Many Upsizers gaining nothing from crash....

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

We all know that a crash impacts different segments in different ways. Downsizers and those approaching retirement or looking to leave an inheritance to children are clear losers, as are the many millions of people in or close to negative equity, and the many more millions being penalised through higher rates on remortgage due to LTV brackets being changed through lower equity.

However we also know that FTB's should in theory benefit through lower prices, although in fact it's not that clear as higher bank margins are eating up most of the savings.

You do realise that the answer to ALL of this is a sustainable, affordable house price model.

Crazy unsustainable rates of HPI have caused all of these problems of losers, and lets not pretend there are winners just yet, as the "would be winners" have had their means to gain entry cut off....i.e. mortgages.

I personally do not care one jot whether an upsizer has financially gained or has just leveled out. Why? Because that's how it should be in my mind, to allow the very people who are releaving the upsizer of their current house the opportunity to afford to do so. This, comes from an "in waiting" upsizer.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

ad9898 wrote: »

There is over a million for sale on Rightmove, same as 2007.

LOL.

Silly bear.:rotfl:

Douglas McWilliams, chief executive of the Centre for Economics and Business Research, which compiles the figures, said: “We may yet experience further small falls in prices, but the worst of the house-price contraction is almost certainly behind us.”

You would imagine that estate agents would be celebrating, but they’re not. They are more worried about the lack of sellers. So far, even the promise of getting something close to asking price is not luring vendors out of their shells, even though buyer inquiries are increasing at the fastest pace since Rics began asking the question 10 years ago.

Perhaps this will pass. Sellers may be holding off because they have heard so much about intense mortgage rationing, they don’t believe there are enough buyers out there with the wherewithal to purchase. Certainly, funding is still a problem for lenders. Even here, however, there are signs of a thaw.

http://property.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/property/article6718312.ece

Hmmmm, no shortage of supply you say.... Interesting.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

LOL.

Silly bear.:rotfl:

http://property.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/property/article6718312.ece

Hmmmm, no shortage of supply you say.... Interesting.

Nope, not silly bear. It's factual.

You are getting confused with properties being on the market and selling, therefore a rotating million properties, and a stagnant market with 1 million properties taking far far longer to sell.

The amount of properties on the market is the same. The length taken to sell them, and therefore the throughput is much lower, hence being able to say lack of sellers.

ad9898_3

I'm not surprised EA's aren't celebrating, many of the vendors are in NE, and most FTB'rs won't pay stupid money on a falling asset. Buyer enquiries are also meaningless, what matters is a sale.

bluey890

nearlynew wrote: »

I love the way the spin has changed recently and now yield is everything.

If over the last few years, these "canny investors" had thought about yield instead of capital gains (which most BTL was sold on), prices would never have risen as much and we would now not be in such a mess.

Greed and stupidity is a wonderful combination.

Yield is important if you do not plan to sell.
Capital gain is important if you are.

It's the truth not spin

bluey890

dopester wrote: »

Plenty of homeowners who have liabilities (mortgage-debt) and challenging income circumstances. They may have equity, even own outright.. but in this economy, there may not be a significant appetite to trade-up. Risking their equity or taking on a bigger mortgage.

Even if they upsize, they leave a house behind for a buyer - unless they keep their old home and do the risky leverage for a second home... in this economy and with the property paradigm busted.

Jumbo-mortgages may be harder to get as well, with tougher qualifying criteria. Many a trophy home-owner could find values get hit the hardest..

My thoughts were in terms of BTL landlords. Many portfolios are doing well on a cash flow basis (more-so than their tenants). BTL landlords will be in a good position to purchase more when house prices bottom out.

nearlynew

bluey890 wrote: »

Yield is important if you do not plan to sell.
Capital gain is important if you are.

It's the truth not spin

In that case, why did we continually hear the phrase "in it for the long term"?

This suggests that people did not plan to sell. Yet they never mentioned yields at the time.
The recent trends in BTL was all about capital gains. But now there is none the reasoning changes.

Sorry. It is indeed spin.

Graham_Devon

bluey890 wrote: »

My thoughts were in terms of BTL landlords. Many portfolios are doing well on a cash flow basis (more-so than their tenants). BTL landlords will be in a good position to purchase more when house prices bottom out.

The only reason BTL landlords can lean on yield instead of asset increases at the moment is thanks to low interest rates.

These will go up.

bluey890

nearlynew wrote: »

In that case, why did we continually hear the phrase "in it for the long term"?

This suggests that people did not plan to sell. Yet they never mentioned yields at the time.
The recent trends in BTL was all about capital gains. But now there is none the reasoning changes.

Sorry. It is indeed spin.

Agreed - talking about paper capital gain whilst having no intention to sell is meaningless (spin).

bluey890

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The only reason BTL landlords can lean on yield instead of asset increases at the moment is thanks to low interest rates.

These will go up.

When exactly?

---

---