Housing Market "far stronger" than a year ago

chucky

Thrugelmir wrote: »

and how much of the market momentum was down to low interest rates?

All those BTL buyers who said bank deposit accounts were yielding too little.

Now we have Newcastle BS offering 5% in an ISA. Thats over 8% gross for a high rate taxpayer or 6.875% gross for a basic rate taxpayer.

So a BTL investor has to yield a net 6.875% after costs to match the rate.

Which would you prefer? A non paying tent , a void rental period or hassle free investment?

easy there Mr T.

is that directed at me personally or is it a general question?

i'll ask a general question too if you don't mind - how many people expected property to drop to an amount that they could afford but it didn't and hasn't...

for those that it did drop to an affordable amount, how many of those did the reduction lending stop prevent them buying and will prevent them ever buying?

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

i'm still laughing at this - you don't have a scooby do you...

I said on this thread.

Laugh at it all you like, you know that was ages ago before all the new policies implemented.

I'm not worried if I'm wrong on that prediction from ages ago, but you keep making stuff up at the moment. No one on this thread has said what you suggested.

Thrugelmir

chucky wrote: »

easy there Mr T.

is that directed at me personally or is it a general question?

i'll ask a general question too if you don't mind - how many people expected property to drop to an amount that they could afford but it didn't and hasn't...

for those that it did drop to an affordable amount, how many of those did the reduction lending stop prevent them buying and prevent them ever buying?

I rarely post personal comments Mr C.

My expressed views tend to be on my wider view of the economy. Even if its detrimental to my own situation!

I'm neither a property bear or bull.

However what I am struggling to find is anything to suggest that for the majority ( and not the select few), that we aren't in for a difficult few years. Which will bring hardship on many.

Expecting quick fixes and sudden movements in markets is unrealistic. The property market has a number of fundamental issues that will take a number of years to unwind.

The first of which is a realism amongst the general populace of how bad things really are and will get. Something which none of us will know until after the next election.

The second is a fundamental issue of how banks are funded and the monetary system works. I studied this 30 years ago when doing all my business related exams.

Thirdly is SAVING. A word may again appear in the Oxford dictionary. Something which people have no comprehension as to how to do if they want to buy something.

chucky

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I rarely post personal comments Mr C.

i know that you don't but the post did come across a bit strange.

i agree with the rest of your post in general terms.

the current crash is over - the next crash will/may happen after the honeymoon period of the next election.

i question the comments regarding the banks funding issues being medium/long term, look at Goldmans today for example. This will change if the market determimes this and conditions improve. if they don't this will alow the banks to recapitalise and structure their balance sheets.

however, i disagree with the nonsense of the generalisations that people talk about on this forum that nothing but urban myths.

Conrad

Snooze wrote: »

Small observation.. but has anyone else noticed how chucky, dan: and really2 have completely disappeared off the radar since the arrival of HAMISH_MCTAVISH ?

This is one of several 'busy' threads about house prices recently and none of them have had any input from the above 3 but plenty from Mr. McTavish.





Rob

Are you into the Dianna conspiracy too!

Thrugelmir

chucky wrote: »

i question the comments regarding the banks funding issues being medium/long term, look at Goldmans today for example. This will change if the market determimes this and conditions improve. if they don't this will alow the banks to recapitalise and structure their balance sheets.

Good results from Goldmans. Though they weren't affected as many other US banks. There profit though has been generated from trading and investment banking rather than retail. So does nothing to improve mortgage lending for example. In fact why would bother as what they do seems far more profitable!

All the banks seem to been grouped together. Yet many, HSBC and Standard Chartered for example have quietly been trading away. Don't require Government backing and don't have liquidity issues.

The banks can only recapitalise by making profit or raising money further by shares rights issues. Any debt they are writing off is somebody elses money.

This debt is being passed to us the taxpayer. Making the banks good long term investments.

chucky

yes you're right - investment banks are good but will have some ups and downs. retail will need a long-term recovery.

there will be 'mini-recoveries' that won't develop.

mewbie_2

chucky wrote: »

the current crash is over - the next crash will/may happen after the honeymoon period of the next election.

You heard it here first folks.

chucky

mewbie wrote: »

You heard it here first folks.

nice work - how's that mortgage that you helped pay off for someone else doing?

mewbie_2

chucky wrote: »

nice work - how's that mortgage that you helped pay off for someone else doing?

Assuming that by someone else you mean the wife, then it's doing nicely, thanks for asking.