OffshoreAlert Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 Urban myth I'm afraid. "Goldfinger" was written by Fleming in the 1950's. Ian Fleming died in 1964, Trellick Tower was completed in 1972 so there is no way Fleming could have known about it. Not necessarily urban myth, this is the house that Fleming found so objectionable, built in the 30's: Willow Road Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roy? Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 It's not fair? Am i reading this right? Just because they made millions, it's not fair? Lord! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woof Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 It's not fair?Am i reading this right? Just because they made millions, it's not fair? Lord! You mean you don't understand why people on this forum despise them? Personally, I have respect for people who create something of value, something beneficial to people, something that exists only because of their talent and vision, and if as a consequence of that they make a lot of money, good for them. The Wilsons are no such thing. They bought up something already in existence and drove up its price. Then they remortaged and bought even more of the same thing, and so on. Any money they might have made was the ill gotten gains stolen from the younger generation. I hope they lose the ******ing lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XswampyX Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 It's not fair?Am i reading this right? Just because they made millions, it's not fair? Lord! What's fair got to do with anything. If you look around you do you see any fairness? I've got an idea..... I'll go to the job centre, and pay the employers £2,000 to get every job in there, then I will stand out side and get people to work for me, doing the jobs I've just bought. Of course I will be charging them 25% of their take home pay. If they don't like it well they are free to get another job. Oh wait...... I've got them all. mwahahahahahahah! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTID Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 If you have a limited company and require any sort of sizable loan the bank will always require a personal quarantee commitment where they would look at any personel assets/colaterol you own to offset against. 'strue. I only wanted a seven grand business credit card for my little company and I had to have 'HSBC' tattooed on one of my testes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTID Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 (I am the OP if you hadn't already noticed.) Hating the Wilsons is an infinite concept. There can be no OP. In a Zen sense, this thread has been running longer than time itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ʎqɐqɹǝʞɐɥs Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 To be honest I quite fancy Judith Wilson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meow Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Two points... 1) Isn't the wilson's attitude rather premature and glib? This would be all well and dandy if they had actual "sold" their portfolio but they're basically boasting that they're selling up and haven't realised a penny yet... surely? 2) Is it not the case that all asset bubbles have a dead cat bounce shortly after the initial stage of the drop into the abyss for precisely the reason the Wilsons are demonstrating... Johnny come latelys and once self satisfied, voyeuristsic, fence sitters catch on to the fact that this is real and there is no where (ultimately) from here to go but down Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverland Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Two points...1) Isn't the wilson's attitude rather premature and glib? This would be all well and dandy if they had actual "sold" their portfolio but they're basically boasting that they're selling up and haven't realised a penny yet... surely? 2) Is it not the case that all asset bubbles have a dead cat bounce shortly after the initial stage of the drop into the abyss for precisely the reason the Wilsons are demonstrating... Johnny come latelys and once self satisfied, voyeuristsic, fence sitters catch on to the fact that this is real and there is no where (ultimately) from here to go but down 1) They are hoping that random Russian billionaires and their advisers read the Times and the Estates Gazeetee/Property Week I would imagine 2) I tend to agree with you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScaredEitherWay Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 It kind of reminds you of Bovey's smugness and his profits yet to materialise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluffy666 Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 1) They are hoping that random Russian billionaires and their advisers read the Times and the Estates Gazeetee/Property Week I would imagine2) I tend to agree with you I think they did have an offer circa 2007 but rejected it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uriah Heap Posted September 4, 2009 Author Share Posted September 4, 2009 (edited) Recently I read an article about new property funds being formed to set up large scale BTL companies. I am sure the Wilson's empire, of real houses rather than new builds, would be of interest if the price is right. However, at a guess any fund would want a 10% gross return so if we assume 700 houses at an average rent of 700pm income is 5.88m per year giving a value of about 60m. If 60m is not enough to keep them solvent then they are in trouble, I cannot see a sale to lots of small investors raising much, the advantages of a single sale, stable values and income, would be lost. Replaced by buying into a firesale with no guarantee the market could adsorb the number of properties on sale. A very valid point - and when you think about it, what other measure of value does a property portfolio have other than as a source of a steady income? I think your actual valuation might be a tad generous though. Edited September 4, 2009 by Uriah Heap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash4781 Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 The couple, from Boughton Monchelsea, have homes throughout Kent including 50 to 70 in Shepway, with several in Hawkinge, and about 80 in Maidstone.Only three of their 700 properties are outside Kent. Mr Wilson stressed that the couple would try to protect tenants, selling out to large landlords, but could 'guarantee nothing'. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12...es-sale-go.html Sell them to Sibley! Have they sold them or are they announcing they have 697 properties in Kent to get rid off ? It's the boomers selling up as "Mr Wilson, 61, said: 'The time is right for us to go. It will break my heart to say goodbye to all the houses we have but you cannot take them to the grave with you.' " Quite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhaddock Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 "He says he won’t miss the biggest headache of being a mega buy-to-let landlord, which was debt-collectors pursuing ex-tenants for minor amounts of money that they didn’t actually owe." WTF? Daily Express article Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest happy? Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Anyone know how heavily leveraged the Wilsons are? The website suggested that the financing model was 85/15. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XswampyX Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Some of the comments are interesting. They could just be 'The BBC business personality of the year". Nathan Taylor wrote:Well they have done the maths, and it seems better to get out now befor the great crash of 2010/2011 ;-) My contempt for these people knows no limits. Any money they have 'made' in the last 20 years has been taken away from hard working families, who maybe were trying to buy a modest house near where they worked and were outbid by these two vultures, who then rented the same house back to them. I hope they never realise a penny after paying back the banks the £69,999,999 they probably owe. Phew! September 2, 2009 10:09 PM BST on UK-TimesOnline Recommended (72) Report Abuse Permalink User Image Tim Miller wrote: My money is on that they fear a further 20% drop which would break the covenants on most of their property loans. The banks would then force sales which would act as a domino effect on their whole portfolio. I am in property by the way, this crash is far from over. September 3, 2009 2:53 AM BST on UK-TimesOnline Recommend? (44) Report Abuse Permalink User Image Peter Fone wrote: These are the type of people that inflated the housing market in the 1st place, I sincerly hope they lose a ton of money! I believe there should be a " house is to live in" law! & massive tax for any second property, growing higher the more properties you own! September 3, 2009 7:37 AM BST on UK-TimesOnline Recommend? (35) Report Abuse Permalink User Image mit theimp wrote: Something should be done about the 'buy to let' market. Those with existing money can make more money at very little risk - while those struggling get nothing for paying a monthly rent equivalent to monthly mortgage repayments. September 3, 2009 12:19 AM BST on UK-TimesOnline Recommend? (30) Report Abuse Permalink User Image iain howell wrote: aren't these the landlords who took a tenant to court over a broken toilet lid and lost last month? September 3, 2009 2:12 AM BST on UK-TimesOnline Recommend? (27) Report Abuse Permalink User Image Nick Pike wrote: Well sales are still well down, and prices will drop further eventually. With their leverage, they could end up bust. Flooding the market with 900 houses is not going to enhance prices, is it. I think these people know that the future looks black, and this is a knee jerk reaction. They played on the market forever significantly going up beyond wage inflation, and as maths teachers, should have known that the maths dont allow this to happen for ever. September 3, 2009 3:07 AM BST on UK-TimesOnline Recommend? (26) Report Abuse Permalink User Image Mike C wrote: Did these planks really buy all their properties in one area? If so, there's no way out for them. Sell all at once and they'll flood the local market, try to drip-feed properties and they'll never off-load them before the market crashes again. They must be very highly geared. I doubt they'll come out of it with anything, let alone £170M! September 3, 2009 10:18 AM BST on UK-TimesOnline Recommend? (15) Report Abuse Permalink User Image Big Dave wrote: Given that this country has an acute shortage of housing, I would like to propose punitive taxes on properties which are not owner-occupied. Tying so much of this country's wealth up in bricks and mortar is a bad thing. September 3, 2009 10:14 AM BST on UK-TimesOnline Recommend? (14) Report Abuse Permalink User Image Peter Fone wrote: Steve H. Mmmm you seem to sum up whats wrong with the greed aspect in this country. Just because I think that houses are for living in & should be affordable (not free) hardly makes me an extreme communist. Where as you seem to perpetuate the capatalistic dogma that has driven this country to the dogs over the last 20 years! September 3, 2009 9:00 AM BST on UK-TimesOnline Recommend? (14) Report Abuse Permalink User Image Ben Holloway wrote: Nathan Taylor and Peter Fone are right on the money . " the Wilson's have a right to enjoy their property " But do they have the right to deprive others of enjoying their own property by making hundreds unavailable because of their wealth . Somewhere in your logic you seem to forget that others have these rights too . I don't see the section in ECHR where it says these rights are for wealthy landlords only . September 3, 2009 11:12 AM BST on UK-TimesOnline Recommend? (13) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Baron Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 (edited) Anyone know how heavily leveraged the Wilsons are? The website suggested that the financing model was 85/15. Difficult to predict with any precision because the story from the Wilsons is constantly changing. Based on debt/equity figures they issued last year (which simply didn't make any sense) some observers reckoned their balance sheet was already up to £10 million under water. Suddenly deciding to sell the whole portfolio suggests that their lenders could be making margin calls. I reckon they are bust. Edited September 4, 2009 by Red Baron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric pebble Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Is Sibley really Mr Wilson? You know what -- I think that's not all that unlikely! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Pint Princess 2 Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Interesting. I just used the Nationwide calculator A property located in Outer South East which was valued at £132000 in Q1 of 2003, would be worth approximately £153105 in Q2 of 2009. This is equivalent to a change of 15.99%. They have what, 700 houses, presumably all bought on I/O mortgages like this one. So presently they owe roughly £112,000 on that house and will possibly realise £153,000 in its sale minus some transaction costs. Make it 150,000. That's about £38,000 profit before tax. That's by no means a bad return and if you assume that's fairly typical then multiply it by 700 you get about £2.5m. Of course it depends on where they got the capital for the deposits. If they were re-mortgaging older properties, they may well get a lot less than 2.5m in profit out of their portfolio. Indeed, the big sign on their web-page says "never use your own money" to buy a house. i.e. all their early properties are likely to have been remortgaged to the hilt. They also say they always use Fixed Rates I/O and I bet their fixes are all coming to an end right now and they are struggling to re-mortgage because they have nothing below 75% LTV. I don't know when they stopped buying houses but I wouldn't mind betting that they kept buying right up to the peak. I suspect that there may well be a massive forced sale being hidden behind the numbers. That should be 25 Million I think, minus £4.5 Million (18% Capital Gains) so around £20 Million profit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric pebble Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 That should be 25 Million I think, minus £4.5 Million (18% Capital Gains) so around £20 Millionprofit? There's no way they're going to be able to shift all those properties and walk away with anything like £20m. They are in deep, deep doodoo's..... and they are going to need a very large supply of [very large] pants.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric pebble Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 "A consortium of professional footballers" Who are not, as a rule, renowned for their towering intellect............. It is PATHETIC isn't it?!! You can smell the dodginess of the whole thing from 200 miles away! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mancghirl Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Difficult to predict with any precision because the story from the Wilsons is constantly changing. Based on debt/equity figures they issued last year (which simply didn't make any sense) some observers reckoned their balance sheet was already up to £10 million under water.Suddenly deciding to sell the whole portfolio suggests that their lenders could be making margin calls. I reckon they are bust. It looks suspicious, doesn't it? A touch of the Anthea and Grant's about it 'We are not in financial trouble and I will sue anyone who says so.....' Couldn't have happened to a nicer pair. May the FTBs of Ashford and Maidstone lure them to their deaths and burn them in a Wickerman Edward Woodward stylee, singing manically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Miller Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 That should be 25 Million I think, minus £4.5 Million (18% Capital Gains) so around £20 Millionprofit? They did not build a property empire of once 900 house now 700 without constantly borrowing against existing houses they own. My guess is that they are in a very tight position and under pressure with any further falls leading to breaking the loan covenants. Because they so unwisely bought so many similar properties in the same area, selling to the public would only depress the market further. They are forced therefor to sell to the 'trade' where they will get a good kicking in the nadgers. Any buyer of any intellect will understand all to well what liability they are taking on, I doubt the Wilsons will get anything like top dollar at all, My bet is discount their values by a good 20%, maybe more. I note footballers were deemed as potential interested buyers, not Land Securities then or British land! The Wilsons are not going to come clean and say why they are really selling now, I bet it's forced or at least because they are advised that this crash is far from over and as I said earlier they could find the rugged pulled. It's the end of an era, BTL is now RIP, for now anyway. The $64,000 question is, Will any government put a stop to BTL's in the future? Going on track record and anything for a quick fix, I doubt it very much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecrashingisles Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Couldn't have happened to a nicer pair. May the FTBs of Ashford and Maidstone lure them to their deaths and burn them in a Wickerman Edward Woodward stylee, singing manically. "Prices are a-coming down" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hactonhouse Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Reading of the dilemna facing the Wilsons of how to dispose of their portfolio reminded me of a chap I read about in the press a few years ago. Like the Wilsons he needed to raise a lot of money and he also decided to sell his assets in one fell swoop. He too told the press in advance what he was proposing to do. The only difference between him and the Wilsons was that he was selling a pile of gold. As I recall he got a pitiful price for his efforts. Can't recall the chaps name but I'm sure a well educated couple like the Wilsons would have learned from this foolish fellows precedent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.