MSE News: Nationwide: first house price fall in 10 months

stueyhants

Jonbvn wrote: »

If you bothered to read the report, you will see that they mention that retail sales also fell due to the poor weather.

Judging from the fall in retail sales during January, however, the housing market does not appear to be the only sector of the economy to have experienced a setback related to adverse weather and the expiry of economic stimulus measures.

One month's data is unlikely to indicate a new trend. As such the only person who is grasping at straws is you stuey lad.

The number of sales is pretty irelevant if the distribution of sales hasn't changed. Whether there are 50k of sales or 40k of sales doesn't matter as long as the distribution of sales within those two scenarios are the same. It's an average, averages by their nature cope with different sample sizes - thats the point of them.

If they said that it was snowy down South (more expensive homes) and less snowy up North (cheaper housing) as a reason then I could see the logic in this (i.e. the distribution of the type of house changed), but this isn't the case.

Batchy

no one dares to comment that month on month is down, year on year is actually UP...

but this a reflection on the stupidly low VALUE in Feb 09... but not a lot else in terms of annual increases.

more to be read into the month on month, which IMO shows how sentiment REALLY has changed.

The interest expressed in property is dropping dramatically so much for increased DEMAND... its all a load of Balloni!

Really2

stueyhants wrote: »

The number of sales is pretty irelevant if the distribution of sales hasn't changed. Whether there are 50k of sales or 40k of sales doesn't matter as long as the distribution of sales within those two scenarios are the same. It's an average, averages by their nature cope with different sample sizes - thats the point of them.

If they said that it was snowy down South (more expensive homes) and less snowy up North (cheaper housing) as a reason then I could see the logic in this (i.e. the distribution of the type of house changed), but this isn't the case.

Have they changed now then.;)

stueyhants wrote: »

My assertion is that the mix adjustment factors are not having the same ‘balancing’ effect as before and consequently part of the recent rises in indices can be attributed to better houses selling pulling up the so called average price.

stueyhants

Really2 wrote: »

Have they changed now then.;)

Good quote, this then removes the other 'excuse' for falling prices (stamp duty change). If the mix adjustment factor really works why didn't it cope with the change to the stamp duty.

I'm arguing these figures go to prove that the mix adjustments are a weak tool to blend the averages.

Either prices are really falling due to fundemental issues such as demand and supply or prices are not falling and the mix adjustment is pants

Which is it ?

Really2

stueyhants wrote: »

Either prices are really falling due to fundemental issues such as demand and supply

Which is it ?

The above one, Demand has been weak the start of this year there is no argument form either side on that.

The only way we will find out if that is because of things like stamp duty and the colder than average seasonal weather will only be realized over the next few months, when these in reality are out of the system.

Seasonal adjustment could be slightly out perhaps (due to it being over seasonal)

But just a thought I wonder how many who missed the stamp duty window did a deal with sellers on the price?

If I misses it and it was not my fault I would ask the seller to knock it off the sale price or no sale.
Just a thought, possibly did not happen much, but it is possible due to the buyers not wanting to increase pre christmas budgets.

EG
Average house costs £1600 less but in reality it cost £1600 more for stamp duty. Net result in reality a January/Feb buyer has paid the same as if they had purchased pre Christmas.

stueyhants

Surely stamp duty change would be factored out with the mix adjustment ?

I suppose it's possible the factor blended some of the impact but not all .... nothing is ever perfect.

Really2

stueyhants wrote: »

Surely stamp duty change would be factored out with the mix adjustment ?

I suppose it's possible the factor blended some of the impact but not all .... nothing is ever perfect.

I am saying people possibly paid less because of the drop in stamp duty, I don't think that would be included in a seasonal adjustment.

It would not account for the full 1% but it is possibly something to think about.

lostinrates

Haven't read anything..thread or aticle, heard on news and smiled. More noise.

I don't care ATM about the bigger picture, ATM my investigation, my thoughts, they are about usand what I'm looking at has been doing just fine for me, some flurry of movement, some confusing asking prices, but lots of downwards trend.

Batchy

1% stamp duty then the extra .2% for the Increase in VAT on the fee's probably if you was looking at it scientifically.

lol... but seriously, the most interesting part is the fall off in demand.

significant to levels seen when we had double digit falls... in 2008

Really2

Batchy wrote: »

1% stamp duty then the extra .2% for the Increase in VAT on the fee's probably if you was looking at it scientifically.

It's not a given though, you only pay VAT if they are registered (but I dare say most established ones are) Stamp duty is a given at that value.

As I said before on the volumes and the fall we will only know if this is not down to the end of SD and the over seasonal weather in the next 3 months in reality, when it has worked out of the system.

If this does carry on over then next few months it could set a trend or the year.

But not much can be read in to one month, a month that could have been effected by a couple of events.