8% higher than they were this time last year.
A single month's figures is neither here nor there. It's the rolling trend that matters, and 12 months takes seasonal fluctuations into account.
Buyers typically receive a 3% reduction in asking price
only in extremely overheated markets do people pay the full asking price. So what?

All in all, this tells me the market looks set to remain firm.

Edited by JohnG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk about selective interpretation of stats.

Totally agree, this is one of the worst examples of RealistBear's spin. RB, do you really think people can't think for themselves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest wrongmove

Totally agree, this is one of the worst examples of RealistBear's spin. RB, do you really think people can't think for themselves?

RB thinks we all stupid sheep in his flock. I find many of his posts quite insulting, given the level of education and general intelligence to be found on this board. His quantity of input would be admirable, if every post did not take us for fools. Still, it takes all sorts, I suppose.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk about selective interpretation of stats.

Let's revisit this, shall we?

Careful JohnG!! You don't want be a hypocrite now...

A 2 percent rise in FTBs is RELATIVE. It could indicate that other buyers are staying away...therefore possibly a DECREASE in buyers overall!!

Also it not a single months figures..."fell by a FURTHER 1%" suggests it has fallen previously.

Don't give RB a hard time over this...its written by an EA for chrissake! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Careful JohnG!! You don't want be a hypocrite now...

A 2 percent rise in FTBs is RELATIVE. It could indicate that other buyers are staying away...therefore possibly a DECREASE in buyers overall!!

Also it not a single months figures..."fell by a FURTHER 1%" suggests it has fallen previously.

Don't give RB a hard time over this...its written by an EA for chrissake! ;)

It's a 7.7% rise in FTBs, albeit from a lower base than in previous years. My guess is that FTBs are replacing BTLs as the numbers are becoming increasingly difficult to stack up from an investor's point of view.

The FURTHER 1% was compared to what? The previous month? 2 months ago, the last 4 consecutive months? 1 month nearly a year ago? In the absence of that information we need to go back to a rolling 12 month basis.

Yes, the original article was written by an EA, but the reinterpretation of the figures presented in the article were all RB's own work. :huh:

Edited by JohnG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk about selective interpretation of stats.

Let's revisit this, shall we?

So that will further support the market. 7.7% more FTBs. That's a significant increase.

BUT ... A single month's figures is neither here nor there. It's the rolling trend that matters, and 12 months takes seasonal fluctuations into account.

only in extremely overheated markets do people pay the full asking price. So what?

All in all, this tells me the market looks set to remain firm.

I'm with JohnG: the interpretation is way too selective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RB thinks we all stupid sheep in his flock. I find many of his posts quite insulting, given the level of education and general intelligence to be found on this board. His quantity of input would be admirable, if every post did not take us for fools. Still, it takes all sorts, I suppose.....

It seems Haart have rained on the Bull's parade doesn't it? :lol:

What is also interesting is that it was Haart who claim the 1% drop in London prices and that buyers are able to negotiate a 3% discount. Not very good news if you are a bull?

I think you have muddled what Haart state and what you would like to attribute to the poster. Regrettably for the Bull's, Haart have not spun anything but blandly stated that house prices are down in London. The "return of the FTBs" has apprently not helped prices much is they are falling by 1% in a month.

But the bottom line is what counts. A 1% drop runs counter to the VI spin that prices in London are going up. The EAs may be finding that the spin is working against them by putting would-be buyers off until the crash gathers pace.

Here is a cut and paste from their artcile which I doubt you can spin to read that prices are going up:

FTBs return to market
8 August, 2006
haart estate agents has revealed a return of first-time buyers (FTBs) to the property market.
• London house prices have fallen by 1% in July to £245,017
• Buyers typically receive a 3% reduction in asking price
• The level of first time buyers in the market has risen by 2% up to 28%
The latest data from haart estate agents reveals that the average London house price has fallen by a further 1% in July to £245,017 from £247,703 in June. However, prices are 8% higher than they were this time last year.

Down 1% in a month :o Let's see, that's an annualised drop of_____________% :D

I'm with JohnG: the interpretation is way too selective.

Too Bearish? What part of the Haart report was not too your liking? The 1% drop or the 3% discount? <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is also interesting is that it was Haart who claim the 1% drop in London prices and that buyers are able to negotiate a 3% discount. Not very good news if you are a bull?

According to Hometrack reports back in 2005, when the London market really was weak, buyers were negotiating an average 7% discount from the asking price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems Haart have rained on the Bull's parade doesn't it? :lol:

What is also interesting is that it was Haart who claim the 1% drop in London prices and that buyers are able to negotiate a 3% discount. Not very good news if you are a bull?

I think you have muddled what Haart state and what you would like to attribute to the poster. Regrettably for the Bull's, Haart have not spun anything but blandly stated that house prices are down in London. The "return of the FTBs" has apprently not helped prices much is they are falling by 1% in a month.

But the bottom line is what counts. A 1% drop runs counter to the VI spin that prices in London are going up. The EAs may be finding that the spin is working against them by putting would-be buyers off until the crash gathers pace.

Here is a cut and paste from their artcile which I doubt you can spin to read that prices are going up:

FTBs return to market
8 August, 2006
haart estate agents has revealed a return of first-time buyers (FTBs) to the property market.
• London house prices have fallen by 1% in July to £245,017
• Buyers typically receive a 3% reduction in asking price
• The level of first time buyers in the market has risen by 2% up to 28%
The latest data from haart estate agents reveals that the average London house price has fallen by a further 1% in July to £245,017 from £247,703 in June. However, prices are 8% higher than they were this time last year.

Down 1% in a month :o Let's see, that's an annualised drop of_____________% :DToo Bearish? What part of the Haart report was not too your liking? The 1% drop or the 3% discount? <_<

Up 8% in a year.... that's up 24% in three years using your technique for price projections....? :huh:

3% discount means that the selling price is 97% of asking price which is above normal IMO. i.e. bullish.

Despite this even MORE FTBs are returning to the market. They're willing to pay about 8% more than last year.

You are clinging to your one PATHETIC statistic of a 1% monthly fall. This month would have been slightly affected by the World Cup and also the extremely hot weather during that month and the fact that house prices have seasonal ripples anyway. During the summer, house buying activity falls off.

This thread (and your spin) is just showing you up as a fool, RB. You sound like you don't have a CLUE about the housing market and how it operates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest wrongmove

More patronising nonsense from RB. As I am renting, I really wish this did rain and the bull's parade. Seems it's only raining on the bullsh1tter's parade, unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More patronising nonsense from RB. As I am renting, I really wish this did rain and the bull's parade. Seems it's only raining on the bullsh1tter's parade, unfortunately.

Come on, you can't call Haart bad names as they are only reporting what they claim to be finding. Why do you think their report of a 1% decline in London prices together with a 3% discount is untrue? <_<

Up 8% in a year.... that's up 24% in three years using your technique for price projections....? :huh:

3% discount means that the selling price is 97% of asking price which is above normal IMO. i.e. bullish.

Despite this even MORE FTBs are returning to the market. They're willing to pay about 8% more than last year.

You are clinging to your one PATHETIC statistic of a 1% monthly fall. This month would have been slightly affected by the World Cup and also the extremely hot weather during that month and the fact that house prices have seasonal ripples anyway. During the summer, house buying activity falls off.

This thread (and your spin) is just showing you up as a fool, RB. You sound like you don't have a CLUE about the housing market and how it operates.

Have you sent in your complaint to Haart? Its dissappointing news for the Bulls that is for sure just when the VIs were into their "up up and away" spin on the heels of the NuLabour NuLand registry stats. :)

How does that old saying go--don't shoot the messenger (poster) for the bad news contained in the message (post)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest wrongmove

Come on, you can't call Haart bad names as they are only reporting what they claim to be finding. Why do you think their report of a 1% decline in London prices together with a 3% discount is untrue? <_<

Have you sent in your complaint to Haart? Its dissappointing news for the Bulls that is for sure just when the VIs were into their "up up and away" spin on the heels of the NuLabour NuLand registry stats. :)

How does that old saying go--don't shoot the messenger (poster) for the bad news contained in the message (post)?

Where did you get the idea that only bull's think you bull ? I rent, and have a deposit saved and a reasonable income, so I am out of the market by choice. Hardly a raging bull. If your spin was true I would be delighted. The truth of the article is that prices are up 8% this year and buyers are getting average to smaller than average discounts. There has been a tiny drop while everybody was on holiday - perfectly normal for a healthy market at this time of year.

But you know this RB, you just think we are all too stupid to come to our own conclusions.

What about Warwick - up by 43% this year ! (annualised figure based on flaky stats) Even the real bulls don't continually spout nonsense like this. They credit us readers with some intelligence. Something you refuse to do.

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where did you get the idea that only bull's think you bull ? I rent, and have a deposit saved and a reasonable income, so I am out of the market by choice. Hardly a raging bull. If your spin was true I would be delighted. The truth of the article is that prices are up 8% this year and buyers are getting average to smaller than average discounts. There has been a tiny drop while everybody was on holiday - perfectly normal for a healthy market at this time of year.

But you know this RB, you just think we are all too stupid to come to our own conclusions.

What about Warwick - up by 43% this year ! (annualised figure based on flaky stats) Even the real bulls don't continually spout nonsense like this. They credit us readers with some intelligence. Something you refuse to do.

:rolleyes:

But what part of the Haart "bull" did you disagree with? Was it the drop of 1% in one month or the 3% discount? IMO, it was a simple straightforward report, admittedly from a VI, but worthy of posting for its frankness.

And how do you know that the Haart report is not true? Is it any less true than the other VI spin we get about house prices raging in London?

Sometimes it good to have a Bear report to counter the VI spin and IMO the Haart report was as good counter-spin as I have seen for ages. Why? Because it was Bear news comning from a leading VI.

If you object to it, why not complain to Haart directly and say their stats are freakish, spin or lacking in intelligence?

Your Avatar does seem a bit Bullish and might seem to symbolise an action that involves a particular kind of Bull product you claim to be against. <_<

Edited by Realistbear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest wrongmove

But what part of the Haart "bull" did you disagree with? Was it the drop of 1% in one month or the 3% discount? IMO, it was a simple straightforward report, admittedly from a VI, but worthy of posting for its frankness.

And how do you know that the Haart report is not true? Is it any less true than the other VI spin we get about house prices raging in London?

Sometimes it good to have a Bear report to counter the VI spin and IMO the Haart report was as good counter-spin I have seen for ages. Why? because it was Bear news comning from a leading VI.

If you object to it, why not complain to Haart directly and say their stats are freakins, spin or lacking in intelligence?

Your Avatar does seem a bit Bullish and might seem to symbolise an action that involves a particular kind of Bull product you claim to be against. <_<

:lol:

My avatar is a bull taking a sh1t !

And as you know, despite your straw man debating style, I have no problem with the Haart report. It fits with the other available data - prices up 8% YoY, discounts small, seasonal drop last month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

My avatar is a bull taking a sh1t !

And as you know, despite your straw man debating style, I have no problem with the Haart report. It fits with the other available data - prices up 8% YoY, discounts small, seasonal drop last month.

Bull sh1t?

Okay, so you have no problem with the Haart report. Neither do I, so we are agreed.

Time to move on to the next. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too Bearish? What part of the Haart report was not too your liking? The 1% drop or the 3% discount? <_<

To be clear, I am a bear. However, there is not much that is helpful to the bear cause here.

Like JohnG said, a single month's figures is not sufficient to draw any conclusions and over 12 months prices are still up; only in extremely overheated markets do people pay the full asking price.

You've spun a few figures to suit your point of view (which also happens to be mine), but it's still obvious spin.

And how do you know that the Haart report is not true? Is it any less true than the other VI spin we get about house prices raging in London?

No one is saying it's not true, just that it does not contain much good news for bears.

Or to put it another way, I am saying your interpretation of the article is flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear, I am a bear. However, there is not much that is helpful to the bear cause here.

Like JohnG said, a single month's figures is not sufficient to draw any conclusions and over 12 months prices are still up; only in extremely overheated markets do people pay the full asking price.

You've spun a few figures to suit your point of view (which also happens to be mine), but it's still obvious spin.

I have noticed that the VIs have a tendency to report monthly figures and suggest trends on the basis of them.

What figures have Haart spun here? The 1% drop in a month or the 3% discount? Or is there no spin in the article?

Or is it the whole artcile you object to? It is bearish I have to admit and all artciles from VIs admitting price drops are very significant. It is rare to see a VI, especially an EA, admit things are not so good. They normally like to report that houses are flhying off the shelves or that prices are "up up up" etc. Haart's artcile was, IMO, very refreshing. It has obviously stirred the Bulls and Trolls somewhat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have noticed that the VIs have a tendency to report monthly figures and suggest trends on the basis of them.

What figures have Haart spun here? The 1% drop in a month or the 3% discount? Or is there no spin in the article?

Or is it the whole artcile you object to? It is bearish I have to admit and all artciles from VIs admitting price drops are very significant. It is rare to see a VI, especially an EA, admit things are not so good. They normally like to report that houses are flhying off the shelves or that prices are "up up up" etc. Haart's artcile was, IMO, very refreshing. It has obviously stirred the Bulls and Trolls somewhat?

Realist Bear, are you pulling my leg or what? You do not seem to read what I write.

Yes, VIs report monthly figures then annualise them. It's intellectually dishonest, so don't copy them.

Yes, the Haart article contains a mixture of fact and spin: they downplay the 1% and overplay the 8%. You can do better by focussing on fact and reasoned arguments, not spin.

I do not object to the whole article. It contains a few interesting element, the 1% drop being one, though it should not be overanalysed. I do object to your interpretation of the article, as your interpretation is a full of anti VI spin. I don't like spin whether it supports or attacks my position. I like facts and reasoned analysis.

I am neither a Bull nor a Troll, just a priced out FTB who want to understand the market better before making what will probably be the biggest financial decision of my life.

The post you have made in this thread have not helped on that front (though, I freely admity, post in other threads have)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Realist Bear, are you pulling my leg or what? You do not seem to read what I write.

Yes, VIs report monthly figures then annualise them. It's intellectually dishonest, so don't copy them.

Yes, the Haart article contains a mixture of fact and spin: they downplay the 1% and overplay the 8%. You can do better by focussing on fact and reasoned arguments, not spin.

I do not object to the whole article. It contains a few interesting element, the 1% drop being one, though it should not be overanalysed. I do object to your interpretation of the article, as your interpretation is a full of anti VI spin. I don't like spin whether it supports or attacks my position. I like facts and reasoned analysis.

I am neither a Bull nor a Troll, just a priced out FTB who want to understand the market better before making what will probably be the biggest financial decision of my life.

The post you have made in this thread have not helped on that front (though, I freely admity, post in other threads have)

Now I am confused. I have cut and pasted my "analysis" which you think is spin:

Flies in the face of NuLabour's NuLandRegistry stats. Could Haart be trying to stimulate a dead market by getting prices down so that people actually buy a house?

I think its a fair comment on the shock report from a VI that HPI is going down. It asks questions for response. Instead the Bulls, Trolls and peculiar Bears have jumped on it to say its MY spin! :blink: Blame Haart for their stats not me. I thought they were very much in the Bear's favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its a fair comment on the shock report from a VI that HPI is going down. It asks questions for response. Instead the Bulls, Trolls and peculiar Bears have jumped on it to say its MY spin! :blink: Blame Haart for their stats not me. I thought they were very much in the Bear's favour.

Haart's figures aren't the issue here, RB; it is your selective use of them. You ignored a number of key facts such as:

* "First time buyer levels are at their highest level in 12 months, having risen 2% in July to 28% of the market share as their confidence remains high."

* "prices are 8% higher than they were this time last year."

* “The South East region of London was the only region to see a price increase of 4.9%, bringing its average price closer to those of the other regions (£223,502). The South East has been boosted by the increased demand due to the good schools in the area and the shortage of suitable property.”

Having said that, thanks for posting this; I do appreciate the time you put in to this. :)

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.

  • 301 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.