MSE news: House prices rise marginally, says Land Registry

IveSeenTheLight

ruggedtoast wrote: »

People who dont need to sell will hold out for asking price.

People who dont need to buy will hold out for more falls.

Everyone else stuck inbetween doesnt get a choice.

I think this is very simplistic.

It could lead to more supply as potential sellers think they will be able to get their property sold.

It could lead to an increase in buyers, if the perception is the market has bottomed out

I noted from the LR report that the areas with most sales are under £100k.
Could this indicate that the lower priced properties is affordable to FTBers thus starting the bottom rung of the ladder, where have all these sellers vacated to? Are they saving money by being able to get up the ladder at reduced prices? Are they still to re-enter the market.

There are a lot of potentials for this

nearlynew

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Unfortunately not. There are penalties for filing incorrect statistical returns to both the ONS and Customs & Excise. I would imagine conveyancing solicitors would incur the same.

But how about how the figures are analysed and interpereted?

You can get statistics to "prove" anything.

All government statistics are fiddled.
End of.

Graham_Devon

Is it just me who is a little surprised at the figures?

Thought it would have been more than this, when you compare the Halifax and NW index's from the LR reporting time.

Thrugelmir

nearlynew wrote: »

But how about how the figures are analysed and interpereted?

You can get statistics to "prove" anything.

All government statistics are fiddled.
End of.

There're not Government statistics. The Civil Service is responsible for producing them.

nearlynew

Thrugelmir wrote: »

There're not Government statistics. The Civil Service is responsible for producing them.

And of course, they're impartial.

:rotfl:

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Is it just me who is a little surprised at the figures?

Thought it would have been more than this, when you compare the Halifax and NW index's from the LR reporting time.

It just shows that NW and Halifax are guides and do not hold the whole market data of the the LR has the fuller picture.

Remember also that these could be adjusted in the coming months as any lagging data comes in

Crash_Over

nearlynew wrote: »

But how about how the figures are analysed and interpereted?

You can get statistics to "prove" anything.

All government statistics are fiddled.
End of.

Amazing the lengths to which posters will stoop to avoid admitting reality.

IveSeenTheLight

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

It just shows that NW and Halifax are guides and do not hold the whole market data of the the LR has the fuller picture.

Remember also that these could be adjusted in the coming months as any lagging data comes in

On top of this, it's simply different indices, different figures, different results

Are you really surprised at a variance of less than 1%?
Or are you doing a little fishing

chucky

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

As this news goes out, I wonder what impact it will have to sentiment.

sentiment will be improved especially with similar news coming out of the US today.

Home prices posted their first monthly gain in three years in May, a gauge of values in 20 major U.S. cities showed, reinforcing signs of stabilization in a market hammered by the worst slump since the 1930s.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aubrgv4TH7tE

System

I think what ISTL is saying is that the LR lags by 3-4 months.

The nationwide indexes for March/April was 0.9 and -0.4

And you're saying you're surprised by a 0.1% figure on the LR.

How is that surprising?