Channel 4 Dispatches 5.11.07

[Smell the Fear]

More pulp IMHO, did I hear correctly that the young investor, who had tenants in awe of him, is worth only the princely sum of 160K gross if he sells the lot up?

That was a particularly enjoyable comment, he actually said "I'm a self-made man".

Sorry mate, but your far from made and not much of a man if this is any indication of your abilities.

[bearly hopeful]

IMO, at this stage of the oncoming crash the programme was wholly justifiable in gently breaking in the sheeple. I would love to see BTL's crying en masse , even tortured a little, but i thought thought it was a good way to introduce the subject and subtelly point the finger at who's responsible. Cheers FP .

[Hawk]

IMO, at this stage of the oncoming crash the programme was wholly justifiable in gently breaking in the sheeple. I would love to see BTL's crying en masse , even tortured a little, but i thought thought it was a good way to introduce the subject and subtelly point the finger at who's responsible. Cheers FP .

I don’t think that was their plan to slowly break the poor fragile public in to the news of oncoming crash – The programme was supposed to be an exposé of the current housing crisis.

THEY MISSED THE POINT, or didn’t stress the main point enough at least.

It was diluted, shite and didn’t tell anyone anything that they didn’t already know.

The more pressure we put on media like channel 4 – Telling them what we want to see on their channel, the more likely they are going to broadcast it.

I’m not denying that the crash is now unstoppable but we have to be proactive in the sense of making people believe that their house isn’t worth what they think it is.

Most of the delay in the crash happening will be changing people’s attitudes. Anyone whose house isn’t getting repossessed will be in denial.

Edited November 5, 2007 by Hawk

[eric pebble]

I distinctly remember hearing one guy say that in these situations all the talk by experts of a soft landing usually turnout to

be wrong and what we inevitably get is a hard landing.

To hear that on TV was refreshing.

Also those young couples that bought houses at the end didnt look too happy about it, I think they knew they had made a mistake.

Total numpties!!

[Without_a_Paddle]

Dear oh dear. I've suffered enough minutes of this by and large poor assessment of the "suffering" of first-time-buyers already to see it is not going to address anything new, revealing, relevant or insightful. We have the usual parade of paranoid FTB's in London who never stop to think why they are subject to "record prices" and a "market in turmoil". And this is the hyperbolic flavour of this programme, whose sub-theme is "time is of the essence" (Repeat ad infinitum). We have are a parade of trendy but dense 30-somethings whose mantra is "time is running out" and "if I wait one day longer I will be shut out". etc.; etc.; etc.

And then we are treated to sick making platitudes from sellers: "it's like losing a child" (a reference to flogging her dingy little house for an outrageous sum by a Rosie Millard behave-a-like).

What none of these people ever STOP to think is that if they just REFUSED to play the game, the price of their seedy little purchase in London would magically reduce. They are ALL being conned, cajoled, press-ganged, scammed, duped and tortured into buying what they could rent for almost half the price. The more of them that get duped the more the prices will rise. Even if this programme had mentioned this fact it might have saved itself.

But this programme broadly fails because it presents a yesterday paradigm, with only fleeting observations of current market realities. Though it does mention the concept of "waiting", one "expert" recommends six months! And then we have a gormless couple who have a baby on the way who cannot under any circumstances wait. Did they investigate renting for a fraction of the mortgage they have been conned into getting? No. Were they given insights into alternatives? No. They just trotted out the mantra.

This representation of property is in its own time warp. Its producers must know that the writing was on the wall even during its making. Instead of fully updating its content to match current circumstances, it tries to persuade us to keep the stable shut after the horse has bolted. This is typical of low brow "property insight" programmes. It serves a mind-numbingly naive audience and it does so in a mind-numbing way. Far from alerting us to the truth, it merely perpetuates the myth of shortage and persuades us way after the party is over that BTL's are making cash.

Only ONE "expert" actually declared: "Don't buy....rent until prices come down". That is the lone voice amongst a sea of platitudes. This OBSESSION that "ownership" somehow gives you some mythical kudos over renting (in a falling market) is well past its sell by date. As is another repeated mantra of the (sorry) extremely stupid potential buyers, who, despite the obvious hitting them in the face, STILL hold on to what they have been told by VI's for the last decade...."we just want to get on to the ladder". No perception whatever that the ladder could become a snake.

The one thing this programme did do reasonably well was to explode the ridiculous myth that shared ownership is in any way an advantage. It rightly criticised this avenue, though in my view it was not nearly hard hitting enough. Shared ownership is not just lacking in practicality, it is an utter con job by councils in league with devleopers.

VP

What none of these people ever STOP to think is that if they just REFUSED to play the game, the price of their seedy little purchase in London would magically reduce. They are ALL being conned, cajoled, press-ganged, scammed, duped and tortured into buying what they could rent for almost half the price. The more of them that get duped the more the prices will rise. Even if this programme had mentioned this fact it might have saved itself.

Sorry, but that really is a load of idealistic rubbish...

Where are they ALL going to find the properties to rent?

Maybe they should encourage a few more BTL landlords to buy up some more properties so they can all rent at half the price...

Edited November 5, 2007 by Without_a_Paddle

[Hawk]

Sorry, but that really is a load of idealistic rubbish...

Where are they ALL going to find the properties to rent?

Maybe they should encourage a few more BTL landlords to buy up some more properties so they can all rent at half the price...

F*^K OFF TROLL

[bearly hopeful]

I don’t think that was their plan to slowly break the poor fragile public in to the news of oncoming crash – The programme was supposed to be an exposé of the current housing crisis.

THEY MISSED THE POINT, or didn’t stress the main point enough at least.

It was diluted, shite and didn’t tell anyone anything that they didn’t already know.

The more pressure we put on media like channel 4 – Telling them what we want to see on their channel, the more likely they are going to broadcast it.

I’m not denying that the crash is now unstoppable but we have to be proactive in the sense of making people believe that their house isn’t worth what they think it is.

Most of the delay in the crash happening will be changing people’s attitudes. Anyone whose house isn’t getting repossessed will be in denial.

I agree it seemed lame to all the people who read and visit this site regularly, but if it gets your average joe soap even slightly concered about the possibility of a crash, there you have yourself a seed that can only grow, and that is key, IMO, to get this cat out the bag. When every-one else can see whats been stinking in the bag things should progress a with a bit more vigour.

I think it would probably be more useful to try and dispell all the crap being shown like location X3,property ladder, homes under the hammer etc. As this is the braiwashing stuff that is doing the harm.

[Hawk]

I agree it seemed lame to all the people who read and visit this site regularly, but if it gets your average joe soap even slightly concered about the possibility of a crash, there you have yourself a seed that can only grow, and that is key, IMO, to get this cat out the bag. When every-one else can see whats been stinking in the bag things should progress a with a bit more vigour.

I think it would probably be more useful to try and dispell all the crap being shown like location X3,property ladder, homes under the hammer etc. As this is the braiwashing stuff that is doing the harm.

Don’t get me wrong any bear news is good news.

I was really looking forward to the programme and all it did was disappoint.

I just don’t think subtlety works; we need hard hitting truth to get the message across.

We need something that will make ‘John in finance’ walk in to the office the next day and say did you see that programme on channel 4 last night.

We need something to slap him in the face and say “You know that shitty little 2 bed semi that you own in Cack-Ville next to the Pizza-hut, it isn’t actually worth 3 million quid”.

I know what you mean about getting rid of all those programmes like ‘Homes Under the Hammer’ but at times I couldn’t see the difference between them and the dispatches prog..

They should have exposed that BTL **** as the numpty he is.

All they did was show what a great businessman he was compared to the poor F*^kers renting the flat he owns. They made no attempt the ridicule him, and say these are the amateur BTL dicks that are currently f*^king up the county and in a few years time are going to be systematically blowing their brains out due to horrendous financial decisions fuelled by greed.

Edited November 6, 2007 by Hawk

[bearly hopeful]

Don’t get me wrong any bear news is good news.

I was really looking forward to the programme and all it did was disappoint.

I just don’t think subtlety works; we need hard hitting truth to get the message across.

We need something that will make ‘John in finance’ walk in to the office the next day and say did you see that programme on channel 4 last night.

We need something to slap him in the face and say “You know that shitty little 2 bed semi that you own in Cack-Ville next to the Pizza-hut, it isn’t actually worth 3 million quid”. (end quote)

Amen to that . Personally I'd like to make CGNAO the spokesman for HPC , imagine the extra sales in adult incontinence pants. But for a commercial channel who derive alot of their income through proprety related sales (adverts and poxee property shows) Its a start. I'd like to scare the hell out of the public, but after the BBC leaked info on the noerthern crock and the bank run that followed I suspect the makers have been told to tread a little gently. After the N.R. run maybe people are little twitchee still ?

Edited November 6, 2007 by bearly hopeful

[Nicholas Cage]

And this is the hyperbolic flavour of this programme, whose sub-theme is "time is of the essence" (Repeat ad infinitum). We have are a parade of trendy but dense 30-somethings whose mantra is "time is running out" and "if I wait one day longer I will be shut out". etc.; etc.; etc.

Felt the same to me, "buy buy buy" time is running out. Of course saving £1,000 in cash is nothing, saving 2 grand is nothing; offering below asking price is insane.

[Guest The_Oldie]

Sorry, but that really is a load of idealistic rubbish...

Where are they ALL going to find the properties to rent?

Maybe they should encourage a few more BTL landlords to buy up some more properties so they can all rent at half the price...

No need, many already do... http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...c=59880&hl=

[Confiteor]

Professor Peter Ambrose is a legend. Loved everything he said. So rare to see this madness placed in a social context. I've just sent him an email to thank him. A boomer with a conscience for the younger generations is a rare thing.

Dr John Bone was not far behind. Just depressing that he is from my part of the world, but I have never heard of him. The media just hasn't bothered to speak to people like him throughout this madness. Especially not in Aberbubble. Every single aspc.co.uk/estate agent press release would be balanced with his comments in an ideal world.

Jen and Sam. Dear oh dear.

I don't care how snobbish it sounds: that pair will be able to service a +£100K debt for about five minutes.

Unless that guy is doing very well in the local drugs scene, they are doomed to repossession.

[johnycoldears]

I thought this programme did a pretty good job of putting across the risks inherent in property speculation..

Started off with an upbeat "must buy now before it's too late" message delivered by vacant looking FTB's, interspersed occasionally with warnings from far more impressive looking commentators with titles like "professor" and "Dr" and ok even "financial advisor". By the end far more time was devoted to bears with gravitas like Dr John Bone and you couldn't help but get the impression that the property market was worth avoiding, at least in the short term, - and let's face it keeping people out in the short term (next 6 months or so) should be all that is necessary to kick start a lot longer cycle of falling house prices.

I just hope that they revisit the subjects of this programme in 12 months time - I'd love to see the throwback 80's yuppie landlord living in a cardboard box. It was also refreshing to see the young teaching couple refusing to pay more than they could afford and budgeting to survive increasing interest rates and falling house prices. They were actually buying a house to be a home not an asset - I wish them luck.

Edited November 6, 2007 by johnycoldears

[Extradry Martini]

I caught the second half of the show - thought it was pretty good and a lot of sense was being talked by some of the people on it.

What always amazes me is how people can believe this "within a few years, there will be a whole generation unable to buy their own house", or "the future will be comprised of those that own property and those who will never be able to afford to buy" guff. I mean, why does no one think about those statements? In this future, where are the "have-nots" living? In houses let to them by the "haves". Naturally, the rent they are paying to the "haves" is within what they can afford. But if they cannot afford to buy, then this rent must be significantly less than the monthly cost of owning a house. As this rent is signifcantly less than the mortgage, the "haves" are losing significant amounts of money letting their houses to the "have nots" - which means it is in their interests to sell, which means of course that prioces come down to within reach of the "have nots".

In other words, and as I keep saying until I'm blue in the face, the long term maximum value of property is what we can afford, and this is why real estate prices, when adjusted by earnings, mean-revert (as per the attached chart). The moving between the minimum and maximum in the chart represents the willingness to buy property. Since 2002, of course, we have had a speculative bubble fueled by very cheap credit which has driven prices well beyond what is represented by ability and maximum willingness, meaning that not only are we at the turning point I describe in the paragraph before this, but also that we are heading for a very nasty, drawn-out, slump in the property market from here ...

But I'm preaching to the converted here aren't I?

Edited November 6, 2007 by Extradry Martini

[misfit]

no, it wasn't a good programme

I disagree I thought it was a good programme covering a lot of the main issues as above but then I enjoyed the truth about property too.

The information is out there but there needs to be a change in buyer behaviour which does not appear to be happening. As long as people believe they must get on before the ladder is pulled away then this bubble is only going to rise higher. I thought buying at 4* was risky but now it looks positively prudent.

More buyers should read the financial press Merrill Lynch head gone, Citigroup head gone, NR head gone and even though my boss thinks I am mad I think Barclays could issue some bad news soon.

I have said it before and I will say it again tax second homeowners such as the BTL brigade. When will people realise 33% of property are held in the hands of BTL ers. This has a destabilising effect and distorts the market.

[dryrot]

I disagree I thought it was a good programme covering a lot of the main issues as above but then I enjoyed the truth about property too.

iYes, programme not bad at all. Some of the critcal posts ON HERE are a bit OTT. But the program was a great step forward, and hopefully harbinger of many more.

[Without_a_Paddle]

F*^K OFF TROLL

QUOTE (Without_a_Paddle @ Nov 5 2007, 11:57 PM)

Sorry, but that really is a load of idealistic rubbish...

Where are they ALL going to find the properties to rent?

Maybe they should encourage a few more BTL landlords to buy up some more properties so they can all rent at half the price...

F*^K OFF TROLL

But I'm right though aren't I? It's idealistic rubbish.

There aren't enough empty rental properties available to swing the market for a start!

The price is set by supply and demand and affordability.

Affordability is heavily influenced by current mortgage deals.

The thought that people can bring down the price by choosing to rent instead is a daft plan and is music to the ears of every landlord.

There's probably thousands of renters who have followed a similar plan over the last 5 years and it's pretty obvious that this plan doesn't work in the real world.

Edited November 6, 2007 by Without_a_Paddle

[babesagainstmachines]

The thought that people can bring down the price by choosing to rent instead is a daft plan and is music to the ears of every landlord.

Come back and say the same in 6 months...

The program was called the Housing Trap, yet there was scarcely a mention of the real trap... NEGATIVE EQUITY. I'm sure they could have dug up some footage from the last crash of people saddled with high debt levels and unable to get rid of that debt due to negative equity.

Other than that point, I quite enjoyed it.

[happily renting]

sometimes i get really really bored and restless. i often look at rightmove, partly for a laugh. half out of desperate interest. then i collapse back to aimlessly looking at the same info but in a million different posts on here. its like a 42 page cookbook with the only ingredient allowed being a potato.

i scan u-tube for dusky video from low res phones of things being blown up. i might check ebay to see if that set of 3/4 size bagpipes would be worth bidding on, but then i always end up back here. aimlessly again wandering through the acres of samey posts (albeit appreciated) but still - samey.

and now these new tv 'shock' programs are getting the same.

impotent. springs to mind.

(the programs that is...not me...ahem)

c'mon world. give me at least a massive financial banking collapse or some nimbys being burned in a barn fire.

is it too much to ask ??

Just when I think it's finally time to stop coming here to read more of the samey, a post like this comes along to (ironically) keep me hooked. And thanks to VacantPossession for a great review.

Must go check out those 3/4 size bagpipes.

[AteMoose]

I take my hat off to the young couple that have purchased a renovators delight.

I appear to have been doing things wrong all these years, you are not supposed to use a steam machine to remove wallpaper you use a 20lb club hammer and a four inch bolster

lol, i guess they might beable to get more sq foot per room.

to be fair it didn't look like normal wallpaper, it had the consistency of concrete!

[Extradry Martini]

But I'm right though aren't I? It's idealistic rubbish.

There aren't enough empty rental properties available to swing the market for a start!

The price is set by supply and demand and affordability.

Affordability is heavily influenced by current mortgage deals.

The thought that people can bring down the price by choosing to rent instead is a daft plan and is music to the ears of every landlord.

There's probably thousands of renters who have followed a similar plan over the last 5 years and it's pretty obvious that this plan doesn't work in the real world.

You do not understand the mechanics of a market (still! - how many times do you need this explained to you?) : when bubbles burst it is - initally - because of a lack of buyers, not because of increased selling. Prices get marked down, not traded down. After the market has peaked in a bubble, more than 80% of market transactions during the bear phase take palace within the last 20% of the bear move. Much as most people were not buying as the market rose, most people will not be selling as it falls, but that will not stop the market falling.

So do not think that there will be a huge wave of new tenants for BTL investors - that simply will not happen. In fact, while yields do rise in a bear market, it is because rents fall more slowly than prices, but they do fall nonetheless. BTL investors will be hit in 3 ways: Falling property values, higher credit costs and lower income. It's as simple as that, and anyone who thinks that BTL makes sense from here on in is deluding themselves (as we both know from the SP site).

[Catch22]

You do not understand the mechanics of a market (still! - how many times do you need this explained to you?) : when bubbles burst it is - initally - because of a lack of buyers, not because of increased selling. Prices get marked down, not traded down. After the market has peaked in a bubble, more than 80% of market transactions during the bear phase take palace within the last 20% of the bear move. Much as most people were not buying as the market rose, most people will not be selling as it falls, but that will not stop the market falling.

So do not think that there will be a huge wave of new tenants for BTL investors - that simply will not happen. In fact, while yields do rise in a bear market, it is because rents fall more slowly than prices, but they do fall nonetheless. BTL investors will be hit in 3 ways: Falling property values, higher credit costs and lower income. It's as simple as that, and anyone who thinks that BTL makes sense from here on in is deluding themselves (as we both know from the SP site).

I totally agree, with both your take on how markets work, and how WAP fails to understand how markets work......an excellent post in all respects.

[Austin Allegro]

The impression I got was that most of the prog was filmed well before the credit crunch, and was originally intended as a 'priced out forever' type sob-fest. Then when Northern Rock happened and a crash seemed possible, they changed the script a bit to allow more bearish views.

One thing that really annoyed me was that camp baldie bloke, Malcolm (?). Typical clueless London 'must get on the ladder' type. I was particularly incensed by the constant twaddle about his 'special mortgage deal about to expire' FFS if you can only buy a dump in Brockley and you need a lodger to pay the mortgage, what sort of financial situation are you in - and this is BEFORE Northern Rock! He was very, very lucky not to be able to buy, but the sad thing is he probably doesn't realise it.

Overall it was good though - you can't expect every programme to be 'HPC the Movie'

[sinclair]

Just to say well done FP. You put across our case in a clear and concise manner. I think the soundbite approach really is the best way to get the message across, most people have the attention span of a gnat afterall!

[TalkingSense]

Just to say well done FP. You put across our case in a clear and concise manner. I think the soundbite approach really is the best way to get the message across, most people have the attention span of a gnat afterall!

FP, it looks like you have the makings of a little pressure group there:

James Hamilton (Numis Securities), Danny Gabay (Fathom Financial Consulting), Dr John Bone (University of Aberdeen), Prof Peter Ambrose (University of Brighton), Ray Barrell (National Institute of Economic & Social Affairs) and your good self.

I agree with Happily renting @205. I am also very very bored with all this talk and no action.

Could the list above play a role ?

www.migrationwatchuk.com seems to have helped with the migration issue.

Would a similar style organisation to tackle house prices and all the relevant vested interests be useful ?