PLEASE NO MORE posts callng Kirstie Allsopp names

jamescredmond

chucky wrote: »

you've answered your own questions...

anyone who took advice or purchased off the back of these TV programs is crazy.

the programme director or editor are probably a better target - they're the ones that chose the pieces from the filming that would appeal to the 'suggestible' members of the viewing public...

I didn't realise I was asking any questions....

let's have a bit of a giggle, chucky.

aver. viewing figures for LLL hovered around 2.5m (based on prev. series).

so, if the less savvy viewers took krusty/phil's advice literally in 07 and went out and bought.........how many?

no way of really knowing, so here comes the guesswork: 1%? would that be reasonable?

putting aside the HPC loons, saner, better informed voices were expressing concern about HP's before 07.

LLL's 'property experts' sailed on regardless (they must have done their research surely?).

back to my rough guesstimate: 25000 gulls bought? say 20000. that's a lot of 'crazy people', shrieking and panicking that they were about to 'miss the boat'. so they jumped on the titanic..

the early series ramped the market and some made a tidy profit. good luck to them. no jealousy from me. promise.

but when it became increasingly obvious, even to me - a layman - that all was not well* this prog. persisted with the line that all was fine and dandy.

this is why I find LLL offensive.


*IMF european housing stock report 2006. (IIRC), which called UK housing stock over-valued 40%.

Conrad

huntersc wrote: »

Now, due to market conditions beyond anyone's wildest predictions the .

No no no

Again, threads using the term 'credit crunch' ( as in the comming credit crunch) were posted on that forum back in early 2005.
Some on there really did see this comming.

chucky

jamescredmond wrote: »

the relentless pursuit of ratings,eh?

to the point where more means less.

if people want to slob out in front of this dross, then by all means.

but it should be clearly categorized as 'fiction' and carry a wealth warning to any suggestible members of the gen. public.

or would that defeat the point?

here's your original post - i count two questions in there from you

jamescredmond wrote: »

I didn't realise I was asking any questions....

let's have a bit of a giggle, chucky.

aver. viewing figures for LLL hovered around 2.5m (based on prev. series).

so, if the less savvy viewers took krusty/phil's advice literally in 07 and went out and bought.........how many?

no way of really knowing, so here comes the guesswork: 1%? would that be reasonable?

putting aside the HPC loons, saner, better informed voices were expressing concern about HP's before 07.

LLL's 'property experts' sailed on regardless (they must have done their research surely?).

back to my rough guesstimate: 25000 gulls bought? say 20000. that's a lot of 'crazy people', shrieking and panicking that they were about to 'miss the boat'. so they jumped on the titanic..

the early series ramped the market and some made a tidy profit. good luck to them. no jealousy from me. promise.

but when it became increasingly obvious, even to me - a layman - that all was not well* this prog. persisted with the line that all was fine and dandy.

this is why I find LLL offensive.


*IMF european housing stock report 2006. (IIRC), which called UK housing stock over-valued 40%.

i've highlighted a few words that were a recurring theme on this post - a lot of it is assumption.

blaming someone else for mistakes and decisions that people make is not a great trait and seems to be very common - especially on this forum.

being offended by a TV programme or a TV presenter is quite strange - personally i'm more bothered about famine in Africa or lack of drinking water in some villages in South East Asia.

Dithering_Dad

jamescredmond wrote: »

I didn't realise I was asking any questions....

let's have a bit of a giggle, chucky.

aver. viewing figures for LLL hovered around 2.5m (based on prev. series).

so, if the less savvy viewers took krusty/phil's advice literally in 07 and went out and bought.........how many?

no way of really knowing, so here comes the guesswork: 1%? would that be reasonable?

putting aside the HPC loons, saner, better informed voices were expressing concern about HP's before 07.

LLL's 'property experts' sailed on regardless (they must have done their research surely?).

back to my rough guesstimate: 25000 gulls bought? say 20000. that's a lot of 'crazy people', shrieking and panicking that they were about to 'miss the boat'. so they jumped on the titanic..

the early series ramped the market and some made a tidy profit. good luck to them. no jealousy from me. promise.

but when it became increasingly obvious, even to me - a layman - that all was not well* this prog. persisted with the line that all was fine and dandy.

this is why I find LLL offensive.


*IMF european housing stock report 2006. (IIRC), which called UK housing stock over-valued 40%.

I agree 100% with you!

I never even knew that you could buy a house until I watched one of krusty/phil's shows. Well, straight away I ran out to the House Shop (I since discovered that House Shops are called 'Estate Agents') and bought one, so as not to miss the boat. It took months. Who knew it was so hard to buy one??

Well, I decided that if krusty/phil thought that houses were worth getting (and they must be cos they were on the telly), then I'd buy the best damned house that I could. I got a 120% mortgage and bought a huge place for many hundreds of thousands.

Wel,, now I'm stuck with huge mortgage payments, negative equity and the repo men will be coming round soon to boot me out.

This is krusty/phil's fault, if only I hadn't watched that damned TV program!! :mad: . I'm seriously thinking of suing the film makers, but I need to clear my current cases:

Case 1: Dithering Dad v Top Gear (they said that a Lambourghini was good. I bought one but can't insure the bloody thing. They didn't mention this anywhere in their program. I'll take em to the cleaners).

Case 2: Dithering v Hell's Kitchen (my cooking has improved, but I can't stop saying "f*&k").

Max_Headroom_3

I think you guys are missing the point.

This wasn't (just) some ditzy bird on a property program.

There's a video on this very thread where Krusty went on a serious news program, was introduced by the news reader as "our resident property guru", had the title under her name when it came up of "Property Expert"and went on to state the fact on that news program that (and I quote)

"There isn't going to be a market crash, there may well be a leveling off in the prices".

This at a time where there was much informed (and indeed correct) speculation that there could be.

To give such investment advice on a news program to people to whom she'd been presented to as an expert is just beyond comprehension.

So no I don't see this as being like Clarkson on Top Gear saying "Buy a Lamborghini, they're great", this is like a serious investment commentator stating (for instance) that you are absolutely safe buying Northern Rock shares, there will not be a falling in share price. If you'd bought Northern Rock shares on the back of that fact quoted to you by an expect on a serious news program, and there had then followed a big drop in share value, what would you think?

More to the point, what would you think if the "expert" turned out to have a vested interest in the sales of Northern Rock shares doing well (as Krusty had a vested interest in property prices doing well)?

JonnyBravo

jamescredmond wrote: »

so, if the less savvy viewers took krusty/phil's advice literally in 07 and went out and bought.........how many?

no way of really knowing, so here comes the guesswork: 1%? would that be reasonable?

:rotfl:

I think your guess might be a little high.

Targetted mail only gets upto 5% response rates. This typically doesn't involve spending quite as much as buying a house.
Of course if 1 person based their decision on this program you may still be cross with the program


Me?

I'd just be too busy shaking my head (and, yes, I'm ashamed to say.... laughing at their stupidity) at the idiots who thought money grew on trees.

JonnyBravo

Max_Headroom wrote: »

I think you guys are missing the point.

This wasn't (just) some ditzy bird on a property program.

There's a video on this very thread where Krusty went on a serious news program, was introduced by the news reader as "our resident property guru", had the title under her name when it came up of "Property Expert"and went on to state the fact on that news program that (and I quote)

"There isn't going to be a market crash, there may well be a leveling off in the prices".

This at a time where there was much informed (and indeed correct) speculation that there could be.

To give such investment advice on a news program to people to whom she'd been presented to as an expert is just beyond comprehension.

So no I don't see this as being like Clarkson on Top Gear saying "Buy a Lamborghini, they're great", this is like a serious investment commentator stating (for instance) that you are absolutely safe buying Northern Rock shares, there will not be a falling in share price. If you'd bought Northern Rock shares on the back of that fact quoted to you by an expect on a serious news program, and there had then followed a big drop in share value, what would you think?

More to the point, what would you think if the "expert" turned out to have a vested interest in the sales of Northern Rock shares doing well (as Krusty had a vested interest in property prices doing well)?

So???


You've never heard a wrong "expert" opinion before?

Try these....


"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." -- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943

"We don't like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out." -- Decca Recording Co. rejecting the Beatles, 1962.

"Drill for oil? You mean drill into the ground to try and find oil? You're crazy." -- Drillers who Edwin L. Drake tried to enlist to his project to drill for oil in 1859.

"$100 million dollars is way too much to pay for Microsoft." -- IBM, 1982




People really need to learn to think for themselves..... and guess what.... we'll all still make some mistakes. :eek:

A real shock, I know.

fatpig_2

You guys only read what you want to read. Nobody said Krusty was solely to blame, just that she played a significant part in the crisis as a high-profile property ramper.

GracieP

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

Case 1: Dithering Dad v Top Gear (they said that a Lambourghini was good. I bought one but can't insure the bloody thing. They didn't mention this anywhere in their program. I'll take em to the cleaners).

I hate Top Gear, I really, really hate it. But unfortunately, thanks to Dave and the fact that my husband enjoys either the show or winding me up, I have seen many episodes. And I've often seen them talk about the insurability of the cars they review.:p

sabretoothtigger

Conrad wrote: »

No no no

Again, threads using the term 'credit crunch' ( as in the comming credit crunch) were posted on that forum back in early 2005.
Some on there really did see this comming.

Yep vince cable was warning in 2003 unfortunately he sounded like the end is nigh man at the time. Who cares about high debt when plenty of people are willing to lend

Theres that 1999 nytimes article warning of a bail out for sub prime debt also. Problem is no one had the will to turn down easy money