Findaproperty.com Listing Continue To Rise Dramatically

[the_duke_of_hazzard]

Victor Meldrew: Yeahssssssssss

But the increase is 7% since January 17th. Not 1%. Thats a 700% difference.

Wittgenstein speculated that a man who refused to understand basic premises of discussed would be described as mad, eg if they refused to accept that one plus one is two. His point was that the premises of our arguments are so basic that they do not have any further ground to be justified by, so we must dismiss such people as mad. (Incidentally, he argued that philosophers often fell into this category).

I never thought that I would encounter such a person in real life.

[Guest wrongmove]

I think too much analysis can detract from the simplicity of the thread.

I don't think too much analysis can destract from the simplicity of your brain..........

[Realistbear]

Wittgenstein speculated that a man who refused to understand basic premises of discussed would be described as mad, eg if they refused to accept that one plus one is two. His point was that the premises of our arguments are so basic that they do not have any further ground to be justified by, so we must dismiss such people as mad. (Incidentally, he argued that philosophers often fell into this category).

I never thought that I would encounter such a person in real life.

Bears are hardly likely to have much in common with Neithers or some bulls??? Both arguing from different perspectives. Its what debate is--diagreeing with each other and making points.

[BrickingIt]

Bears are hardly likely to have much in common with Neithers or some bulls??? Both arguing from different perspectives. Its what debate is--diagreeing with each other and making points.

Your perspective being Sun newspaper, cherry picking headlines and data mining.

You're all cuddly though.

[the_duke_of_hazzard]

Bears are hardly likely to have much in common with Neithers or some bulls??? Both arguing from different perspectives. Its what debate is--diagreeing with each other and making points.

I don't believe it - you've missed the point _again_!

[cwcw]

Its a simple marketplace concept. If the number of oranges on the market suddenly rises the price falls. If the grocers selling oranges withdraw oranges from the market then supply declines and prices rise. However, if the amount of oranges for sale remains the same while the number if grocers declines the market is not affected.

But that isn't an analogy. An analogy would be if the grocers advertised each orange they offered for sale in the local paper. If the grocers withdraw oranges from the advertising in the local paper then supply still remains the same - those oranges still physically exist for sale. If the grocer advertises his oranges to a new local paper, that local paper will show an increase in supply based on what it's advertising. However, supply is still the same because the oranges were on sale already, they're just advertised in a new place.

I don't believe for one second that you don't understand this. You're either on a wind up mission or you don't like to accept when you're wrong. I think it speaks volumes that you simply skip past any posts that pull your logic apart by using simple examples that even a 5 year old could grasp the concept of.

Someone made the point about average properties for sale per estate agent, which gives a much better reflection of the market as a whole, although still based on a sample. However, an increase in supply of just over 1% in January is hardly unexpected in a market with seasonal fluctuations.

[Realistbear]

But that isn't an analogy. An analogy would be if the grocers advertised each orange they offered for sale in the local paper. If the grocers withdraw oranges from the advertising in the local paper then supply still remains the same - those oranges still physically exist for sale. If the grocer advertises his oranges to a new local paper, that local paper will show an increase in supply based on what it's advertising. However, supply is still the same because the oranges were on sale already, they're just advertised in a new place.

I don't believe for one second that you don't understand this. You're either on a wind up mission or you don't like to accept when you're wrong. I think it speaks volumes that you simply skip past any posts that pull your logic apart by using simple examples that even a 5 year old could grasp the concept of.

Someone made the point about average properties for sale per estate agent, which gives a much better reflection of the market as a whole, although still based on a sample. However, an increase in supply of just over 1% in January is hardly unexpected in a market with seasonal fluctuations.

IMO many of the thousands of properties coming onto FaP indicate a growing supply and/or a rush to get properties listed on an internet source as local marketing is not working.

If demand was meeting supply why double market? If these properties were NOT already being marketed then the point I am making is proven. You can't have it both ways. Herein lies the point of the thread.

Some of the properties were undoubtedly on sale already--some that is. But here you have 1000 or more new listings a day that have not sold elsewhere if they were already being marketed which should tell you that there is a large supply waiting to be offloaded.

[Guest d23]

The anecdotal evidence presented by other bears on this thread as to more for sale signs appearing, thicker property sections etc. all combine to produce a reasonably convincing argument that there is a lot more for sale today than there was a month ago and that seasonal reasons only explain part of the story.

presumably these are different from the fully signed up and commited bears responsible for the quotes below:

"I'm watching three areas by using Rightmove to look at all houses/ added in 7 days and added in 14 days.

So far in January, total available houses is down by 10% in one area and flat in the other two.

Supply is very, very tight in South Oxfordshire, NP7 and around Monmouth which are my areas."

"No...there are no more properties around here in Middlesex..marked is totally drying up."

"EA's don't seem to be panicking yet as there seems to be a larger pool of buyers versus the amount of houses available."

"Sorry, it just isn't, wish it was, in the various periods that I've house hunted I've never found so little on."

"While the situation is probably different in the rest of the country, this part of London, for houses is suffering from lack of supply"

"There are virtually no houses on the market at the moment - they are getting offers the day they go on."

"Could be that there is so little at the market EAs are putting prices higher and higher to grab the business?"

"But the good thing is the estate agents have nothing to sell."

"I believe there is definitely a shortage of property on the market in the South."

"Yes there is no two ways about it they have not be able to build/adapt enough new homes."

Of course they are all must lying judging by the 'evidence' you have so far provided; or maybe you have made a complete nonsense of your 'analysis'; or maybe they are all 'stealth bulls'

Edited February 8, 2007 by d23

[cwcw]

IMO many of the thousands of properties coming onto FaP indicate a growing supply and/or a rush to get properties listed on an internet source as local marketing is not working.

No it doesn't. It tells us that the internet is a growing medium for advertising property. The RightMove phenomenon happened throughout the boom years, so you can't argue that estate agents only list on the internet when they're getting desperate.

If demand was meeting supply why double market? If these properties were NOT already being marketed then the point I am making is proven. You can't have it both ways. Herein lies the point of the thread.

See above - estate agents have been adding listings to internet sites throughout the boom. Why would they change this now? Increasing the number of advertising outlets is likely to bring about a quicker sale with potentially more competing buyers. It doesn't mean they're getting desperate.

Some of the properties were undoubtedly on sale already--some that is. But here you have 1000 or more new listings a day that have not sold elsewhere if they were already being marketed which should tell you that there is a large supply waiting to be offloaded.

No. It tells me that FindAProperty is a growing website, much in the same way RightMove was, and is. RightMove is more saturated so would form a better basis for your simplistic analysis, but still a flawed one.

[Without_a_Paddle]

cwcw I'd better warn you that RB is a religious type who discounts all arguments that prove the earth is over 6000 years old!

He's argued this in great detail on other threads. he reckons the planet Earth is very young because the bible says so...

IMO RB also has similar blind faith in his argument about FaP and no amount of logic or reasoned argument will change that.

[spline]

This is quite funny , and I still can’t quite grasp that, despite all the help given here, RB still hasn’t managed to spot where he’s gone wrong – i.e. that the size of the housing market as estimated from the numbers listed on FindaProperty is proportional to N / EAs, and not, as he claims, by N, where N and EA denote the number of properties and estate agents respectively.

Perhaps what we need is a bit of “over analysis” as RB just loves this sort of thing, so maybe try something like this …

The number listed N is given by market share S times the market size M, so that’s

N = S * M

N = number listed on the website

S = market share (0-100%)

M = total size of the market (total houses available on market)

We can suppose, at least to a crude approx, that S ~ EAs / total_EAs, i.e. that S = EAs / const, which gives

N = EAs * M / const

and a bit of rearranging leads directly to

M = const * N / EAs

as already pointed out lots of others on this thread.

It’s a pity really, as I quite liked the idea that back in 1998, or whenever, before the website existed, there where absolutely *zero* houses for sale and buyers had to teleport them in from a parallel dimension.

[Seen It Before]

IMO many of the thousands of properties coming onto FaP indicate a growing supply and/or a rush to get properties listed on an internet source as local marketing is not working.

If demand was meeting supply why double market? If these properties were NOT already being marketed then the point I am making is proven. You can't have it both ways. Herein lies the point of the thread.

Some of the properties were undoubtedly on sale already--some that is. But here you have 1000 or more new listings a day that have not sold elsewhere if they were already being marketed which should tell you that there is a large supply waiting to be offloaded.

Say that only about 65% of the 265k properties are actually available to purchase when you strip out rentals and solds, this leaves about 175k as a round figure. Looking at that 175k in conjunction with the Land Registry ~300k sales for Oct - Dec 2006 it could be argued there is a shortage.

~1.1m properties are sold out of 22m residential households anually, looks like your magic website is going to need a lot more listings, the anagram of your user name just about sums you up, Alert Rabies!

[65243]

rb, please keep us updated with these figures, its getting interesting

[Guest d23]

rb, please keep us updated with these figures, its getting interesting

did you actually bother to read the preceding 20 odd pages of utter nonsense that this thread degenerated into?

[Realistbear]

presumably these are different from the fully signed up and commited bears responsible for the quotes below:

"I'm watching three areas by using Rightmove to look at all houses/ added in 7 days and added in 14 days.

So far in January, total available houses is down by 10% in one area and flat in the other two.

Supply is very, very tight in South Oxfordshire, NP7 and around Monmouth which are my areas."

"No...there are no more properties around here in Middlesex..marked is totally drying up."

"EA's don't seem to be panicking yet as there seems to be a larger pool of buyers versus the amount of houses available."

"Sorry, it just isn't, wish it was, in the various periods that I've house hunted I've never found so little on."

"While the situation is probably different in the rest of the country, this part of London, for houses is suffering from lack of supply"

"There are virtually no houses on the market at the moment - they are getting offers the day they go on."

"Could be that there is so little at the market EAs are putting prices higher and higher to grab the business?"

"But the good thing is the estate agents have nothing to sell."

"I believe there is definitely a shortage of property on the market in the South."

"Yes there is no two ways about it they have not be able to build/adapt enough new homes."

Of course they are all must lying judging by the 'evidence' you have so far provided; or maybe you have made a complete nonsense of your 'analysis'; or maybe they are all 'stealth bulls'

The solution is to go on FaP or a similar site and buy a house listed on there--there are hundreds of thousands of them available and 1000 or so new listings each day. With that many available properties the keen buyers couyld buy more than one each!

The "bear" that said there is nothing for sale in MDDX should go to the Middlesex listings on FaP. There are not under a thousand--which is a lot, but almost 10,000 on offer. A quick look at the hundreds of pages of property shows anything from 115k for a flat to massively overpriced gaffs overlooking gasworks etc.

http://www.findaproperty.com/searchresults...&allareas=1

The person who says there is nothing in Oxforshire can delight in almost 800 choices, with dozens coming on every day or so:

http://www.findaproperty.com/searchresults...&allareas=1

Remember, this is just FaP, there are many other sources with lots of houses up for sale.

[Realistbear]

Say that only about 65% of the 265k properties are actually available to purchase when you strip out rentals and solds, this leaves about 175k as a round figure. Looking at that 175k in conjunction with the Land Registry ~300k sales for Oct - Dec 2006 it could be argued there is a shortage.

~1.1m properties are sold out of 22m residential households anually, looks like your magic website is going to need a lot more listings, the anagram of your user name just about sums you up, Alert Rabies!

FaP is just one source. Add all sources and I daresay the numbers are huge. The rentals ought to remain in as a downmarket often sees for sales turn into rentals once the vendor has given up and is getting desperate. For Sale/Rent is a clear sign of a market in distress. We were in that position in 1992 trying to do another STM. Should start to see a few of these around about now.

Also, we are at the beginning of the downcycle if the LR is right in showing 5 months in a row of slowing (it has to slow before going YoY negative). The herd is only just getting jumpy and just about anything could trigger a stampede.

[Realistbear]

This is quite funny , and I still can’t quite grasp that, despite all the help given here, RB still hasn’t managed to spot where he’s gone wrong – i.e. that the size of the housing market as estimated from the numbers listed on FindaProperty is proportional to N / EAs, and not, as he claims, by N, where N and EA denote the number of properties and estate agents respectively.

Perhaps what we need is a bit of “over analysis” as RB just loves this sort of thing, so maybe try something like this …

The number listed N is given by market share S times the market size M, so that’s

N = S * M

N = number listed on the website

S = market share (0-100%)

M = total size of the market (total houses available on market)

We can suppose, at least to a crude approx, that S ~ EAs / total_EAs, i.e. that S = EAs / const, which gives

N = EAs * M / const

and a bit of rearranging leads directly to

M = const * N / EAs

as already pointed out lots of others on this thread.

It’s a pity really, as I quite liked the idea that back in 1998, or whenever, before the website existed, there where absolutely *zero* houses for sale and buyers had to teleport them in from a parallel dimension.

On another note: where are you with UKC? I dumped 80% of my holding last week at 4.11. Its up a little since then. IMO, the market had factored in their massive property holdings and a HPC will devalue that stash very quickly. Made 300% on my first tranch which was nice. Almost enough to keep up with inflation in Rhodesia.

[Willy Weasel]

Just a thought, RB. How many properties would you expect there to be for sale in a Bull maket?

[Guest d23]

The solution is to go on FaP or a similar site and buy a house listed on there--there are hundreds of thousands of them available and 1000 or so new listings each day. With that many available properties the keen buyers couyld buy more than one each!

The "bear" that said there is nothing for sale in MDDX should go to the Middlesex listings on FaP. There are not under a thousand--which is a lot, but almost 10,000 on offer. A quick look at the hundreds of pages of property shows anything from 115k for a flat to massively overpriced gaffs overlooking gasworks etc.

http://www.findaproperty.com/searchresults...&allareas=1

The person who says there is nothing in Oxforshire can delight in almost 800 choices, with dozens coming on every day or so:

http://www.findaproperty.com/searchresults...&allareas=1

Remember, this is just FaP, there are many other sources with lots of houses up for sale.

Spin spin spin spin

The "bear" that said there is nothing for sale in MDDX should go to the Middlesex listings on FaP. There are not under a thousand--which is a lot, but almost 10,000 on offer. A quick look at the hundreds of pages of property shows anything from 115k for a flat to massively overpriced gaffs overlooking gasworks etc.

Middlesex is a very large sprawling area incorporating several london boroughs and a huge population ; also you have (spun) forgot to exclude sold; if you do so you'll see there are 5900 of which two hundred are commercial properties. Many are listed multiply also.

The person who says there is nothing in Oxforshire can delight in almost 800 choices, with dozens coming on every day or so:

http://www.findaproperty.com/searchresults...&allareas=1

exclude sold and there are 595, not really a flood for a county with 241,218 households

RB, once again: All I'm saying is that FaP is not a reliable indicator of anything, I'm not saying there is a desperate shortage, just telling you that this does not prove there is an enormous flood.

do you remember the last time you got this excited about an EA's website figures?

The rate at which house prices are being reduced leads me to the inescapable conclusion that we have a house price crash on our hands.

this was in 2005, 9 months before the 'surprise' rate cut.

Lots of bearish news to examine RB, or to 'bait' bulls / neithers with.

Edited February 9, 2007 by d23

[Realistbear]

Just a thought, RB. How many properties would you expect there to be for sale in a Bull maket?

Impossible to say.

BTW--the theoretical return of 50% if I owned a house in Warks since 2003 looks a bit thin now that the FT index is out that shows W Midlands up well under 5% last year. Down in 2005. A simple savings account would have beaten that return. STRing would have been better at the end of 2004.

[Without_a_Paddle]

Impossible to say.

BTW--the theoretical return of 50% if I owned a house in Warks since 2003 looks a bit thin now that the FT index is out that shows W Midlands up well under 5% last year. Down in 2005. A simple savings account would have beaten that return. STRing would have been better at the end of 2004.

But where would you live whilst the STR fund was in the savings account?

After tax any interest would barely pay the rent. So the STR would be losing money compared to a homeowner. i.e. the STR would get no net growth on their ladybird saver account. All that savings growth goes to the LANDLORD

Face it RB, you seem to be in total denial of the fact there has been a house price boom in recent years.

You sold your house and banked the cash. People then borrowed your money from the bank to buy more houses and this fuelled HPI still further.

You got your interest every year and you got taxed on the interest and your Landlord took the remaining interest away as rent money. The Landlord (and other homeowners) sat back and watched the property gain value with HPI as you paid off the mortgage with your rent payments...

Which bit of this don't you understand?

[j.b.m.c.]

Face it RB, you seem to be in total denial of the fact there has been a house price boom in recent years.

100% correct. RB is an embittered individual who refuses to admit that he called the HPC incorrectly.

Like some (but not all) of the bears on these boards, they are wishful thinking, hoping, praying for a HPC. Yet I've heard no one state how much prices will crash and when.... like I said, wishful thinking.

Which bit of this don't you understand?

100% actually!

[time_and_tide]

100% correct. RB is an embittered individual who refuses to admit that he called the HPC incorrectly.

Like some (but not all) of the bears on these boards, they are wishful thinking, hoping, praying for a HPC. Yet I've heard no one state how much prices will crash and when.... like I said, wishful thinking.

It's no crime to wish for a long overdue correction to a bubble that has been horribly distorting the market - just as you fervently hope it won't happen, for your own selfish reasons.

Difficult to say exactly when and by how much, but I am absolutely confident that it will happen because this phenonena just screams 'bubble' and all bubbles, throughout history, sooner or later, without exception, go BANG.

Come to terms with it or suffer the consequences.

[Guest grumpy-old-man]

100% correct. RB is an embittered individual who refuses to admit that he called the HPC incorrectly.

Like some (but not all) of the bears on these boards, they are wishful thinking, hoping, praying for a HPC. Yet I've heard no one state how much prices will crash and when.... like I said, wishful thinking.

100% actually!

50% in most areas over a 5 year period from now. The crash has started, I have the data if you want to see it

I see it going Japanese & a big recession (poss depression) the same or bigger than 1929.

given all the data that floats about on this site, even a numptie would say a crash is imminent, I say we are in the first stages right now.

Edited February 9, 2007 by grumpy-old-man

[65243]

50% in most areas over a 5 year period from now. The crash has started, I have the data if you want to see it

I see it going Japanese & a big recession (poss depression) the same or bigger than 1929.

given all the data that floats about on this site, even a numptie would say a crash is imminent, I say we are in the first stages right now.

hi, i would be interested to see the figures