Once a bear, now firmly a bull? Or once a bull now...

IveSeenTheLight

Cleaver wrote: »

According to this forum it's magnolia, laminate, plasma TVs, Kirsty Allsop, 'liar loans' and the labour government. Which I guess might be bang on.

My theory is that it's because British people seem to have had a right hard on for property in recent years, and there have been a number of organisation happy to give them a financial hand job.

Sorry, had a few beers tonight.

There's no doubt that in Britain there is a higher appetite for ownership as opposed to renting. This is without doubt a contributer as is the increase in population we have seen in the last decade. More than 2 million more people in the country with houses not being built to the same level.

the_ash_and_the_oak

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

There's no doubt that in Britain there is a higher appetite for ownership as opposed to renting. This is without doubt a contributer as is the increase in population we have seen in the last decade. More than 2 million more people in the country with houses not being built to the same level.

Agree w this but at same time are we saying here that there was a time (over the last 50 years) when this wasn't case

Really2

I was bearish (30% falls on houses) but made my moves early, glad I did.
I can't see nominal bottom being more than 30% so on houses I am not really bear or bull.

Still feel we have a good few years of stagnation fo houses and slow growth in the economy.

IveSeenTheLight

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

Agree w this but at same time are we saying here that there was a time (over the last 50 years) when this wasn't case

Certainly.
The percentage of owner occupiers was never as high as it is nowadays.
More people in the country increasingly competing for limited property.

the_ash_and_the_oak

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Certainly.
The percentage of owner occupiers was never as high as it is nowadays.
More people in the country increasingly competing for limited property.

Thats not quite the same thing. I don't dispute owner occupancy has risen over the last 50 years - less convinced that appetite has changed during that time (for me its more that access to credit has increased and cost of it reduced - and also a gradual shift from the majority of property being privately fully owned and rented out to the majority being owner occupied and mortgaged)

Appetite/desire has always been v high in the UK imo. Not feeling that people "want to own" today any more than they did in 1985 or 1971.

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

As I can still ask "where is the money going to come from" and it confuses nearly every "bull" out there, I am still a bear.

Only one person has ever answered that. And that's julieq.

:Twhat this man said :T

Cleaver wrote: »

And presumably you didn't understand her answer, so are you still searching for another explanation?

this forum is getting boring now with the same answers to the same old questions to the same old HPCers...

the_ash_and_the_oak

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Certainly.
The percentage of owner occupiers was never as high as it is nowadays.
.

This is actually pretty interesting imo. When owner occupancy stats were low did this mean there was a large pool of non-owners (renters) competing for a small amount of property (the majority of property presumably permanently rented out rather than bought/sold)

StevieJ

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Certainly.
The percentage of owner occupiers was never as high as it is nowadays.
More people in the country increasingly competing for limited property.

To a certain degree but remember a great many of those council houses are now privately owned and thus added to private housing stock.

Graham_Devon

Cleaver wrote: »

And presumably you didn't understand her answer, so are you still searching for another explanation?

Her answer was future pay, over a 25 year period.

The answer was understood.

Just not something I thought was very convincing.

But nice swipe, nevertheless.

the_ash_and_the_oak

StevieJ wrote: »

To a certain degree but remember a great many of those council houses are now privately owned and thus added to private housing stock.

But isn't this still a factor? - a large pool of property that was previously for rent only but now in the buy/sell pool?