The Wilsons - 875 buy to let property empire

Alan_M_2

mewbie wrote: »

er. any Zimbabwean?

Errr so you don't think any Zimbabwean Billionaire's are immoral/unethical or corrupt.....there's a novel idea....

The only squeaky clean Billionaire that springs to my mind is the chap that owns Ikea.

mewbie_2

Alan_M wrote: »

Errr so you don't think any Zimbabwean Billionaire's are immoral/unethical or corrupt.....there's a novel idea....

You're right of course. I meant to convey a simple joke, based on the inflation problem in Zimbabwe where I think a loaf of bread costs several billion dollars. So everybody who can afford a loaf of bread is a billionaire. I hadn't wanted to imply a lack of corruption in Zimbabwe, more a comment on how easily a billion could become meaningless in times of ridiculous inflation. I certainly did not wish to mock the poor people of Zimbabwe, even though I presume a lot of them are billionaires.

In some ways I wish I hadn't bothered now, as it wasn't very funny anyway. And probably racist too, thinking about it.

Back to the mother-in-law jokes for me...

Walletwatch

mewbie wrote: »

In some ways I wish I hadn't bothered now, as it wasn't very funny anyway. And probably racist too, thinking about it.

Back to the mother-in-law jokes for me...

I think it was just a clever use of the term billionaire, and as you say, an indication of how irrelevant the term may be for countries with so many zeroes in their currency.

I personally did not read it as a racist slur on the people of ZW, nor did I find the joke un-funny. Frankly, I am all for being sensitive, but political correctness beyond a point would make these forums a dull and drab affair, methinx...

Cheers
WW

Generali

Well I thought it was funny mewbie. Well, gently amusing at least.

Alan_M_2

Went clean over my head.....sorry...:rolleyes:

neverdespairgirl

It's getting to the point in Zimbabwe where you need a billion to buy anything, even a loaf of bread.

Banderman

The Wilsons are 2 truly 'orrible people. They're nearly as bad as krusty and phil

dopester

The Wilsons.....

Conrad wrote: »

Common sense and my experience tells me these 2 will be up to around 90%+ ltv in order to have kept buying property so frequently.
15% equity is nothing, it could become 15% negative overnight.

I was wondering if there might be some up-to-date news about the Wilsons so went to look for updates.

Didn't find anything new, but stopped at a Daily Mail January 2007 article when they were interviewed by the press, and clearly flying high with confidence, although with only 707 houses at that point.

Roughly half their houses are mortgaged. Thanks to their extraordinary buying power, they can negotiate very low rates from mortgage warehouses.

Conrad wrote: »

I'm sorry, smart investors I know have not been buying for some time now. These clowns seem to be unaware of cycles and 'buy low, sell high'.

What gauls is thier love of limelight as if they are something to behold, when in reality any of us could do it, if we were mad enough.

Agreed.




They really cringe me out.

Cringe 1: (buying 3 houses during the interview with the financial reporter)

The Wilsons negotiate with such stealth and speed that the deal for three brand-new terraced homes, each priced at £180,000, had been concluded right under my nose - and I never suspected a thing.

Cringe 2: (even at 2007 levels, its buy buy buy, use your own home as security for a BTL - its only a game. What is the worse that can happen?!!!! Of course your existing home is well safe isn't it.)

"To anyone dithering about buying a second property to rent, my advice is this: 'Don't mess around. Get stuck in and buy it!'" Mrs Wilson concurs, albeit in more measured tones befitting a former deputy headmistress.

"You've got to say to yourself: 'What's the worst that can happen?'" she says. "The worst thing is that you'll have to sell the second house. But so what? You'll still have the one you live in.

"The key is not to take it all so seriously. It's only a game. You have to remember we're mathematicians, so a million is just a one with six noughts on the end. It takes more than a few noughts to frighten us."

Cringe 3 is because of the lie, but also contains a valuable lesson of just how house prices are up for some serious price negotiation in the darkest part of a crash, for much harsher round of discounting - even when after prices have bottomed, from banks and desperate/forced sellers. To stick to your guns and force the deal you want, and go for another if it isn't accepted.

A friend of mine had his sealed bid accepted in the early 90s for a discount similar to Mr.Wilsons...... but he did not lie like Fergus did below.

And what cringes me the most is the Wilsons seem to have zero expectation of such market conditions returning as in the early 90s - despite seeing the carnage first hand themselves (with their "living in auction rooms").

A tad recklessly, Mrs Wilson can't resist telling me about one scam her husband pulled in 1994. After snapping up a four-storey house in South-East London at auction for £44,000, he noticed 'for sale' boards outside the property next door. So he called the estate agents to ask the price.

"It's £58,000," came the reply. Mr Wilson insisted that this was far too much, claiming he had bought the adjoining house for £30,000.

His bid was initially rejected, but a few days later, on Christmas Eve, the phone rang.

"If you've got £30,000, it's yours," the agent said.

The deliciously simple sting was concluded a few days later, when Mr Wilson had the house valued for mortgage purposes and it was deemed to be worth four times the amount he had paid: £120,000.

He borrowed the maximum amount allowable - £100,000 (85 per cent of its value) - and promptly used the excess funds as a deposit on several more houses.

There is a whole load more that cringes me out, from their clothes, to the "Judith Wilson Investment Property Bond" which she supposedly has promising to double every 7 years ! (A £10,000 stake bought for a newborn baby apparently promising to be worth £80,000 for a deposit at 21 years of age - !!!!!!!), to Fergus supposedly wanting to do a Dragon's Den type show with him in charge of housebuyers competing for mortgages, to saying they could go to 1000 properties "there is no limit".

Link: How two maths teachers clocked up 707 houses and £240m fortune

dopester

"If you've got £30,000, it's yours," the agent said.

The Wilsons. It is clear what outcome I'd like for them.

1994.

It was only 14 years ago.

I remember the year so clearly (although I was in no position to buy a house).

We're so going to see how strong the 300% "new paradigm" is, and witness how it plays out for those who leveraged themselves in to it, spending equity they'd released, or buying more properties to fuel HPI to new ever increasing levels.

dopester

So... in January 1997 the Wilsons had 707 properties.

Just going back to the brit's original post in the thread... the iplayer interview has Fergus confirming they have 875 properties.

So they've bought at least 168 properties since January 2007 (actually 3 more which they bought during the Daily Mail interview)

Have to assume they mostly bought houses as we all know they don't like flats, and lets assume circa £180,000 a house.

168 x £180,000 = (? a big big number)

brit1234 wrote: »

:question:Questions:question:

Is this the end of the buy to let guru and what will happen in Ashford to property prices if these go bust?

Also do you think they are right in saying by buying houses rather than flats they are OK?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7432256.stm

Fergus' audio interview with the BBC was in June 2008.

He cracks me up. :rotfl:

I think he is so very much deluding himself about 2 different markets (flats and houses), with his implication that he can understand one crashing whilst the other won't see heavy falls. He was there in the last crash. He acquired houses which had crashed hard in price. He should know !!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes Fergus, if we've got a choice we will take a house, but not at any price, and it won't be just flats which crash in price maths-boy.

flats which are an absolute disaster - and you've got houses where they've had 2, 2 1/2, 3% adjustment. Last week it was announced that houses nationally have gone down about £5,000 and I think that's about right.

Of course it matters because every time it goes down £5,000 then I've got 875 properties gone down £5,000