House prices fall 1.8% in feb

MrDT

ad9898 wrote: »

:rotfl:it's funny I clicked on Mr B's name the other night and it came up with 'Dan :', I thought thats weird, clicked on 'amcluesent' and it said he was 'luvpump'. Did it with a few others as well, I'm sure it's a glitch cus I don't think Brodders has any 'sockys':D

Are you telling me that New Gold Dream wasn't Mr B?

He started posting a the day after Mr B's most recent 'farewell' thread. Stopped once Mr B returned.

And, well, it was just obviously him ok

edit: !!!!, sorry, not another sock puppet thread. Umm, yeah, houses, int they cheap these days? When I were a boy you had to take out 100 year mortgages that your kids paid off after you were dead an' buried etc etc...

poppy10_2

GDB2222 wrote: »

This is a function of how the trend line is calculated. It's usually calculated by taking the latest house price figure and working backwards in time. Consequently, the current position and the trend line are always "almost touching".

Tut tut, GDB . I expected better from you.

The trend line is produced by linear regression and not simply by taking a single pivot point. The two endpoints are certainly not "always almost touching".
See for example, this time last year:

Dan:_4

ad9898 wrote: »

:rotfl:it's funny I clicked on Mr B's name the other night and it came up with 'Dan :', I thought thats weird, clicked on 'amcluesent' and it said he was 'luvpump'. Did it with a few others as well, I'm sure it's a glitch cus I don't think Brodders has any 'sockys':D

How strange. Just to make clear to everyone - Dan: is unique and not a socky for anyone. :beer:

besonders1

fatpig wrote: »

It's amazing how house prices just keep getting cheaper all the time. It's fantastic news for hard-working families who want a place of their own. And for future generations too.

I think its marvelous, like light at the end of the tunnel. I remember last year, a friend telling me off for not believing the prices would crash! It means FTB's will get more4less. A small terrace is almost within my budget (but even now they're not selling) whereas before I would struggle to get a 1 bed flat for the same price range.

adr0ck

GDB2222 wrote: »

Can I see the 2004/5 graph you are referring to please? Do you have a graph produced then?

poppy answers it above

thanks poppy

GDB2222

poppy10 wrote: »

Tut tut, GDB . I expected better from you.

The trend line is produced by linear regression and not simply by taking a single pivot point. The two endpoints are certainly not "always almost touching".
See for example, this time last year:

I hear what you are saying, and of course that's how I would do it. (It's actually non-liner regression, as they are using a simple polynomial.) But I don't think that's what they are doing - or do you think I'm putting too much emphasis on the "Base: Q4 2007"?

ad44downey

Dan: wrote: »

How strange. Just to make clear to everyone - Dan: is unique and not a socky for anyone. :beer:

Oh the wonderful irony of it all. Dan: categorically states that he's no-one's sock puppet, etc. blah, blah, blah. Then who thanks his post? Yes, step forward chucky. It's beautiful. :T

beingjdc

GDB2222 wrote: »

I hear what you are saying, and of course that's how I would do it. (It's actually non-liner regression, as they are using a simple polynomial.) But I don't think that's what they are doing - or do you think I'm putting too much emphasis on the "Base: Q4 2007"?

I think "Base" refers to the RPI price point based on which they're adjusting for inflation to get the real terms chart, rather than anything to do with the trendline (which does move around - why was is 2.3% in 2004, surely it should then be less than 2.3% now we're below 2004's prices!)

Of course with RPI negative shortly, the real terms chart goes haywire.

lukekelly_2

GDB2222 wrote: »

I hear what you are saying, and of course that's how I would do it. (It's actually non-liner regression, as they are using a simple polynomial.) But I don't think that's what they are doing - or do you think I'm putting too much emphasis on the "Base: Q4 2007"?

As far as I'm aware that is what they're doing. There are problems with their models, particularly their habit of using a 30 year period for the trend-line which means that strong price movement 30 years ago can alter the trend-line substantially as old quarters drop off. They do though use all the standard regression techniques, and certainly don't project backwards when creating these graphs. You can actually download their raw data if you so wish and construct your own trend-lines, you'll find you come up with something very similar.

Negative RPI shouldn't make the graph go haywire. It's cumulative. A year of it will have limited affect on the cumulative inflation figures, at least in terms of long-term trend-lines. The trend-line will certainly be moving downwards in response to the current changes though, two years of 15% falls on a 30 year data series should knock off a good fraction of a percent.

stevetodd

Bf109 wrote: »

Prices back to April 2004.

Anyone who bought a house in the last 5 years has lost money.

How? I bought it 3.5 years ago how have I lost money?