Guardian takes on VI's.

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

I agree, but why do so many on here go back to the peak as the norm for house transactions? (which is also frustrating).
People on here argue so often there is no demand because transactions are so low, I have post on here before the range of transactions which is around stagnation (75,000 - 85,000 if i remember correctly).
It is interesting we are at that amount (86,000 CML report) yet people are still banging on about a massive crash because volumes are so low.

Probably because the peak is pretty much used for everything.

Bulls are forever comparing house prices with peak. About a 3rd of Hamish's posts probably do this!!

People are not banging on about a massive crash because volumes are so low anywhere. If they are, show me. But I'm pretty certain it's an argument I've not seen.

People are talking about falls in house prices due to upcoming interest rates, removal of stimulus, job losses, lack of wage inflation etc.

The pretence you are putting out, that people are arguing a "massive crash" because of low demand, is something I have not seen.

Graham_Devon

Linton wrote: »

We do talk about demand - endlessly. Trouble is you dont listen. Try again....

You mean I don't hold your opinion?

I don't agree with your observations as some kind of stereotype. But I'm not going to sit here telling you I have told you and you won't listen.

Linton

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You mean I don't hold your opinion?

I don't agree with your observations as some kind of stereotype. But I'm not going to sit here telling you I have told you and you won't listen.

Sorry, my comment was unnecessarily rude.

The observations arent trying to stereotype, just observations on overall tendencies. Individuals may differ.

Which ones do you disagree with?

Graham_Devon

Linton wrote: »

Sorry, my comment was unnecessarily rude.

The observations arent trying to stereotype, just observations on overall tendencies. Individuals may differ.

Which ones do you disagree with?

Your first, second and third observations.

Maybe not the third one quite so much. It does ring true, especially the last few years.

But the first I can't agree with, and neither can I about the second.

First, because, in line with what I said about the last few years, I don't believe this has been the case. They want to, maybe, but people have been priced out so badly, they have often had the kids, settled down, before buying the house.

Second, because as we have seen over the last few years, they hardly sacrificed anything. Indeed, once in, it was makeover time.

Linton

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Your first, second and third observations.

Maybe not the third one quite so much. It does ring true, especially the last few years.

But the first I can't agree with, and neither can I about the second.

First, because, in line with what I said about the last few years, I don't believe this has been the case. They want to, maybe, but people have been priced out so badly, they have often had the kids, settled down, before buying the house.

Second, because as we have seen over the last few years, they hardly sacrificed anything. Indeed, once in, it was makeover time.

What I mean by raw demand is what people really want. What they want may then be countered by practicalities. But yes, people actually trying to buy a house may be delayed, though they arent happy about it.

On point 2 I disagree. I guess 2 is related to 3. 2 is about people with relatively low income and is saying they are prepared to use a large part of that income to buy a house even if it means sacrificing other things.

3 is saying that if you have more than the minimum you tend to use the extra to buy a better house.

And yes some people have done very nicely out of HPI. But in the early days it was normally a sacrifice. Mortgages have always been a high fraction of available income.

Graham_Devon

Linton wrote: »

What I mean by raw demand is what people really want. What they want may then be countered by practicalities. But yes, people actually trying to buy a house may be delayed, though they arent happy about it.

On point 2 I disagree. I guess 2 is related to 3. 2 is about people with relatively low income and is saying they are prepared to use a large part of that income to buy a house even if it means sacrificing other things.

3 is saying that if you have more than the minimum you tend to use the extra to buy a better house.

And yes some people have done very nicely out of HPI. But in the early days it was normally a sacrifice. Mortgages have always been a high fraction of available income.

As high as often the entire income of one worker in a couple both working?

Is this ok? A trend we should continue and embrace?

Graham_Devon

*!!!!!!* gone.

Time for chucky to call me Gayum.

DervProf

Graham_Devon wrote: »

*!!!!!!* gone.

Time for chucky to call me Gayum.

chucky hasn`t called you that has he/she ?

That`s a point, what is chucky ?

Graham_Devon

DervProf wrote: »

chucky hasn`t called you that has he/she ?

That`s a point, what is chucky ?

Something along those lines. Think his version had a little more finesse than mine.

He's quite creative is our chucks