House prices expected to fall - Official

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

To be completely honest, hardly anyone outside of those invested for monetry gain gives a stuff about nominal prices. It does not matter a jot to anyone who just wants a home to live in.

pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese........ don't tell me you still haven't understood it.

of course they look at nominal value - that's what they're paying.

you don't see 'real' values until after the event and when it's adjusted for inflation

In economics, nominal values are the face value of currency over long periods of time (years), whereas real values have been corrected for inflation.

bear1969

Harry_Powell wrote: »

Evil happens when good men look away. I will need proof before I retract. A doctor's statement perhaps?

Perhaps you are more here just to cause trouble than debate house prices ,You should not be accusing people of abusing their kids ,family or whatever you should be keeping such thoughts to yourself ,As such you should be banned from posting on a site that is for debating and not making derogatory comments about other members

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

you would have thought so but there's quite a few of these characters on here...

at least they're entertaining

If we can just skip the arguments for a second.

It's all about interpretation isn't it. Everyone can look at a graph, but out of 3 people, 1 person can see the graph differently as they hold a different viewpoint.

That 1 person then insists their viewpoint is correct, because the graph doesn't show something. The other 2 people state "yes, can see what you are saying, but thats not included in the calculation and never has been". The 1 person still insists that the graph is wrong, even though the graph has always been calculated on the same data.

This happens everywhere in every walk of life.

What we get on here, is the same data used by the media in most cases, but from either side, people on here arguing that actually if you look at the data this way, it shows something different.

That then turns into a silly argument, name calling etc etc.

The data is static, if we remained static in our analysis of the data, we wouldn't have to keep going round slagging off everyone as "not understanding" or similar. It's very hard to understand when you are simply told you are wrong one month to the next as the goalposts have now been changed. Suddenly what was right last month is now wrong this month. We haven't talked about nominal prices since the last leg down. Now, suddenly, today, nominal prices are the be all and end all and anyone who doesnt take this on board does not understand and deserves to be slagged off.

This isn't a go at really2, but a good indication of what I'm talking about. Mini argument about how long prices have been falling. Really2 suggested that as prices will still positive each month, they were not falling and cannot fall if they are positive. I suggest that the numbers reported are falling. Suddenly, it's stalemate and it's into a mini argument. My interpretation is that +0.8, +0.3 -0.1 is falling over 3 months. Another posters interpretation is only one month is falling as only one is negative. His interpretation is right to him. Mine is right to me. I can see what he is saying...prices were not falling. I'm sure he can see what I was saying, the numbers are falling. But it seems this has to be made into some way of slagging off the other person.

I'm sure the forum would be a much nicer, and easier place if we could just keep static in the use of data instead of bringing in other entities each month depending on what the data says.

If we can't do this, lets at least expect that it's not a failure to understand and therefore an excuse to ridicule someone. It's that we see things differently. It really doesn't matter how we see it, as the official figures, the ones we always use but jazz up to make our points will show a fall or a rise. Nominal etc will not be shown.

And now, I have some work to do....but that was my attempt at at least trying to make a little peace around here, instead of eveything changing every second and having to call each other ridiculous names.

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

If we can just skip the arguments for a second.

It's all about interpretation isn't it. Everyone can look at a graph, but out of 3 people, 1 person can see the graph differently as they hold a different viewpoint.

No, there is only one way to view a graph. But some people may not understand what the data means.
If they are they don't understand in general they are wrong.
It is not like a piece of art and how you interpret it, it is a graphical representation of statistical information.

The very fact you come up with such a theory shows how very wrong you are and why you fail to understand what we are explaining.

How you argue what the data means is up to you. But failing to understand it is usually a problem because it frustrates people who can see what is being argued is not correct to what it actually means

Emy1501

Really2 wrote: »

But then would they not wander why prices were not dropping and could be above that point nominally in less than 5 years nominally?

They can be thick on both sides, all they will do then is presume the prediciton is wrong.

All people will see is the headline figure. Just like the headlines were there were going to be huge cuts and it had an effect on buyers these sort of headlines will continue to have an effect.

Public confidence in the market is whats important at the moment and these sort of headlines will do the market no favours in the short term and can have a knock on effect in the medium term.

Most are not going to even remember what was predicted 3 months ago let alone 5 years before.

Really2

Emy1501 wrote: »

All people will see is the headline figure. Just like the headlines were there were going to be huge cuts and it had an effect on buyers these sort of headlines will continue to have an effect.

Public confidence in the market is whats important at the moment and these sort of headlines will do the market no favours in the short term and can have a knock on effect in the medium term.

Most are not going to even remember what was predicted 3 months ago let alone 5 years before.

So the next positive news will correct it all then. Or we will find out another celeb has contracted a cold and it will all be forgotten. (If they are not really bothered they will not retain it up or down)

We are all saved

But perhaps someone could explain to me why negative forecasts mean the forecasters are right again?

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

So the next positive news will correct it all then. Or we will find out another celeb has contracted a cold and it will all be forgotten. (If they are not really bothered they will not retain it up or down)

We are all saved

But perhaps someone could explain to me why negative forecasts mean the forecasters are right again?

It won't be forgotten about because the charts will show a decline. Over a few months of declines, it will put people off buying. Regardless of what news comes out.

No one is saying the forecast is correct. No one could. It's just a forecast. As I said earlier, you are trying now to make out other people are interpreting a forecast as a given...which will just lead to arguments.

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It's all about interpretation isn't it. Everyone can look at a graph, but out of 3 people, 1 person can see the graph differently as they hold a different viewpoint.

no sorry - not in your case... and you do it time and time again...

especially when someone doesn't stop for second try to understand that a YoY graph can gone up when the monthly report has fallen - this has happened plenty of times.

the nominal vs real argument on this very thread is just typical.

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It won't be forgotten about because the charts will show a decline. Over a few months of declines, it will put people off buying. Regardless of what news comes out.

Where is this going I am told people don't retain the data but you are arguing it turns in to falls now? Perhaps you need to ask emy what they are debating as I read it has sentiment.
If sentiment can go down on news why can it not go up again tomorrow GD?

So they wont have forgotten the near 18 months of rises then? or when the graph suddenly ticks up? Or is it that it is different when it is negative?

It's amazing how these forecasts have manifested in to falls now.:eek: (when sentiment turns instantly in to falls)

System

Really2 wrote: »

No, there is only one way to view a graph. But some people may not understand what the data means.
If they are they don't understand in general they are wrong.
It is not like a piece of art and how you interpret it, it is a graphical representation of statistical information.

Fantastic post.