Hometrack +0.4%

[BufferBear Bitcoin Bull]

Will post story l8r.

http://money.guardian.co.uk/houseprices/st...1934919,00.html

http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe...1934919,00.html

Edited October 30, 2006 by Buffer Bear

[look to the past]

"with property values in and around London climbing by closer to 12%"

nice - that has got to be £25000+ profit just for having a morgage

[blondebier]

... that has got to be £25000+ profit just for having a morgage ...

How does that work then?

[Realistbear]

"with property values in and around London climbing by closer to 12%"

nice - that has got to be £25000+ profit just for having a morgage

As they say, the proof is in the pudding, or in this case, in the selling. Don't forget, house prices are just opinion whereas debt is real.

[Bearfacts]

The Times has this splashed across the front page with the headline 'Millionaires Push House Prices to Record High'.

The accompanying artricle is absolutley shameless ramping with all the usual old chestnuts wheeled out i.e central London prices being driven by hoardes of Russian Billionaires and city Bankers with record bonuses ... yadda yadda. One has to ask, as according to Hometrack the rise is the same as last months, why the big splash ? Last months data barely got a mention in the Business section but this months data is Front page news ... could it be a reaction to the Bearish news emmanating from the U.S and the threat of rate rises ? It should also be noted that the Times is now in the business of pushing mortgages.

Funnily enough though if you look at the graph they print of Hometracks data -what it shows is that prices fell by about 4% from 2004 to 2005 and now for England and Wales they have risen about 4% 2005-2006. It forms an almost perfect sine wave with the losses equalling the pluses. So what the data really tells us is that prices since 2004 have gone down a bit and then gone up a bit with the net result that prices have remained flat. In real terms of course this is a fall by the rate of inflation. And if you had taken your cash and put it on into an ordinary saving account you would have made 10%.

I did say yesterday that we should expect a wall of propoganda for the next week or so to counter the real bad economic news that is emerging - just see it for what it is and chill.

[Guest Cletus VanDamme]

How does that work then?

It make Londoners feel even more wealthy, to keep them spending.

[look to the past]

How does that work then?

Average house in london last year £200000+(ish) 12%increase = £24000+

The Times has this splashed across the front page with the headline 'Millionaires Push House Prices to Record High'.

The accompanying artricle is absolutley shameless ramping with all the usual old chestnuts wheeled out i.e central London prices being driven by hoardes of Russian Billionaires and city Bankers with record bonuses ... yadda yadda. One has to ask, as according to Hometrack the rise is the same as last months, why the big splash ? Last months data barely got a mention in the Business section but this months data is Front page news ... could it be a reaction to the Bearish news emmanating from the U.S and the threat of rate rises ? It should also be noted that the Times is now in the business of pushing mortgages.

Funnily enough though if you look at the graph they print of Hometracks data -what it shows is that prices fell by about 4% from 2004 to 2005 and now for England and Wales they have risen about 4% 2005-2006. It forms an almost perfect sine wave with the losses equalling the pluses. So what the data really tells us is that prices since 2004 have gone down a bit and then gone up a bit with the net result that prices have remained flat. In real terms of course this is a fall by the rate of inflation. And if you had taken your cash and put it on into an ordinary saving account you would have made 10%.

I did say yesterday that we should expect a wall of propoganda for the next week or so to counter the real bad economic news that is emerging - just see it for what it is and chill.

The problem is prices when down last year up this year –so we could have broke even – but prices are still rising – what is it going to take to change this small problem for a HPC

[Bearfacts]

The problem is prices when down last year up this year –so we could have broke even – but prices are still rising – what is it going to take to change this small problem for a HPC

I.Rs going up - same thing that caused the falls in 2004-2005. I seem to rememebr 4.75% was too much for the market last time around. How will it cope with rates at 5% + ?

Change in sentiment as sheeple realise that house prices can fall - ie contagion from the U.S

Recession in U.S spreads to Europe and U.K.

Debt ceiling reached.

Rising unemployment

FTB being priced out.

Speculators trying to get out before the cack hits the fan.

Take your pick.

Yes you could have broken even over 2004-2006 but had you put your lolly into an ordinary savings account then your cash would have grown by at least 8%.

Edited October 30, 2006 by Bearfacts

[Europa]

One has to ask, as according to Hometrack the rise is the same as last months, why the big splash ? Last months data barely got a mention in the Business section but this months data is Front page news ... could it be a reaction to the Bearish news emmanating from the U.S and the threat of rate rises ? It should also be noted that the Times is now in the business of pushing mortgages.

More likely it was a slow news day; not everything is rooted in a conspiracy

[look to the past]

I.Rs going up - same thing that caused the falls in 2004-2005. I seem to rememebr 4.75% was too much for the market last time around. How will it cope with rates at 5% + ?

Change in sentiment as sheeple realise that house prices can fall - ie contagion from the U.S

I don’t think that 4.75% was to much before – I believe it stopped the market because of worries about if housing market would crash and that no one new how high IR’s would go – this time around I don’t think people will worry about either of the above (after all it’s now been proved HPI will go on for ever no mater what)

I think it will be down to affordability supply and demand – the most we can expect is 5.5% and it’s not going to break the bank

Yes you could have broken even over 2004-2006 but had you put your lolly into an ordinary savings account then your cash would have grown by at least 8%.

8% in two years - don't forget tax,rent and inflation - selling you house and putting the money in a bank is / has been a loser for the last 2 years

Edited October 30, 2006 by look to the past

[Bearfacts]

I don’t think that 4.75% was to much before – I believe it stopped the market because of worries about if housing market would crash and that no one new how high IR’s would go – this time around I don’t think people will worry about either of the above (after all it’s now been proved HPI will go on for ever no mater what)

I think it will be down to affordability supply and demand – the most we can expect is 5.5% and it’s not going to break the bank

8% in two years - don't forget tax,rent and inflation - selling you house and putting the money in a bank is / has been a loser for the last 2 years

4.75% was clearly too much - last time round thats why GB panicked and told the MPC to cut rates. I think 5.5% will be enough , infact I think 5% will be enough - we will see.

8% in two years is OK. Yes you have to pay rent, if you bought a house you'd be paying interest on teh mortgage. 8% allowed for tax, 10% before tax. If you had bought in the last two years you would have had to pay stamp duty, legal fees, agent fees etc. So I don't think selling and sticking the money in a bank has been a mistake atall but everyone's circumstances are different.