MSE News: Nationwide: strong house price growth in January

Harry_Powell

mr_fishbulb wrote: »

He is like the Vinnie Jones of the forum

He's the Graham Devon of the Bull team.

chucky

just thought i'd give this thread a bump....

this is just another nail in the coffin of the cult HPC warriors that are out there

stueyhants

chucky wrote: »

just thought i'd give this thread a bump....

this is just another nail in the coffin of the cult HPC warriors that are out there

What I don't get is, the bulls would have always be right at some point. I mean that the price no matter how far it had fallen would have at some point gone back up to the previous peak.

HPC warriors as you put it, pointed out back in 2005-2007 that prices would crash, bulls stated they were wrong. As we can see today the bulls we wrong. Just because prices are going to go back up doesn't mean all HPC predictions are wrong.

Anyway, I'd wait until next Tuesday before you declare final victory in the war.

Harry_Powell

stueyhants wrote: »

What I don't get is, the bulls would have always be right at some point. I mean that the price no matter how far it had fallen would have at some point gone back up to the previous peak.

Even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

chucky

stueyhants wrote: »

What I don't get is, the bulls would have always be right at some point. I mean that the price no matter how far it had fallen would have at some point gone back up to the previous peak.

you should have been around last year when people were still saying 50% was still to come off property. they're either clueless or ignorant - it;s got to be one of the two...

stueyhants wrote: »

HPC warriors as you put it, pointed out back in 2005-2007 that prices would crash, bulls stated they were wrong. As we can see today the bulls we wrong. Just because prices are going to go back up doesn't mean all HPC predictions are wrong.

not strictly true... many have put off buying since the late 1990s... so that would be a minimum of 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008... that's a lot of times to have got it wrong...

the great HPC cult temple of worship HPC.co.uk has been around since 2003 too...

Graham_Devon

All good in my view. It's another month where the entire average monthly wage isn't enough to keep up with HPI.

To be fair, everyone is wrong on this one. The bulls turned "bearish" over the winter months a few months ago. There were many arguments about this very thing. So bulls and bears alike have been proven wrong by this.

To me it just doesn't make any sense, let alone sense celebrating it. Once again we are in teritory where no one average person/couple, bar those who own can keep up with the prices, no matter how sensible they are or how much they save for their deposit.

That's got trouble written all over it. But seems to me this time, people who could have been burned by falling prices have a chance to sell up and take their cash before it all falls down again.

stueyhants

Harry_Powell wrote: »

Even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

There seems to be two arguments on here.

What is the 'actual' status of the economy/housing market etc. This is debated through surveys, GDP numbers and informed views.

Give the data to date, the bears are loosing the argument (that said data going forward is starting to look on the downside).

The other argument is why the 'actual' data (surveys, GDP etc) are the way they are. This is the area I think can be argued sensibly, bulls seem to be confusing artifical stimulus for real growth and recovery.

stueyhants

chucky wrote: »

you should have been around last year when people were still saying 50% was still to come off property. they're either clueless or ignorant - it;s got to be one of the two...


not strictly true... many have put off buying since the late 1990s... so that would be a minimum of 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008... that's a lot of times to have got it wrong...

the great HPC cult temple of worship HPC.co.uk has been around since 2003 too...

I think what this post says to me is we shouldn't try and put all people in to either the bull or bear narrow 'box'. Not all bulls want double digit HPI, like not all bears want 50% falls.

Graham_Devon

stueyhants wrote: »

The other argument is why the 'actual' data (surveys, GDP etc) are the way they are. This is the area I think can be argued sensibly, bulls seem to be confusing artifical stimulus for real growth and recovery.

The argument I see on this one is that it's not artificial, because it's out there and being used, therefore real.

I can't argue with the terminology, but I can argue that it is still artificial. But this is another one that can go round in circles!

Harry_Powell

stueyhants wrote: »

This is the area I think can be argued sensibly, bulls seem to be confusing artifical stimulus for real growth and recovery.

IMO, the interesting discussion lies in whether we think the artificial stimulus will act as a catalyst or whether it's a temporary boost. For my part, the jury is still out on this one.

I wouldn't like to gamble my future on it, hence why I bought my first house last year.