Halifax +2.6 % MoM

skap7309

OK after reading the comments i agree with both bulls and bears. However my take on this is (and i am suprised it has not been mentioned yet)

There is clearly going to be two stages to this crash - BoE lowered rates to an unsustainable level to get people borrowing again - this is having an effect now and as it is artificially low they will need to rise in the near future. This is stage one complete and as things get moving again they will begin to rise, bringing on stage two.

I am not entirely convinced by the unemployment argument lowering prices, but then again who am i to argue.........

Dan:_4

:rotfl::rotfl:It's 'brown trousers' time over on HPC.co.uk today :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I would say it doesnt indicate a time period, as you cannot put a time period on such a thing?

If I asked you to tell me when this will all be over, you'd be able to tell me the best time to buy, you'd be a very VERY rich man.

So I guess there is no time period, as it's impossible to give.

So you could make the purchase of jaffa cakes fit it then.

For any graph to be relevant it needs a scale, otherwise its actually a picture.

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

Yes.

As I said it as nothing to do with assets. Over lap it over any asset prices and you will find out it is rubbish.

The only thing it has in common is assets go up and down. But they do not follow the grieving process they follow market forces.:rolleyes:

PS look at the nationwide graph on HPC your graph would fit more with us being at the end of the cycle, (2000 fist sell off, 2004 top of the market, 2007 over extended return to normality)
Now i dont think we are at that stage but we are at the return to the mean if you look at that graph.

I completely disagree. You are basically trying to tell me that the level off we had in 2005 was the denial? And the bull trap increase we see on the graph was the "over extended" return to normality from 2005-2007?!

Was a long time over extended.

I respect your opinion, but disagree completely.

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I would say it doesnt indicate a time period, as you cannot put a time period on such a thing?

that was my point it could be 1990, 1995 or 2000.

personally, i'd rather use other indicators rather than a theory that used for those with terminal illnesses but your free to look at it in your own way.

StevieJ

skap7309 wrote: »

OK after reading the comments i agree with both bulls and bears. However my take on this is (and i am suprised it has not been mentioned yet)

There is clearly going to be two stages to this crash - BoE lowered rates to an unsustainable level to get people borrowing again - this is having an effect now and as it is artificially low they will need to rise in the near future. This is stage one complete and as things get moving again they will begin to rise, bringing on stage two.

I am not entirely convinced by the unemployment argument, then again who am i to argue.........

It depends on how far rates increase, up to 5% I don't think will effect on many, esp first time buyers who have not benefited much from the rates reduction. I think most homeowners can't believe their luck at the moment with low rates, I should imagine the sensible ones will be looking for long term fixes soon.

Lotus-eater

skap7309 wrote: »

There is clearly going to be two stages to this crash - BoE lowered rates to an unsustainable level to get people borrowing again - this is having an effect now and as it is artificially low they will need to rise in the near future. This is stage one complete and as things get moving again they will begin to rise, bringing on stage two.

So how much affect will interest rates have on house prices?
I've seen it said that they will stay low (below 2%) for years and I've also seen it said that they will rise to around 8%.
I have no idea what they will do. But if they stay low, does this mean house prices will stay (artificially :rolleyes:) high? Till they rise that is, because even the most ardent bull knows they must go up at some point.
And at some point the governments help for home owners who get into trouble will run out, are we just waiting for the perfect storm?

Heyman_2

skap7309 wrote: »

There is clearly going to be two stages to this crash - BoE lowered rates to an unsustainable level to get people borrowing again - this is having an effect now and as it is artificially low they will need to rise in the near future. This is stage one complete and as things get moving again they will begin to rise, bringing on stage two.

There are many factors and I wouldn't call this month's figures an end or completion to any stage. If you read the BBC article here -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8082582.stm

There's a couple of notable quotes -

"There are some tentative indications of a possible stabilisation in activity, albeit at a low level," said Nitesh Patel, the group's housing economist. "It is always important not to place too much weight on any one month's figures. Historically, house prices have not moved in the same direction month after month even during a pronounced downturn."
He pointed to the fall in house prices of 11% during 1991 and 1992, during which time there were still five monthly price rises.

but also -

Both lenders suggested that a low supply of homes for sale was likely to have had an effect on average prices.

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

I have to agree with you here, from what I gather West country doesn't pay very good wages and yet your house prices are higher due to holiday homes for Londoners and retirees. You have my sympathy

Ahh it's swings and roundabouts.

I thought about moving out of the area, but once you have a house here, the UK is your oyster (bar london). So once the house is owned here, you can sell up and go most places, and for the same money, upsize too.

My best mate moved north, chasing the house. He's realised now that to get back here, he's going to have to leave his 3 bed detached with garage, for which he will be able to get a 3rd floor two bed flat here at a push. And he wants to come back here.

So it has its benefits. But this is the reason I have shared ownership, though I get lambasted on here for having chosen that path. I had no choice really. Would have had to be earning 65k per year around 2007 to afford just the average home. 45k at a push on a 5x mortgage.

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I completely disagree. You are basically trying to tell me that the level off we had in 2005 was the denial? And the bull trap increase we see on the graph was the "over extended" return to normality from 2005-2007?!

Was a long time over extended.

I respect your opinion, but disagree completely.

But the graph clearly shows the return to mean. we are there at the moment so it is the only way it fits.
That is why the graph is so wrong to use.