London house prices already exceed 'peak' of 2007

abaxas

Really2 wrote: »

You will have to get him a very small brown paper bag to breath into.

I find giving him cornflakes helps.

googler

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

[/B]

Aberdeen prices now within 4% of peak, and higher than every month in 2007 except two.

Which prices, though? Average price taken over all properties, in all price ranges? I'm not surprised they have, since everyone suggests that there's more sales at higher prices, less at lower prices, which distorts the average.

abaxas

googler wrote: »

Which prices, though? Average price taken over all properties, in all price ranges? I'm not surprised they have, since everyone suggests that there's more sales at higher prices, less at lower prices, which distorts the average.

Maybe the absolute dross has no value? When it was 40-50k before?

* maybe true for the NE

nollag2006

Again - more distraction from the bears

Given the evidence and the facts before you do you accept that house prices in prime parts of London are now at or above their 2007 peak?

System

You've really excelled yourself this time abaxas.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

googler wrote: »

Which prices, though? Average price taken over all properties, in all price ranges? I'm not surprised they have, since everyone suggests that there's more sales at higher prices, less at lower prices, which distorts the average.

No, Register of Scotland mix adjusts to prevent bias from a greater sale of different property types. They also exclude all sales above a million pounds, etc.

They also indicate that volume is up 20% on last year, when prices were tanking and mortgage funding was much harder to get, and yet I didn't see anyone arguing that low volume or mix skewed the stats downwards then....

IveSeenTheLight

googler wrote: »

Which prices, though? Average price taken over all properties, in all price ranges? I'm not surprised they have, since everyone suggests that there's more sales at higher prices, less at lower prices, which distorts the average.

The methodology the ROSEA use is as follows: -

1. What kind of averages are produced?
The published data are simple averages and based on basic analysis using transactions between £20,000 and £1,000,000. No weighting or adjustment is applied to the information collected to reflect any seasonal or other factors, such as house type, new build or second hand transactions.

The latest release figures (Nov 2009) had total sales for Aberdeen at 410 (£181,426) while in Nov 2008 it was 345 (£160,004).

Therefore the point you are trying to make seems irrelevant given that there are more sales and therefore averaged out better

bernard_shaw

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

No, Register of Scotland mix adjusts to prevent bias from a greater sale of different property types.

I can't see any reference to mix adjustment on their methodology notes here:
http://www.ros.gov.uk/pdfs/rsdguidancenotes.pdf
nor on the notes on the bottom of the data sheet here:
http://www.ros.gov.uk/pdfs/la_nov09.pdf

They do say:
"The information for each stated time period aims to cover all sales of residential properties..."
Mix adjustment would imply selective exclusion, no?

How do you think they perform their mix adjustments?

---

Edit, just seen ISTL's post. Thanks for that. No weighting or adjustment confirmed.
It's on their FAQs

Sir_Humphrey

chucky wrote: »

and that's why the chart shows Greater London and not the Central London areas

Data skew on very limited turnover.

I look at my chosen areas like a hawk and they are still below 2007 prices. Full stop.

IveSeenTheLight

bernard_shaw wrote: »

---

Edit, just seen ISTL's post. Thanks for that. No weighting or adjustment confirmed.
It's on their FAQs

I keep a close eye on the area as I have a Vested Interest there.
For those interested, this is a graph I keep updated with information available from the Registers of Scotland Executive Agency