Phil Spencers firm going under.

tirano

spuds wrote: »

I wonder if this will end up as a Tom Aiken type deal, where the company goes into admin and he buys it back cheaply.

Why on earth would he want to buy it back ?

wchris

tommy75 wrote: »

Are you joking? Ask the thousands of familys who scrambled onto the property bubble in fear of missing out who are now struggling with payments and reposession. Not all down to this idiot and potato head but they helped pump up the market with their property !!!!!! shows. Still showing how to get into massive dept on a tv channel near you.

I can not fathom out how people can place any blame on people like Phil and Kirsty for what's happening in the current housing market. Essentially all their programmes have done is help people find homes who asked for their help. Simple as.

If you start referring to this as 'property !!!!!!' that intices people into buying houses for more than they are worth then you are really making out the public to be more naive than I can imagine.

Next thing I know is you'll be blaming Top Gear for enticing people into buying new cars they can't afford, or clothes shops for making people feel as though they must buy all the latest fashion even though the cost will be going straight on their credit cards!

These programmes are entertainment, not financial advice for people!

Individuals have to be held accountable for their own actions, not blame everyone else all the time. Those people getting 100% mortgages should have said to themselves, "what if prices drop?" or "can I afford this if interest rates go up?" Why do people always have to push the blame on to someone else.

It's like blaming credit card companies for allowing you borrow that much money. YOU spent the money. Yes, they didn't help but its YOUR fault, not theirs. You can maybe put 1% of blame on to them but no more than that!

Apologies. Had to get that off my chest. Rant over. Am I wrong?

Cannon_Fodder

From Wikipedia "Advertising spending has increased dramatically in recent years. In 2007, spending on advertising has been estimated at over $150 billion in the United States and $385 billion worldwide."


Question - if people are not influenced by seeing/hearing something, why would businesses waste $385 billion...??


On the specifics of Locationx3, take last weeks Relocationx3 - the couple buying had a budget of £350K, prepared to look at doer-uppers, and had £50K set aside for the work required; i.e. £400K total.

So, what do the intrepid duo do? First a sensible house, then they show them one at £450K - that needs more than £50K spending on it...

Initial reaction of the couple? Oh, how lovely, what a house etc etc.!! "Quelle suprise". Of course they are going to have that reaction...25% over budget! Why not look at a mansion?

Now, luckily their heads were screwed on and after sleeping on it, they dropped that house from their short-list.

But the time wasted, and the risk of being convinced to over-extend yourself - by "experts" who have been unable to find anything else, are just two of the reasons why they are on the list of people to blame. % = difficult. 5%?


On the subject of TV influence on the masses - try asking your local butcher if he has a "pork shoulder on the bone"...stocks are apparently running low, just because of 1 Jamie Oliver programme...

wchris

I am not saying that tv has no influence. Far from it.

I admit that if I see something on tv that I like the look of (clothes, films, music, food etc) then I sometimes give it a try...BUT...I am not going to get spend more than I can afford just because tv/advertising etc hints that I need to spend.

People make their own choices. Free will and all that.

But...guilty as charged...I tried the Pork Shoulder - I could afford to try it :rolleyes:

All I am saying is that people need to take more responsibility for their actions - not just where money is concerned either.

Cannon_Fodder

We had the pork yesterday, too...melt in the mouth, yum! But being unfamiliar with the size needed we probably bought too big a piece - cannot wait for my sarnies at lunchtime...


Not all the influence of Locationx3 has been about £50K+ price differences. Of course that was an extreme, that the individual needs to take responsibility for. It was just that after this crash, to still be doing things like that shows that the pair have not learnt a thing.

Plenty of the old programmes expressed the speed with which the market was moving, "act now or the price will have gone up 1% by next month", and "why pay another months rent, that is money down the drain"...

Ramping of this kind stirred up the market, and it became a self-fulfilling prophecy...due the the influence that we can all see from TV.

On its own it didn't MAKE people spend more money, but "buzz" around the market certainly led some people to make offers above what they were 100% comfortable with - "why lose the house you love for the sake of £2K", or "someones offered asking price, you'll have to go over".

They did so, "knowing" that HPI would pay them back...

bo_drinker

Re Jamie Oliver. Apparently we weren't buying shoulder and he was trying to push it , he did a couple of good recipes recently and there you go you struggle to get it. I am not his biggest fan but I watched a prog re the pork etc and it was very good. Off subject slightly there. Now back to the smug Spencer, where were we ?

fatpig_2

wchris wrote: »

. Am I wrong?

Yes. It's incredible that someone in this day and age can be SO naive.

wchris

I understand what you are saying. I guess they just shouldn't use the word 'investment' when it comes to property at the moment.

The truth was though at the time property was going up by 1% a month so what they were saying was true. And when they said "why lose a house you love for only 2k", I don't think this made any difference. Its not that extra 2k on your mortgage that people are struggling with.

There was a "buzz" in the market, and their programme merely refelected that "buzz" rather than generate it...maybe?!

I think people have just become far too comfortable with the theory "you buy a house it goes up in value" and planned their life(style) on this premise.

I do think that house prices coming down long term to more affordable levels will help everyone in the long term though. I am getting a bit off my original point now!

(By the way...I am not related to either Kirsty or Phil, and I am not their press agent either. Just expressing my thoughts)

dervish

Nomad25 wrote: »

I agree. Definitely a ducker and a diver, sorta remins me of Arthur Daly.

evidence?

He seems like a nice affable fellow to me.

ad9898_3

I was unfortunate enough to see a very early Location x3 on the TV yesterday, Phil did seem an 'ok' kinda guy, however Krustie looked about 10 years old and nauseatingly annoying. She is vile.