Scots continue buying at inflated prices

kriss_boy

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Why would you trawl the property pages religously after work given the fact that you bought in 2008?



P.S. Rightmove is not the best tool to check on available properties ofr sale or rent in Aberdeen.
www.aspc.co.uk is far better

Because we bought a cheap property that was about half the amount we were offered as a mortgage.

I could sell my place tomorrow but buy something bigger but Im not convinced property prices will rise over the next 2/3 years.

IveSeenTheLight

kriss_boy wrote: »

Because we bought a cheap property that was about half the amount we were offered as a mortgage.

I could sell my place tomorrow but buy something bigger but Im not convinced property prices will rise over the next 2/3 years.

It's quite possible that prices may not rise in the next 2/3 years.
We can certainly see were in stagnation at the moment.

Are you convinced that property prices will fall in the next 2/3 years given you yourself (and presumably many others) may find larger property affordable now?

kriss_boy

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Fife is such a large area.
May I suggest you look at the ROSEA where you can see a breakdown of the monthly averaged sold prices

Fife June 2007 = £138,026

Fife June 2008 = £142,689

Fife June 2009 = £137,136

Fife June 2010 = £147,021

Why not take the time and plot a graph as I did for my VI area.
It may provide some useful information for you.

The data doesnt factor in size of property nor condition.

A property is far more likely to have rised in value as a result of rennovation rather than fallen due to damage. Also, how many planning applications are for a reduction in a properties size? Compared with the 10s of thousands of extensions that are built every year.

Additionally, people are more likely to sell a property when it poses a profit rather than a loss. How many people are sitting in negative equity that threaten to skew 'average' house prices in years to come?

My conclusion is the data is way too flawed. Simple logic explain why on paper average prices of SOLD properties are higher than they were in 2007 but it does not suggest the intrinsic value of property has risen.

kriss_boy

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

It's quite possible that prices may not rise in the next 2/3 years.
We can certainly see were in stagnation at the moment.

Are you convinced that property prices will fall in the next 2/3 years given you yourself (and presumably many others) may find larger property affordable now?

I reckon house prices will remain as they are for 2/3 years. I frequently check sold prices, keeping details and property schedules for future references.

I expect to check sold prices in 3 years time and see very little rise in the types of properties my girlfriend and I are interested in.

IveSeenTheLight

kriss_boy wrote: »

The data doesnt factor in size of property nor condition.........

You do make a point, however I'm sure if you analysed the cumulative data for your area you would see that there is enough substantial facts (sold properties) to show that the data is not skewed enough by the point you make

IveSeenTheLight

kriss_boy wrote: »

I reckon house prices will remain as they are for 2/3 years. I frequently check sold prices, keeping details and property schedules for future references.

I expect to check sold prices in 3 years time and see very little rise in the types of properties my girlfriend and I are interested in.

Time will tell and it's quite plausable that they will do so as you think.

As I said, Why not take the time and plot a graph as I did for my VI area.
It may provide some useful information for you.

kriss_boy

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

You do make a point, however I'm sure if you analysed the cumulative data for your area you would see that there is enough substantial facts (sold properties) to show that the data is not skewed enough by the point you make

My main concern with the data though is that it does not factor in rennovations or modernisations.

And of course how many people have sold a property at a loss in recent years? They simply cannot afford too!!! Perhaps in a 4/5 years people will break even on those properties thus reducing 'average' prices.

Infact do we even know which 'average' the ROSEA? Mean, modal or median?

IveSeenTheLight

kriss_boy wrote: »

My main concern with the data though is that it does not factor in rennovations or modernisations.

And of course how many people have sold a property at a loss in recent years? They simply cannot afford too!!! Perhaps in a 4/5 years people will break even on those properties thus reducing 'average' prices.

Infact do we even know which 'average' the ROSEA? Mean, modal or median?

Your concern on the data is rennovations / modernisations etc, however presumably on average, this percentage of properties is maintained through the data, thereby negating the effect onthe average.

Sure the individual properties would be affected by rennovations / modernisations etc, but they contribute to the average.

E.g., if 10 out of the 100 properties were rennovated in month one make up the average, then a different 10 out of 100 in month 2, and another different 10 out of 100 in month three, over the quarter 30 out of 300 or 10% of properties are rennovated.

Over time, the averages show what the properties are worth on average.

Let's assume that suddenly there is an increase in rennovations, then likely the average price will increase.

Are you really trying to consider that there has been a huge increase in rennovations during the recession which masked other property drops?.

P.S. It's easy to see the ROSEA methodology. The information is there. It's up to you if you want to use or not.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

kriss_boy wrote: »

My main concern with the data though is that it does not factor in rennovations or modernisations.
?

And it didn't when prices were falling either. Or when they were rising for the last couple of decades. Or falling in the crash before that. Or rising before that.

What's your point?

kriss_boy

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And it didn't when prices were falling either. Or when they were rising for the last couple of decades. Or falling in the crash before that. Or rising before that.

What's your point?

My point is its highly unlikely that the volume/proportion of properties being modernised each year remains constant.

Is it not at all probable that the flipped properties you found to be showing a profit in recent years only achieved those medicore profits due to being moderised?

Inspite of these probable rennovations the overall value only marginally rose indicating the intrinsic value of property has indeed dropped.