Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

bearORbullENIGMA

Btl'ers Vs Str Investors

Recommended Posts

Who is the most dishonest;

The Buy to Letter who's vested interests lie in a continued housing boom OR the STR investor, who's interests lie in a crash, followed by another upturn?

I'm talking here specifically about STR INVESTORS & NOT THE AVERAGE STR's who are just wanting a cheap house to live in when they become affordable again.

I mean somebody who is seriously attempting to profit, by selling at the TOP (to a greater fool) & then BUYING AGAIN AT THE BOTTOM?

Is it merely the Psyche defending the ego when an STR investor points out the dishonesty inherent in the BTL'ers actions OR is it a necessary perceptive reframe an STR investor MUST make in order to Psychologically make right his own wrongs in order to justify his actions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who is the most dishonest;

The Buy to Letter who's vested interests lie in a continued housing boom OR the STR investor, who's interests lie in a crash, followed by another upturn?

I'm talking here specifically about STR INVESTORS & NOT THE AVERAGE STR's who are just wanting a cheap house to live in when they become affordable again.

I mean somebody who is seriously attempting to profit, by selling at the TOP (to a greater fool) & then BUYING AGAIN AT THE BOTTOM?

Is it merely the Psyche defending the ego when an STR investor points out the dishonesty inherent in the BTL'ers actions OR is it a necessary perceptive reframe an STR investor MUST make in order to Psychologically make right his own wrongs in order to justify his actions?

neither is dishonest.

Is someone who buys shares believing that they will increase in value / provide decent dividends dishonest?

High house prices are not only driven by investors, so don't bother with the "pricing out a generation" argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is that you Bruno ? :blink:

Read the post again....

Now,......calm your fear of opinions that conflict with your own....

....try to make a distinction between STR Investors & people who are merely waiting for a crash....

....maybe engage your brain in the process a little....

....think about it for a while....

....then post a response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is someone who buys shares believing that they will increase in value / provide decent dividends dishonest?

Er, Yes.

If they are merely hoping to profit from a greater fool by selling at what they feel is the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Read the post again....

Now,......calm your fear of opinions that conflict with your own....

....try to make a distinction between STR Investors & people who are merely waiting for a crash....

....maybe engage your brain in the process a little....

....think about it for a while....

....then post a response.

Is that a yes or no ? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Er, Yes.

If they are merely hoping to profit from a greater fool by selling at what they feel is the top.

so I presume you are relying on the state pension then, or have a pension invested only in cash?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who is the most dishonest;

The Buy to Letter who's vested interests lie in a continued housing boom OR the STR investor, who's interests lie in a crash, followed by another upturn?

I'm talking here specifically about STR INVESTORS & NOT THE AVERAGE STR's who are just wanting a cheap house to live in when they become affordable again.

I mean somebody who is seriously attempting to profit, by selling at the TOP (to a greater fool) & then BUYING AGAIN AT THE BOTTOM?

Is it merely the Psyche defending the ego when an STR investor points out the dishonesty inherent in the BTL'ers actions OR is it a necessary perceptive reframe an STR investor MUST make in order to Psychologically make right his own wrongs in order to justify his actions?

both are speculating. neither are dishonest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Er, Yes.

If they are merely hoping to profit from a greater fool by selling at what they feel is the top.

In most cases I find:

BTL - greed driven.

STR - self protection.

Most of us are hoping to have no or little morgage. Not to buy more pwoperty to rent to less fortunate.

BTL'ers - No problem with having multiple properties whilst pricing out MANY.

If i eventually buy an ex BTL from some idiots portfolio fine.

If the greater fool bought from me to BTL thats their lookout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude,

Morality isn't really a big factor in investment strategies. All investment is evil (remember the old arguments about gold being a barren metal?). All that matters is how profitable your strategy is; BTL & STR are just different sides of the same bet, and one needs to lose in order for the other to gain, it follows therefore that the virtuous do neither and live at home with thier parents. If you started this thread to make this (pretty lame and obvious) point because your sick of the villification of BTL'ers on this site then you sir are an idiot. Go and read the singing pig forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All investment is evil

i don't agree. If I buy shares in a company and that company can then produce something that is of value and therefore make a profit, and in return they pay me a return for providing the capital, how can this be evil?

That company could wait until it had earned enough money to do it themselves, but my helping was not evil. Likewise, it is only fair that if a company made money from my investment that I would get a return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see nothing immoral about an individual investing in BTL.

(Just stupid at this point in time)

The morality only comes in on a social level:

If we as a society disapprove of the aggregate effect of the choices of thousands of BTL-ers then it is up to us to legislate to control it.

Not to say, "Please Mr Speculator, don't make perfectly legal big profits in the housing market, it's unfair, you're immoral"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Money.... every person in the world is fighting for a share of it, the more that is created the less that its worth. Your only richer or poorer because you have a larger share money or debt. Survival of this economic fittest with everyone fighting over money and assets its the way of the world, its not 'bad' you cant fight it because you will loose, accept it and fight...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no morality. There is only winning and losing.

People try different strategies to further themselves as they see fit and can afford.

Problem is that some people do pointlessly get on their moral high horse about what they perceive to be moral failings in others' plans.

There is also the issue of jealousy and resentment - when one strategy appears to be making its followers rich, then many of those who did not choose that strategy don't like it.

Hence the current crowing from many on here whenever they hear of property-owners (and especially BTLers) in financial trouble.

Anyone on here who has "sold to rent" in the firm belief that prices will crash is now crowing that they made the right decision.

Its a game, where we all try to push ahead as far as we can by either buying something we think will increase in value, or give us extra income, or alternatively, selling something to someone less knowledgeable because we think it will lose value, and we want to "cash in" before it does, so someone else is left holding the baby.

Obviously it is a game where everyone cannot win all the time. In order for some people to win, others have to lose.

No-one is morally any better than anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Following on from my post saying, no point bellyaching about immorality, just focus on setting up regulations to ensure that the greater good is served:

Should we regulate to control BTL now, when it is creating a housing bubble?

I say YES

Should we regulate to stop hypothetical STR speculators selling now?

Obsiously NO. To do so would exacerbate the bubble.

Should we regulate to stop hypothetical STR speculators buying at the trough?

I think NO. Speculators buying at the trough will stabilise the market at a time when buyers will be few and sellers desperate for a buyer.

Therefore the actions of these hypothetical STR speculators will on balance be socially beneficial.

Remember: Done properly - sell high, buy low - specualation is a beneficial activity, working to stabilise prices and increase liquidity. It is only when bubble madness takes over - buy high, never sell - that speculation becomes socially damaging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think BTLers are infact scum they are profitting from others misery, I have a good job on a good wage, I cannot buy anything I am forced to line the pockets of greedy landlords., however this is of course my own fault because I was born 10 years too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i don't agree. If I buy shares in a company and that company can then produce something that is of value and therefore make a profit, and in return they pay me a return for providing the capital, how can this be evil?

That's only applicable for new share issues, which I doubt is a large %age of share trading volumes. The vast majority is pure speculation, not investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Er, Yes.

If they are merely hoping to profit from a greater fool by selling at what they feel is the top.

bearORbullENIGMA, you appear to be saying that all trade is immoral and/or dishonest. You state that someone (whether it be an individual or a corporation) who purchases an object at one price and sells it on to someone else at a higher price is "hoping to profit from a greater fool".

This seems quite an axtreme anti-capitalist view. Almost every trader from Tesco to a Big Issue seller buys stuff for one price and sells it on (hopefully) at a higher price.

Admittedly there is a moral argument that housing shouldn't be traded like this. But I find it difficult to see how it's "dishonest" to be either a BTLer or an Investment STRer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Should we regulate to control BTL now, when it is creating a housing bubble?

I say YES

are you saying that without BTL we wouldn't have a housing bubble??? It may have helped but it is not the cause. Therefore how can you argue to control it.

People should be allowed to BTL as much as they want, they put up the money and take the risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a mortgage, but if I STR at the right time to avoid losing equity on the house during a crash and then buy back in when i call the bottom of the market, that does not make me immoral, that makes me financially astute.

Incedentally I am not doing so but that is for non-financial reasons, plus I see our home as a home and not (just) an investment.

If I was to use the equity in my house to put down a deposit on the house for sale next door and then rent next door out, I think there are some moral questions to be asked here regarding the fact it probably means the value of next door is maintained (as I am buying another house, but not offering another one to sell on the market (demand exceeding supply locally)) and if the house was subsequently rented by 20-somethings who "couldn't afford to buy in this market" then that is immoral, but hey, I'd be tempted if I wasn't lazy.

I think an STR'r is not immoral, they are astute, but if they secretly hope for a crash, they are not squeaky clean because in doing so, they are also hoping some lucky just-FTBoughters are fcuked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's only applicable for new share issues, which I doubt is a large %age of share trading volumes. The vast majority is pure speculation, not investment.

the comment was "all investment is evil", I am not arguing the relative size of a type of investment because you also have many other direct forms of investment in companies other than shares.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i don't agree. If I buy shares in a company and that company can then produce something that is of value and therefore make a profit, and in return they pay me a return for providing the capital, how can this be evil?

That company could wait until it had earned enough money to do it themselves, but my helping was not evil. Likewise, it is only fair that if a company made money from my investment that I would get a return.

:lol: ur right of course-

I was referencing a biblical argument against usury that holds gold is a barren metal and cannot reproduce itself, unlike the virutous labour of tending a flock which increases naturally. Most investments, like the one you give as an example, are about generating passive income and are therefore by this very narrow definition taken from the old testament, evil.

The point of the thread was to lead us into the earth shattering revelation that BTL'ers are not the devil himself, just people trying to make an honest crust. 'investors' not greedy middle class speculators who want the younger generation to finance a comfortable pension for themselves and maybe a trustfund for the kids at the expense of any wealth creation or financial security of thier own. If OP wants people to agree with him he should seriously post this at singing pig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who is the most dishonest;

The Buy to Letter who's vested interests lie in a continued housing boom OR the STR investor, who's interests lie in a crash, followed by another upturn?

Two Bob Each Way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who is the most dishonest;

The Buy to Letter who's vested interests lie in a continued housing boom OR the STR investor, who's interests lie in a crash, followed by another upturn?

I'm talking here specifically about STR INVESTORS & NOT THE AVERAGE STR's who are just wanting a cheap house to live in when they become affordable again.

I mean somebody who is seriously attempting to profit, by selling at the TOP (to a greater fool) & then BUYING AGAIN AT THE BOTTOM?

Is it merely the Psyche defending the ego when an STR investor points out the dishonesty inherent in the BTL'ers actions OR is it a necessary perceptive reframe an STR investor MUST make in order to Psychologically make right his own wrongs in order to justify his actions?

Bruno

BTLs who have bought in the last few years may be foolish but they are not dishonest. By the same measure, STRs are not dishonest either.

On the misery stakes, BTLs do have a case to answer. They have systematically outbid first time buyers for 8 years. The result is that £billions in "take home pay" has been diverted to the money lending industry. Young people are either forced to stay in rented accomodation or live in poverty as home owners. House prices are killing employment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 295 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.