Slumping auction prices point to fall in house prices

house123

Really2 wrote: »

Odd how it goes against the article.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/mortgages-and-homes/house-prices/article.html?in_article_id=490530&in_page_id=57&position=moretopstories



Looks like that place could be in trouble.

Do you think it’s the auction houses fault then?

Really2

house123 wrote: »

Do you think it’s the auction houses fault then?

No But also their average property price as increased in those 3 months.

June = £96,416
Sept = £116,642

So again that goes against the stats presented.

I would go back on my above comment and now say it is to hard to draw a conclution from on auction.

If they used those prices for the article it would have been rising prices, but falling sales.

But falling sale coversions is not good for them.

house123

Really2 wrote: »

No But also their average property price as increased in those 3 months.

June = £96,416
Sept = £116,642

So again that goes against the stats presented.

I would go back on my above comment and now say it is to hard to draw a conclution from on auction.

If they used those prices for the article it would have been rising prices, but falling sales.

But falling sale coversions is not good for them.

Equally your bit about "rising prices, but falling sales." is not really sustainable either.

DaddyBear

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Yes, that's the one.

He's been surprisingly right about many things so far, but as he's now calling for inflation, and buying of houses to protect against it, the hpc lynch mob have turned on him and are now accusing him of being a "stealth bull" and a troll.

This poster is not the real daddybear. It's just a troll from hpc trying to be funny.

Correct, it's a different DaddyBear on HPC, and he is the hyperinflationist and is pushing is opinions extremely vigorously now, having re-entered the housing Market.

As for being a troll, I'd like to know how you came to that conclusion. Low post count, only started one thread, high ratio of thanks to posts. Having said that, I'd rather be a troll trying to be funny than a troll who doesn't realise he's being funny.

Really2

house123 wrote: »

Equally your bit about "rising prices, but falling sales." is not really sustainable either.

I did not say it was
All I have said on this post is that the data is very dubious.

Using 93 samples is far to low, and how they came to the valuation was very dubious (zoopla).

chucky

DaddyBear wrote: »

Actully, it's a different DaddyBear on HPC, but yes he is the hyperinflationist and is pushing is opinions extremely vigorously now, having re-entered the housing Market.

so you're a DaddyBear imposter then

the real DaddyBear always pushed his opinions 'extremely vigorously'. it must be frustrating now that it's a different view point to the HPC ghetto religion.

mewbie_2

Really2 wrote: »

I did not say it was
All I have said on this post is that the data is very dubious.

Using 93 samples is far to low, and how they came to the valuation was very dubious (zoopla).

How many turds do you need to see before you know its a turd?

chucky

Really2 wrote: »

I did not say it was
All I have said on this post is that the data is very dubious.

Using 93 samples is far to low, and how they came to the valuation was very dubious (zoopla).

the funny thing about these bearish people is that positive house sales indexes are irrelevant as they are low volumes.

but now using only 93 properties now is extrememly accurate information. :rolleyes:

Really2

mewbie wrote: »

How many turds do you need to see before you know its a turd?

Good point, but is the thread about identifying turds?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Really2 wrote: »

Good point, but is the thread about identifying turds?

This thread is a turd.

Troll turd, to be precise.