Misery of the BTLers and property developers...

Dan:_4

Graham_Devon wrote: »

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/a98c87f0-1575-11de-b9a9-0000779fd2ac.html

I don't think we can call the above a politically biased, or with an agenda.

It's pretty stark out there, for any BTL landlord, no matter how much they ramp up the economy and tell us "I have more money than you sir".

It's not about "I have more money then you" and you know it.

Some people invest in a pension, some people invest in shares, some people invest in property and some people simply save.

dopester

Dan: wrote: »

It's not about "I have more money then you" and you know it.

Some people invest in a pension, some people invest in shares, some people invest in property and some people simply save.

Watched Homes Under The Hammer the other day. Another pair of investors who bought 2 very small flats in London, to add to their portfolio of 100 properties.

Invest away in property, but don't come crying when the values fall, and you lose everything, including your own home.

Graham_Devon

Dan: wrote: »

It's not about "I have more money then you" and you know it.

Some people invest in a pension, some people invest in shares, some people invest in property and some people simply save.

I know, I said "than you".

No problem investing at all. But the amount of horse shi*e some people are spouting on here about how this is all good, and ramping up the economy for their agenda, not only on MSE, but also elsewhere, as I explained earlier, and the ignorance of anything which says anything else, is boring.

There needs to be some acceptance, otherwise threads go down the troute this one has.

TroJon

Just to clarify, does fungusfighter realise BTL mortgages still have an income to support them - the idea that they are self-financing really breaks down all his arguements...

Except the one with regards to being on the interner... I work in an office, and as with almost all my colleagues, we go on the internet when we can! For example, on the recent sunny days, nobody wanted to sort out a mortgage, so we had it pretty lax.

mp2

Dan: wrote: »

It's not about "I have more money then you" and you know it.

Some people invest in a pension, some people invest in shares, some people invest in property and some people simply save.

people invested into shares over the past year have not been saying a 35% fall in the stock market is good for them. nor would people with pensions say that 35% falls are good for them either.

so why do btler's try to kid themselves by saying 35% falls is perfect for them?

not only is it not 35% falls for them its 35% multiplied by whatever leverage they are on.

so if youre leveraged 4 to 1 with a 25% ltv youre actually down 140% on your real-terms investment.

saying "if i dont sell, ive lost nothing" can be applied to any asset class however you are trying to con yourself and are succeeding if you believe it.

you might believe your own distorted outlook, but the reality and market isnt as forgiving, things are as they are.

there is a difference in what is happening and what you want to believe and you dont accept it because its not in front of you on a piece of paper in the form of a bank statement, a share statement, or pension statement.

your view is if i cant see it, it doesnt exist, hence you still have your head in the sand and by the time it really kicks you down (or you lose most of what you have already gained) it will be too late to do anything about it because you ignored the problems at the outset.

Dan:_4

Graham_Devon wrote: »

There needs to be some acceptance, otherwise threads go down the troute this one has.

This thread was doomed from the start.

mewbie_2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

There needs to be some acceptance, otherwise threads go down the troute this one has.

Right down the troute I reckon.

Dan:_4

mp2 wrote: »

people invested into shares over the past year have not been saying a 35% fall in the stock market is good for them. nor would people with pensions say that 35% falls are good for them either.

so why do btler's try to kid themselves by saying 35% falls is perfect for them?

not only is it not 35% falls for them its 35% multiplied by whatever leverage they are on.

so if youre leveraged 4 to 1 with a 25% ltv youre actually down 140% on your real-terms investment.

saying "if i dont sell, ive lost nothing" can be applied to any asset class however you are trying to con yourself and are succeeding if you believe it.

you might believe your own distorted outlook, but the reality and market isnt as forgiving, things are as they are.

there is a difference in what is happening and what you want to believe and you dont accept it because its not in front of you on a piece of paper in the form of a bank statement, a share statement, or pension statement.

your view is if i cant see it, it doesnt exist, hence you still have your head in the sand and by the time it really kicks you down (or you lose most of what you have already gained) it will be too late to do anything about it because you ignored the problems at the outset.

Investing in either shares or property are long term investments, not for a quick gain in a couple of years.

If I bought a BTL investment in 2007, it will be worth more when I sell it when I retire in 25 year, same as if I bought one in 2009.

mp2

Dan: wrote: »

Investing in either shares or property are long term investments, not for a quick gain in a couple of years.

If I bought a BTL investment in 2007, it will be worth more when I sell it when I retire in 25 year, same as if I bought one in 2009.

are you sure of that? because in japan property prices have dropped 18 years in a row since 1991.

same credit bubble, stock bubble, same housing bubble, same credit collapse, stock market collapse, banks going bankrupt, government bailout of banks.
same low interest rates for 2 decades at 0%, same limited supply of property and limited land available.

do these events in japan over the past 2 decades ring any bells?

i wouldnt be so sure that your house price will be worth more in 25 years. especially in real terms. nominally you may get back to where you were in around 15-20 years time. but adjusting for inflation it will be worth a lot less than what it was valued at in 2007.

in real terms i dont think house prices will ever get back to where it was in 2007. it was all a bubble, funded by essentially what was a pyramid credit scheme.

also if i told you i stumped up £100,000 of my own money and borrowed money at a 10-1 margin so i invested £1million in the stock market in 2007 how secure would you say is my investment?

after all, stock markets always go up too in the long run over 25 years, and generally even more than property.

are you saying that i cant lose?

pickles110564

Graham_Devon wrote: »

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/a98c87f0-1575-11de-b9a9-0000779fd2ac.html

I don't think we can call the above a politically biased, or with an agenda.

It's pretty stark out there, for any BTL landlord, no matter how much they ramp up the economy and tell us "I have more money than you sir".

I have large BTL mortgages but they are only charging me 1.25% and 1.55% so why is it hard for me when all the properties have tenants in.