Dec 2009 - May 2010...mainly the same houses on the market.

nollag2006

Emy1501 wrote: »

Nationwide figures since Jan 2010-2010

Jan-10 1.3 2.1 8.6 163,481
Feb-10 -1.0 1.7 9.2 161,320
Mar-10 1.0 1.5 9.0 164,519

Apr-10 1.0 1.1 10.5 167,802

Halifax figures below from JAN 2010 to April 2010

548.5


169,484


0.4


3.6


4.95


539.5


166,703


-1.6


4.5


4.65


545.1


168,433


1.0


5.2


4.64e


544.4


168,202


-0.1


6.6


4.72e

Lan Registry figures

Jan up 2.2%

Feb Down 0.3%

March Down 0.6%


Average of three since the beginning of the year is about 1% which is pretty much static. Its not very hard to understand?

Yes

You are averaging averages, across data sources and time frames which makes a complete nonsense of your argument.

Emy1501

nollag2006 wrote: »

Yes

You are averaging averages, across data sources and time frames which makes a complete nonsense of your argument.

ER no its not the average of the 3 main index since the beginning of the year is 1% which is pretty static. You get a more realistic figure averaging the 3

nollag2006

I give up - you really don't understand this.

michaels

So it is impossible for house prices to be up yoy but flat for the last 4 months?! Who says school maths isn't dumbing down...

nollag2006 wrote: »

You are obviously struggling to keep up here Emy, so let's take this one step at a time for you



Here is another pretty picture to help you see that HPI is running at an annualised rate in the region of 5 - 10%:



If you have anything more substantial or comprehensive than this, please do come back and tell us.

I know that you don't.





Acadametric are the property consultancy that run the Financial Times' House Price Index report. I hope you have heard of the Financial Times. It is a pink newspaper with not so many pictures.

Emy1501

nollag2006 wrote: »

I give up - you really don't understand this.

Of course you have given up because I have provided you with figures which show that prices are prety much static since the start of the year according to the data from the 3 index's people mainly use. Whether I look at them on an individual basis or take an average of the three they all tell a story of prices being flat.

Now I will be the first to admit that I think they are skewed and much rather pay attention to what is happening in my own local market but as people like you believe the figures are the be all and end all housing market I have stated them for you.

Now if go on what I see in my local area then things have really slowed since April and between 5-10% of my search area had price drops over the last 14 days but the reality is that any nice property at a reasonable price will sell within week sespecially a nice family home. Flats on the other hand are struggling.

Cleaver

nollag2006 wrote: »

Funny how most bears seem to live in unidentified areas that buck the national trend in house price recovery.

I wouldn't take it personally

From memory Tom isn't a 'bear' (well, what you have in your head as a 'bear' is an odd concept anyway, but Tom doesn't fit that picture). I think he's just a guy who owns a place and is thinking of buying another place. A normal person making an observation in other words. Stop assuming that everyone is a bit thick and works on your level of 'bears', 'bulls' and playground games.

His experience is the same as ours when we were buying a place last year. I've said before on here that about 25% of the market was good houses, coming on to the market at a reasonable price and would then sell very quickly. But I would agree with Tom that the vast proportion of houses are not selling. There are loads of houses that were on the market for months when we were looking in Autumn 09 and were still on the market now.

Random sample time. I put the first half of my postcode in to Rightmove. These are the dates that the property at the top of the first twenty pages first went on sale:

October 2008
February 2010
November 2009
April 2010
January 2008
February 2010
August 2009
April 2009
February 2008
April 2010
January 2008
April 2010
August 2008
February 2010
March 2010
June 2009
November 2009
April 2010
March 2008
October 2009

So out of 20 random houses in my area, 8 of them have been on the market a year or longer. 12 of them six months and over. 6 of them have been on the market since 2008. It's not a scientific search, but these properties aren't exactly flying off the shelf are they?

By the way nollag, there's quite a lot of words in this post. If you find this confusing, and are struggling to discuss the issue, can I suggest the following:

"Another bear who's missed the boat and doesn't understand economics. :T"

Davesnave

nollag2006 wrote: »

Funny how most bears seem to live in unidentified areas that buck the national trend in house price recovery.

Tom's area isn't unidentified; it's clearly visible.
So is mine.
Your location seems to be missing, though.

michaels

Nice idea but of course many other properties during the last few months may have come on to the market, sold and come off rightmove all in a couple of months so it is not entirely surprising that the ones you see have a bias towards the over priced / other problem 'stickers'?

Cleaver wrote: »

Random sample time. I put the first half of my postcode in to Rightmove. These are the dates that the property at the top of the first twenty pages first went on sale:

October 2008
February 2010
November 2009
April 2010
January 2008
February 2010
August 2009
April 2009
February 2008
April 2010
January 2008
April 2010
August 2008
February 2010
March 2010
June 2009
November 2009
April 2010
March 2008
October 2009

So out of 20 random houses in my area, 8 of them have been on the market a year or longer. 12 of them six months and over. 6 of them have been on the market since 2008. It's not a scientific search, but these properties aren't exactly flying off the shelf are they?

By the way nollag, there's quite a lot of words in this post. If you find this confusing, and are struggling to discuss the issue, can I suggest the following:

"Another bear who's missed the boat and doesn't understand economics. :T"

Cleaver

michaels wrote: »

Nice idea but of course many other properties during the last few months may have come on to the market, sold and come off rightmove all in a couple of months so it is not entirely surprising that the ones you see have a bias towards the over priced / other problem 'stickers'?

I didn't have a bias towards anything, I just picked a random 20 (i.e. the first house at the top of the first twenty pages on Rightmove).

I understand your point that some houses will go on, and then sell, very quickly and won't be included. But I think it's still an interesting thing to note that I picked 20 random houses in my area that are for sale and 8 of them have been on a year or longer. I'm not saying it proves anything, I just think it backs up Tom's point.