Friday, Oct 16, 2009

From the horses mouth

Renegade Economist: The Man with 900 Houses

Ross Ashcroft catches up with Britain's Buy to Let King Fergus Wilson. A man who bizarrely seems to be totally in the dark to the underlying mechanisms that drive the property market.

Posted by the number cruncher @ 10:20 PM (1343 views)
Add Comment
Report Article

9 Comments

1. phdinbubbles said...

Hilarious.

Friday, October 16, 2009 11:06PM Report Comment
 

2. inbreda said...

oh my god. The man is a moron. If he had actually planned to have his speculative purchases pay out on the basis that the tax payers (that would include me) were going to bail out the banks so they could keep lending to fugwits like him to keep this leveraged BS going, then he'd be a genius. Alas he is a moron. Like many others on here - if this fat drawling (reminds you of Gordon, eh!) Ahole doesn't get what's coming to him, I am checking out of the uk for sure.

Friday, October 16, 2009 11:48PM Report Comment
 

3. quiet guy said...

Cracking post by Number Cruncher.

The interview was funny but at the same time rather disturbing. Fergus stumbled across a speculative scheme that just happened to make him rich with little comprehension of what he was doing or the social cost.

@Inbreda

Sadly, I suspect that Fergus will finish life rich and quite unconcerned about the plight of 'social nuisance' flat dwellers. Possessing the confidence of the ignorant can be quite useful sometimes.

Saturday, October 17, 2009 12:44AM Report Comment
 

4. A Solovine said...

Wonderful. Well done, NC. Worth many, many print stories about the Wilsons. Please re-post if it drops off the home page - it's a Must-See.

Saturday, October 17, 2009 07:23AM Report Comment
 

5. crash n burn said...

The accidental multi-millionaire

Saturday, October 17, 2009 09:03AM Report Comment
 

6. stillthinking said...

The problem isn't people making money out of property, the problem is that the government have got themselves locked into 15 billion per annum payments into -existing- housing stock (housing benefit etc), while due in part to that being unable to raise funds for additional building (in the long run cheaper).
So to what extent do these housing oligarchs benefit from the 500 taxation stipend per worker?

Saturday, October 17, 2009 10:25AM Report Comment
 

7. shipbuilder said...

The reality is that we can say what we like about Mr Wilson, but in terms of the values of our society, he is the peak. He represents what the majority in this country wish for - maximum gain for minimum effort. We think we're better, but it's all over this blog, in every thread. This comment on YouTube sums it up best -

"To Fergus this is just a business, and housing was his chosen form of investment. There is no question in his mind about fairness or the repercussions for others of what he's doing because that's of no interest. What does interest him is the money, because the more money he has the happier/ more powerful/more important he'll be. If you don't act like Fergus by being 'clueless, or afraid or lacking courage' to do what he has, then you will suffer that dreaded American fate of being a looser."

Saturday, October 17, 2009 12:00PM Report Comment
 

8. techieman said...

shippy and ST - I think the issue here is the move to the right of Thatcher to begin with - with right to buy, and was extended by the Nu Labour boys. The move of housing from a social supply to being outsourced to a private supply, is not in of itself a bad thing. Its just how it is funded, how the market is regulated and how much money is made out of it by the providers.

The problem is the last statement - basically they are making too much and the cost is too high. So if we have a reduction in costs - (which means we need to work out HB on a different basis) then that would be ok. Providers would make a fair return but not too much. I think we have missed that opportunity because now the BTL numbers dont add up. So instead of the lettings market being fairly administered (for both good landlords and good tenants) and where "bad" tenants and bad landlords being punished quickly and effectively (eg tenants trashing the place , and landlords not responding to legitimate grievances), joe public has been sucked in to being landlords and the weak buyers will be ousted with that causing problems. Because the Government has dropped the ball, and basically didnt let the free market dictate all the rules, with the only regulation being demand side - eg HB, Then they have a VI in carrying on this state of affairs,

If the market had been left to its own devices from the start, there would have been no dependence on HB. To support loss making BTLrs would make matters worse still - eg by driving up HB higher? If the all parts of the market had been regulated - eg the Swiss model, then again no probs. BUT we have part regulated and part free "marketised" without any thought of the consequences.

I support BTL IF we are not going to have a social housing programme, so long as its run properly, and god forbid bailed out when private enterprise gets involved in a bubble. The only regulations should be to ensure the properties are set to a minimum standard, that there are no cartel like processes - surely HB is a cartel inducing levy, and that both tenants and landlords are secure. The tenants cant be chucked out willy nilly, but the landlords should be supported if the tenant doesn't pay his rent, does a bunk or leaves the place infested etc..There should have been barriers to entry while social housing production was wound down, rather than a rug being pulled and BTL being the "white night"

Pricing should have been a free market principle from the start, then there would not have been multimillionaires (unless they had got in at the beginning, not over leveraged and not MEWED every time). I have no problem with people taking advantage of weak legislation - its the lawmakers that are at fault.

To put the genie back in the bottle is not gonna work, oh of ot wasnt for those pesky meddling governments!!!.

Saturday, October 17, 2009 12:54PM Report Comment
 

9. techieman said...

Classic Ross Ashcroft at 3:14 roll of the eyes . He really shouldn't do interviews - Fergus i mean. 5:30 Ross comes back and says i haven't got a drink problem - :-). And Fergus don't get it.

Feb 2010 prices are definitely going upwards! .... erm so why sell?

Its all a bit simplistic isnt it? Lots of editing,

Saturday, October 17, 2009 01:13PM Report Comment
 

Add comment

  • If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
  • If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines
Username  
Admin Password
Email Address
Comments

Main Blog | Archive | Add Article | Blog Policies