Average home price expected to fall £50,000 - The Times

carolt

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/property_and_mortgages/article4432554.ece

Too good to get lost in another thread!

With very many thanks to baby_boomer. :beer:

PasturesNew

This was a figure I'd put on it in 2006 when I decided it was time to sell. And a figure I've used here in "my examples"

I've always said:

House costs now £200k
In 5 years' time that will be £150k

My idea (not plan as you can't plan) was that if I bought in 2007 I'd have a house and £0 money, but (with interest on savings) if I bought in 2012 I'd have the same house and £100k in the bank (interest added to initial deposit).

TDS_2

Seems more and more reasonable with every month passed.

Pobby

That`s the gut feeling I get.

moanymoany

On the BBC this morning the economic pundit actually talked about falls of 20% - 30%.

chrisandanne

I live in a village, it has a few streets of small victorian 2 bed terraces.

Last year these were selling for £120k...today the first one has been reduced to £96k..A 20% DROP.....This is a 'done up' one...it makes all the rest look overpriced now...I could almost hear the collective groan !!!.

Also today a better 3 bed terrace came on the market for £150k, checking on nethousprices this is 8k over the top price ever achieved in that terrace....what are these people thinking ?. A x

carolt

Probably that whoever buys it will want to take at least 10% off the asking price, so they can feel they're getting a 'bargain'. Assuming that anyone even bothers to view it, of course....

Or maybe they're just having a laugh?.....

moanymoany

We had been intending to start looking in November. However, a drop of 50% is worth another year of renting. It could mean a saving of £60,000 - not to be thrown away.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Love the classics.

Lest we forget how very wrong they were.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Love the classics.

Lest we forget how very wrong they were.

As you have taken the pleasure in dragging this one up.

Could you inform me how the article is actually wrong?

If it was "right", you would be claiming there was no timeframe and therefore didn't count.

Therefore, can you tell me how it's wrong? Just states that by the end of the housing slump, prices could be at 50k. Has the housing slump ended? If so, when did it end?

Certainly, you seem to still be whinging on and on about rationing, which would suggest theres still problems with housing.

And we all know the problems haven't gone away.

So if the slump hasn't ended, how is the article wrong?

If the slump HAS ended, when did it end and secondly, will you stop whinging about ratioining.

And before you ignore all that and claim I'm now predicting prices will end up at average 50k, I'm not, just asking how the article you said was wrong, is actually wrong.

Thanking you. And I won't hold my breath.

Pimperne1

moanymoany wrote: »

On the BBC this morning the economic pundit actually talked about falls of 20% - 30%.

And I don't think that was a real "pundit". If I remember correctly it was Jonathan Davis.