Climbing the Housing Ladder to retirement?

ixwood

I've considered this before. My conclusion was that constantly upsizing/upgrading would provide the biggest asset in the end, but it would cost more to produce (Bigger mortgage payments for a longer time mainly) .

For me, that then boiled down to a choice between working hard for most of my life and having a large estate, or working less and ending up with less.

I'm pretty sure I'll personally go for the work less route and aim to retire ASAP. As soon as the mortgage is gone, then reducing work hours is a serious possibility.

ixwood

An alternative strategy I might consider is never selling the previous house when I do change houses, but then you're getting into BTL territory. Or NSTL.

Any thoughts on this?

silvercar

ixwood wrote: »

An alternative strategy I might consider is never selling the previous house when I do change houses, but then you're getting into BTL territory. Or NSTL.

Any thoughts on this?

I wish I had done this. But then I wouldn't have got anyone to lend me the sort of money I needed to buy the next place.

dopester wrote:

Silvercar and her/his profit calculating. Gotta sell it yet Silvercar to release any of that profit.. and the window is closing for boomers to get out with old-world prices as you're sucked into the deflationary vortex.

Those are sold prices; albeit not sold by me.

[Deleted User]

Davesnave wrote: »

I didn't say my place will increase in value, though I think it will because of the increasing importance of home food production, not to mention other possible income from things like power generation, timber etc.:D

Anyway, we'd prefer to use much of the money we have left to improve its potential and our enjoyment of it, rather than leave it in the bank or investments. The barn is a case in point, as it is likely to have an 'office' attached shortly, which will just happen to be constructed to building regs! Besides power, it also has water and septic tank drainage, so it would be daft not to.;)

On the down side, any property with significant land costs money up-front for maintenance. I would estimate an input of around £10k for machinery etc to do that, but that's no more than some Boomers spend on holidays or hobbies.

I don't think the recent proliferation of 'Escape to the Country' & 'Live the green dream' type TV programmes is accidental, though the reality is often somewhat different from that portrayed. It can be a good thing for a Boomer to do, but one's temperament/health has to be right, or it will be a disaster.

I tend to think you're right.

Interestingly, we were looking to buy a bit of land to exercise our wayward Beagles. We needed an acre or two...or more, that we could fence securely. House prices might have dropped but land prices are still silly. It got to the point where we were willing to pay 60k for a 5 acre field (poor quality land) with zero planning permission - and we were outbid. That's in Ayrshire, scotland too. EVERYTHING went for way over the odds.

We ended up with a lovely house in the country with a 1/3 acre garden. We bought it because it's perfect for us but I do tend to think that properties with land will always be more desireable....which means that in good times you can make a lot when you sell. But aside from anything else doesn't just feel wonderful to have all that space?? Even with our little 1/3 acre it's changed our lives.

Just try buying an acre or two of land from a farmer - they won't part with it for any amount of money. I think if you time it right your property with land could make you very rich.

Best of luck with it!

Davesnave

Deleted_User wrote: »

Just try buying an acre or two of land from a farmer - they won't part with it for any amount of money. I think if you time it right your property with land could make you very rich.

Best of luck with it!

Thanks, but this house is supposed to be ours for a long time and might well be the last one I own, so it isn't really being seen as an investment in that sense. The value would be important, however, if we had to downsize due to ill-health, and then it might be useful to have extra money to cover medical treatment or other forms of care.

You are right that it is hard to buy small parcels of land from farmers. I have already been approached by someone who wants about 0.25 acres of ours for an agricultural building, but I might part with that at the right price, as it would help this person with their business. Due to the nature of the site, they can't expand anywhere else.;)

A garden of 1/3rd acre can still be a very exciting project, capable of producing a great amount of produce. I ran a small nursery on less than that, though it was a work of art planning for the season's production and shifting things at just the right time to make room for later stock!

Harry_Powell

dopester wrote: »

Increase in desirability possibly... (what you doing with that barn with the separate electricity meter anyway?), but increase in value over 10 years, I very much doubt. Nothing personal.

This thread is so whacky. People calculating HPI into the future using the post-WW2 baby-boomer long-wave inflation price rises as the formula for what they believe will always be.



The delusion virus. It seems to be the most potent amongst the baby-boomer generation at around 45 years+, most detectable when their minds think over the value of their homes. It wrecks your head and makes you believe the craziest things... until new realities are forced to be recognised.

We've hit a thick lead inflationary ceiling in credit/finance/ extreme credit expansion, jobs.. and the narrowing field of well paid jobs that will remain available into the future, boomers hitting retirement age... ect.

Silvercar and her/his profit calculating. Gotta sell it yet Silvercar to release any of that profit.. and the window is closing for boomers to get out with old-world prices as you're sucked into the deflationary vortex.

Is there not a risk though Dopester, that you're putting all your eggs into one basket with the deflational spiral theory. If you protect yourself and it occurs then you could save a lot of money. However, if you're over cautious then you could lose out financially and have a much poorer retirement/lifestyle as a result?

Surely it's better to take a middle ground with any strategy? It's like STR - these guys felt strongly that the market would turn, but they forgot that they would have to be very accurate with their predictions, not once but twice. Once in selling the house close to peak (there are many instances where people STR'd as far back as 2001 only to see house prices fly out of their reach) and again in buying back into the market in the trough (already we have seen 10% average gains; it might be that prices fall back but it might also be that prices continue to rise beyond 2007 peaks).

I just don't think it's prudent to gamble your future livelyhood on a single idea and a single strategy.

StevieJ

nearlynew wrote: »

As I said in a psot a few days ago, owning your own home outright is a major step towards financial security. And the sooner you can do it the better.

The trouble with pensions is you have to rely on lying thieves to look after your money and you can never guarantee seeing any of it.

This interesting article is well worth a read...........

http://www.energybulletin.net/51170

Phew, I thought I was going to see that chart again :eek:

Instead, they experience mini-collapses followed by stasis or even some recovery. After reading his theory of catabolic collapse,

Snooze

Is this thread for real or some kind of wind-up?! :rotfl:

CLAPTON wrote: »

your 300k mortgage costs 579k and you have a house that after 30 years can sell at 3,000,000 so gain is about 2,400,000

:rotfl:

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I currently own 2 houses, one is mortgage free and worth somewhere around 400K, and the other somewhere around 200K. The 200K house has a mortgage, that thanks to overpayments for the last 3 years will be clear in around 15 years or so.

My (conservative) expectation is that in real terms, those assets will be worth roughly one million pounds in todays money by the time I will be starting to look at cashing in, 15 years or so from now. Or a 40% growth in 15 years. Which would suit me just fine.

I think there is a real possibility, perhaps even a probability, of growth far beyond that, as much as 100% in real terms in the next 20 years

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

dopester wrote: »

This thread is so whacky. People calculating HPI into the future using the post-WW2 baby-boomer long-wave inflation price rises as the formula for what they believe will always be.



The delusion virus. It seems to be the most potent amongst the baby-boomer generation at around 45 years+, most detectable when their minds think over the value of their homes. It wrecks your head and makes you believe the craziest things... until new realities are forced to be recognised.

We've hit a thick lead inflationary ceiling in credit/finance/ extreme credit expansion, jobs.. and the narrowing field of well paid jobs that will remain available into the future, boomers hitting retirement age... ect.

Indeed... It's fantasylandorama on this thread. When burger flippers in BK are on £100/hr then I could perhaps understand 1-bed back-to-back terraces in Salford costing £half a mil, but as it's currently £5.80 with no sign of going up for the foreseeable then these "conservative (:rotfl:) expectations" of 40% growth in house places are just delusional.

CLAPTON

Snooze wrote: »

Is this thread for real or some kind of wind-up?! :rotfl:



:rotfl:



:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:



Indeed... It's fantasylandorama on this thread. When burger flippers in BK are on £100/hr then I could perhaps understand 1-bed back-to-back terraces in Salford costing £half a mil, but as it's currently £5.80 with no sign of going up for the foreseeable then these "conservative (:rotfl:) expectations" of 40% growth in house places are just delusional.

30 years ago was 1980

houses selling for £600-700 k today then cost about £30k
i.e. a gain of about 20 times

You may well have considerd it would have been absurb in 1980.

I really have no idea what will happen in the next 30 years but if the same rate of inflation happens then yes a house costing 300,000 today could easily to 3million or more.

So no, not a windup just a statement of checkable historical fact

Cleaver

Snooze wrote: »

Indeed... It's fantasylandorama on this thread. When burger flippers in BK are on £100/hr then I could perhaps understand 1-bed back-to-back terraces in Salford costing £half a mil, but as it's currently £5.80 with no sign of going up...

Well you can get an alrightish two bed terrance in Salford for about £70k (like this one) so a couple who are both burger flippers at the local Maccy Dees earning £5.80 would just need 2.89 their joint income to buy that house. Which sounds kinda okay.

I don't think you meant your point to be taken literally though.