We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Why shares were lemons under 'new' Labour
Options
amcluesent
Posts: 9,425 Forumite
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/06/26/ccinv126.xml
Interesting review of shares performance since May 1997, with all dividends reinvested your return was just 7% per annum.
Investment in property under BTL would have seen a nine-fold return over the same period.
Of course, past performance is no guide to the future!
Interesting review of shares performance since May 1997, with all dividends reinvested your return was just 7% per annum.
Investment in property under BTL would have seen a nine-fold return over the same period.
Of course, past performance is no guide to the future!
0
Comments
-
Interesting headline figures, but as with everything there is a need to scratch away at the surface.
The BTL vs FTSE 100 is difficult, index tracking is definitely simpler - buy tracker, put feet up, decide to sell and have your money as early as the next day. Whereas buying a BTL is trickier - find area, find house, find tenants, stop house falling down, find new tenants, decide to sell and wait at least 4-6 weeks possibly longer for cash. I doubt the figures quoted in that article include all the relevant fees.
Best place to put your money under a Brown government? Best read the Telegraph once he's out office to find out :rolleyes:Anything posted is not given as advice but to help with a discussion.0 -
Looks to me that the canny investor would have invested in BTL last decade and now be looking to move that money to the stockmarket for the next decade because it still has a way to go to its previous peak, while housing prices are starting to stagnate or slide.Mortgage Free in 3 Years (Apr 2007 / Currently / Δ Difference)
[strike]● Interest Only Pt: £36,924.12 / £ - - - - 1.00 / Δ £36,923.12[/strike] - Paid off! Yay!!
● Home Extension: £48,468.07 / £44,435.42 / Δ £4032.65
● Repayment Part: £64,331.11 / £59,877.15 / Δ £4453.96
Total Mortgage Debt: £149,723.30 / £104,313.57 / Δ £45,409.730 -
amcluesent wrote: »http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/06/26/ccinv126.xml
Interesting review of shares performance since May 1997, with all dividends reinvested your return was just 7% per annum.
Investment in property under BTL would have seen a nine-fold return over the same period.
Of course, past performance is no guide to the future!
I suppose you could equally use the headline 'Why Buy to Let was a Lemon under John Major''Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
Dithering_Dad wrote: »Looks to me that the canny investor would have invested in BTL last decade and now be looking to move that money to the stockmarket for the next decade because it still has a way to go to its previous peak, while housing prices are starting to stagnate or slide.
UK stockmarket of course ( and not FTSE 250), I think most commentators have been singing the virtues of large cap stocks i.e. undervalued in relation to small.'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
Really? The FTSE 100 is about 200 points (3%) away from its all time high and the Dow Jones is trading around its highest levels ever.Dithering_Dad wrote: »Looks to me that the canny investor would have invested in BTL last decade and now be looking to move that money to the stockmarket for the next decade because it still has a way to go to its previous peak, while housing prices are starting to stagnate or slide.
If you look at the P/E of FTSE100, then we still have a long way to go to reach the 40- odd index average we had before the .com bubble went pop.0 -
If you adjust the market for the effects of inflation then its a long way off its high, the DJIA is a bad index to use as a benchmark due it composition - the S&P500 is much better.
The large caps seems better value as there is much less private equity money washing around these stocks, I believe most fund managers are positioning their funds away from the mid-small caps in preparation for a re-rating. Also if you exclude the p/e of the oober-caps then the the FTSE 100 is attractive compared to the 250.Anything posted is not given as advice but to help with a discussion.0 -
amcluesent wrote: »http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/06/26/ccinv126.xml
Interesting review of shares performance since May 1997, with all dividends reinvested your return was just 7% per annum.
Actually when you consider that from 2000-2003, the market sufffered the worst crash since the 1970s:eek: (there's usually one real nasty per generation) a 7% return is quite encouraging.Trying to keep it simple...
0 -
It is interesting to note that the article actually concludes that the Government were somewhat of an irrelevance to investors.
Quote from the last three paragraphs:
As Tony Blair and Gordon Brown pass on the doorstep tomorrow they will be thinking of their legacies. But for investors they are an increasing irrelevance, and perhaps they always were.
In May 1997, stocks were coming to the end of a prolonged bull run while house prices were only just emerging from a major slump.
That starting point, rather than government policy, is what really determined their performance over the next 10 years.In case you hadn't already worked it out - the entire global financial system is predicated on the assumption that you're an idiot:cool:0 -
amcluesent wrote: »http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/06/26/ccinv126.xml
Interesting review of shares performance since May 1997, with all dividends reinvested your return was just 7% per annum.
Investment in property under BTL would have seen a nine-fold return over the same period.
Of course, past performance is no guide to the future!
Well if you will just by trackers
I got 400% plus by investing in Property IT's less riskey that leverageing a BTL property.--
My Blog0 -
Originally Posted by Dithering Dad
Looks to me that the canny investor would have invested in BTL last decade and now be looking to move that money to the stockmarket for the next decade because it still has a way to go to its previous peak, while housing prices are starting to stagnate or slide.Really? The FTSE 100 is about 200 points (3%) away from its all time high and the Dow Jones is trading around its highest levels ever.
If you look at the P/E of FTSE100, then we still have a long way to go to reach the 40- odd index average we had before the .com bubble went pop.
??? are you saying that you think the FTSE is about to peak and a crash is on the way?? :huh:Mortgage Free in 3 Years (Apr 2007 / Currently / Δ Difference)
[strike]● Interest Only Pt: £36,924.12 / £ - - - - 1.00 / Δ £36,923.12[/strike] - Paid off! Yay!!
● Home Extension: £48,468.07 / £44,435.42 / Δ £4032.65
● Repayment Part: £64,331.11 / £59,877.15 / Δ £4453.96
Total Mortgage Debt: £149,723.30 / £104,313.57 / Δ £45,409.730
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 350.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.8K Life & Family
- 257K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards