Nationwide Nov08: -0.4% Mom, -13.9% Yoy

mnj1x

mitchaa wrote: »

Haha, not what the MSE door mongers were hoping for this morning;)

The average home lost £430 in the last month:rotfl: What about the £1000 rent you lot have just wasted:p

>> What about the £1000 rent you lot have just wasted

Even if a home loses (or gains) only £0 a month, the homeowner still pays 'rent' to his bank - only that in literature it is called 'interest' rather than 'rent' ...

baileysbattlebus

andrewmp wrote: »

Only for existing claimants though isn't it.

Yes, I got the interest rate bit wrong - I think. It is still BoE + 1.58 for new claimants but it's about 6% for existing claimants.

Topcat10

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

The majority of house moves in this country are "aspirational" (I read it somewhere - so don't quote me!). So most people move because they want to, not because they have to.

In my experience a great deal of people will move to get closer to a better school. So people move constantly for a good primary school and possibly again for a good High School. The desire to get children into good schools seems to far out weigh all other fears. Indeed, the cost of moving is cheap relative to the cost of, say, a fee paying education. This is reflected in the high cost of housing close to good schools. This desire won't go just because of a down turn IMHO. Therefore, it's possible that people will see this spring to be a good oppotunity to sell to be where they need to be for school admissions in October 2009. Never underestimate the demand from parents for a good school.

dopester

ad9898 wrote: »

This is the myth that is being pedaled by VI's and the government. There is no more money to lend. What people have to understand is that most of the money that has been lent by the banks over the last decade does not exist, money was being conjured from thin air which was being lent against the perceived value of the commodity, in this case, houses, which have been seen as not worth anywhere near the fantasy values put on them in the last few years, hence the banking crisis.

I've not moved from this post for 20 minutes (whilst watching Untergang Downfall on another screen). Transfixed by the clarity of it and the underlying truth of the situation for house prices and what is in store for the economy.

dopester

LittleMissAspie wrote: »

Well of course. If you bought long ago when prices were cheaper then of course your mortgage payments will be less than someone who buys your house now. But the market can't sustain itself without FTBs, that's why rent vs interest is important.

And it is ignoring the facts of a bear market.

Yes.. they may have built up lots of equity.. but that can disappear in many instances.

I'd personally rather sell for -30%, and transfer some of the capital at current attainable prices back in to liquidity and rent (and rent values are crashing especially at the top end)... than lock in for a 70%+ crash in this Great-Bear-Super-Cycle that we've only just entered.

The dynamics of value expansion and contraction explain why a bear market can bankrupt millions of people. At the peak of a credit expansion or a bull market, assets have been valued upward, and all participants are wealthy - both the people who sold the assets and the people who hold the assets. The latter group is far larger than the former, because the total supply of money has been relatively stable while the total value of financial assets has ballooned. When the market turns down, the dynamic goes into reverse.

Only a very few owners of a collapsing financial asset trade it for money at 90 percent of peak value. Some others may get out at 80 percent, 50 percent or 30 percent of peak value. In each case, sellers are simply transforming the remaining future value losses to someone else. In a bear market, the vast, vast majority does nothing and gets stuck holding assets with low or non-existent valuations.

http://www.elliottwave.com/deflation/

dopester

Topcat10 wrote: »

In my experience a great deal of people will move to get closer to a better school. So people move constantly for a good primary school and possibly again for a good High School. The desire to get children into good schools seems to far out weigh all other fears. Indeed, the cost of moving is cheap relative to the cost of, say, a fee paying education. This is reflected in the high cost of housing close to good schools. This desire won't go just because of a down turn IMHO. Therefore, it's possible that people will see this spring to be a good oppotunity to sell to be where they need to be for school admissions in October 2009. Never underestimate the demand from parents for a good school.

You are living in a dream world. The country is near broke. Receipts to Gov have and continue to fall..

This is only the beginning before further and further cuts. Even your best schools are going to see major funding cuts during the next 5 years. No reason to pay massive premiums for houses in those catchment areas.

Pre-Budget report: Public spending will be cut by £37bn
Public spending will effectively be cut by £37 billion to help pay off Alistair Darling's huge borrowing plans, Treasury figures show.

Yet even health and education budgets, once considered sacrosanct, are coming under pressure.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/budget/3520793/Pre-Budget-report-Public-spending-will-be-cut-by-37bn.html

Topcat10

dopester wrote: »

And it is ignoring the facts of a bear market.

Yes.. they may have built up lots of equity.. but that can disappear in many instances.

I'd personally rather sell for -30%, and transfer some of the capital at current attainable prices back in to liquidity and rent (and rent values are crashing especially at the top end)... than lock in for a 70%+ crash in this Great-Bear-Super-Cycle that we've only just entered.
/

But people don't think like that, do they? Most familes just think I need a home, I need it to be have x number of bedrooms and I need it next to XYZ school. You then ask yourself what can I do to make it happen and get on with it. People are not thinking profits/losses etc. When you have a family you don't have time to wait, your time framework is specific and you make things happen in that framework regardless of what is going on in the economy around you.

When you have a family you meet their needs regardless of the economic environment.

dopester

Topcat10 wrote: »

But people don't think like that, do they? Most familes just think I need a home, they need it to be have x number of bedrooms and Ithey need it next to XYZ school. They ask themselves what can I do to make it happen and they get on with it. They are not thinking profits/losses etc. When you have a family you don't have time to wait, your time framework is specific and you make things happen in that framework regardless of what is going on in the economy around you.

When you have a family you meet their needs regardless of the economic environment.

Fine. By not selling... by remaining where you are.. that doesn't lock in prices. If near identical property across the street sells for £50,000 less that you had in mind for the value of your property, then next door sells for £100,000 less 12 months later, and then one just up the same street sells at £175,000 less 18 months on... all of that crashes the market value of your own property.

You do realise this simple truth yes?

Topcat10

dopester wrote: »

You are living in a dream world. The country is near broke. Receipts to Gov have and continue to fall..

This is only the beginning before further and further cuts. Even your best schools are going to see major funding cuts during the next 5 years. No reason to pay massive premiums for houses in those catchment areas.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/budget/3520793/Pre-Budget-report-Public-spending-will-be-cut-by-37bn.html

Thanks for that:rolleyes:. I don't know what nightmare place you are living in so I can't comment. Big deficits seem to be the order of the day. Japan has a deficit of 195% and it gets along fine. Life continues whatever the deficit, people move house what ever the deficit. I don't think couples sit down and chat about the size of the national debt when considering moving house, well no-one I know anyway.

Topcat10

dopester wrote: »

Fine. By not selling... by remaining where you are.. that doesn't lock in prices. If near identical property across the street sells for £50,000 less that you had in mind for the value of your property, then next door sells for £100,000 less 12 months later, and then one just up the same street sells at £175,000 less 18 months on... all of that crashes the market value of your own property.

You do realise this simple truth yes?

I don't think people with families think about that. They just think I need more space now/ better school now,etc - Then they think can I move? If the answer is yes they do it. They don't really care about house values - they just think can I meet the monthly payments.

We have always moved as our circumstances changed. Got pregnant - need a house. Had more kids - need a bigger house. We have moved boom or bust. I don't think we have ever thought about it as a money making exercise just getting a homee that met our needs.

I think most people are like this.