Phew

Graham_Devon

LOL, I have to laugh at us all. I'm sure were simply FINDING stuff to argue about!!!

It seems utterly impossible that two different people with a different outlook on where prices should be or are going, cannot possibly agree on anything. If they do have to agree, it usually ends in insults to get away from the point we are agreeing

carolt

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Please see above

Why should I 'apologise to my students', ISTL?

Please explain this personal slur.

I can't wait to hear your explanation. In full.

Or your apology.

IveSeenTheLight

carolt wrote: »

Why should I 'apologise to my students', ISTL?

Please explain this personal slur.

I can't wait to hear your explanation. In full.

Or your apology.

We've seen the poor standards of your correcting other posters comments on here and inability to provide an explanation of the poor commenting and acceptance to change or correct said points.

If you have the same standards with your students, I asked whether you were going to apologise to your students.
It was a question if you were going to apologise to them. Only you can answer if you have the same standards with them as you have on here

Really2

Anyway to put the boot on the other foot so to speak.

The last house the same as mine as shown on LR at £285K (but to be fair the one sold at peak April 08was £340K)

So 14% over what I purchased for a year ago.:beer:

Guess it is where you live and when you buy.

IveSeenTheLight

carolt wrote: »

So why is the flat for sale at 250K not being snapped up then, ISTL?

When an identical one sold for 100K more just 2 years ago? Or - to give you the benefit of the doubt - identical but with a slap of magnolia?

who says they are identical?

What we have proven is that two of the properties sold in 2009 were higher than end of 2004 prices (for the exact same property).
That means they are circa 2005 prices at the earliest.

the_ash_and_the_oak

found it,

heres kentish town 1beds in 2003
http://web.archive.org/web/200310270...alerent=1&sp=1
and today
http://www.findaproperty.com/searchr...75&bedrooms=01

carolt

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

We've seen the poor standards of your correcting other posters comments on here and inability to provide an explanation of the poor commenting and acceptance to change and correct said points.

If you have the same standards with your students, I asked whether you were going to apologise to your students.
It was a question if you were going to apologise to them. Only you can answer if you have the same standards with them as you have on here

You are rude, but I don't ask you to apologise to your workmates because of your rudeness.

And winking at me when being offensive doesn't actually make it any less offensive, you know.

You have no idea what I'm like in my job, and aren't likely to, as you live in Scotland. But if you move down south, I might consider taking you on as a private student - if you paid me a premium. I'd expect you to treat me with the same respect I treated you, and with which I treat all my students. I don't have any time or interest in teaching students who are rude to me or to fellow pupils. Not usually a problem I have, I admit.

Anyway, if you are interested in remedial English, I'm more than happy to oblige. You will then be in a position to have a clue what you're talking about.

Could be a long commute at present, though.

I the meantime, it would be great if when you disagree with the content of my posts, you could limit your discussion to the contents of my posts, rather than your 'opinion' of my professional abilities, which, fascinating though it may be, does rather highlight your inability to actually answer argument with argument.

Cleaver

carolt wrote: »

If the figures show anything it's that there is anything but an equal distribution. The words 'utterly random' spring to mind.

You think? I see a pattern pretty much in line with general trends. All propeties on a street will sell at any point for 10% or 15% +/- either way of the average due to a whole host of variables: the seller, the agent, the buyer, the sentiment, the random chance of suddenly getting a lot of interest, or no interest, in a flat. Doesn't matter that they are all the same.

I've split the sales in to half year averages:



You can see that it pretty much mirrors what we've seen nationally really. The flats selling in Q3/4 2009 are pretty much the same price as the flats selling in Q3/4 2005 and Q1/2 2006.

Prices peaked in Q3/4 2007 and Q1/2 2008 before coming right down in Q3/4 2008. Then they've risen lately, as shown throughout 2009.

Pretty standard stuff rather than being 'utterly random' isn't it?

carolt

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

who says they are identical?

Bonia 77 does, just here:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=26510399&postcount=52

carolt

Cleaver wrote: »

You think? I see a pattern pretty much in line with general trends. All propeties on a street will sell at any point for 10% or 15% +/- either way of the average due to a whole host of variables: the seller, the agent, the buyer, the sentiment, the random chance of suddenly getting a lot of interest, or no interest, in a flat. Doesn't matter that they are all the same.

I've split the sales in to half year averages:



You can see that it pretty much mirrors what we've seen nationally really. The flats selling in Q3/4 2009 are pretty much the same price as the flats selling in Q3/4 2005 and Q1/2 2006.

Prices peaked in Q3/4 2007 and Q1/2 2008 before coming right down in Q3/4 2008. Then they've risen lately, as shown throughout 2009.

Pretty standard stuff rather than being 'utterly random' isn't it?

No, not really, because it ignores the fact that identcal flats sold for 80K differences within a 1 month timeframe!

I'd call that pretty random.