Scots continue buying at inflated prices

IveSeenTheLight

kriss_boy wrote: »

Im simply suggesting that unlikely in 2005-2007 sellers realise that a property has to be in tip top condition to have any chance of selling. Times have changed and I think generally people probably spend more money on their homes these days. People are design savy and thanks to the likes of 'location, location, location' etc I think people are more clued up on how to decorate and improve a property.

Bit of a generalisation I think and not necessarily the reflection of the actual market.

I know two people who have recently bought a property and needed to modernise it afterwards.
I even posted a link for one of them for those to review.
Interesting that the property that needed modernising had 10 bidders and went for £30k above the Home Valuation Report

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=30895185&postcount=18

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=34494281&postcount=21

IveSeenTheLight

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

Hamish.

I only have to take a look back at your posts & find my ID in them & 50% will have you calling it wrong in them.

Its not hard.

If it's not hard, for the benefit of proving your point.
Why not point out these errors?

1984ReturnsForReal_2

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

If it's not hard, for the benefit of proving your point.
Why not point out these errors?

If you are that interested go & dig them out yourself.

I waste as little time as possible on Scottish people that encourage people to buy at a time when they will be flushing their money where the sun doesn't shine.....

IveSeenTheLight

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

If you are that interested go & dig them out yourself.

I waste as little time as possible on Scottish people that encourage people to buy at a time when they will be flushing their money where the sun doesn't shine.....

Yet here you are on a Scot's thread making statements that you have not been able to back up :rolleyes:

kriss_boy

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

No.

I just think you're a deeply insecure person, who is completely in denial as to the strength of the Scottish market, and who finds it impossible to accept prices have recovered fully in some areas of Scotland.

Thus the endless lashing out with hostility when we prove they have.

Thats a bit of an absurd anaylsis of my character given that I have merely offered a few suggestions as to why recent 'average house prices' are inaccurate.

I really dont see how any of my posts could be construed as being hostile even in response to your patronising retorts.

I stand by my original point and I have nothing further to add. 'Average House prices' dont give an accurate account of the intrinsic value of property when the sample data is limited and when it is suspected that 10s of thousands of people are in negative equity.

The true value of property during these times will only become clear over the next 3 or 4 years.

kriss_boy

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Bit of a generalisation I think and not necessarily the reflection of the actual market.

I know two people who have recently bought a property and needed to modernise it afterwards.
I even posted a link for one of them for those to review.
Interesting that the property that needed modernising had 10 bidders and went for £30k above the Home Valuation Report

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=30895185&postcount=18

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=34494281&postcount=21

I think at the moment generalisations are the best we have.

I think we all agree people paid over the odds in 2007 and until those properties are sold on again and accounted for they will have no detrimental impact on average house prices data.

googler

kriss_boy wrote: »

I stand by my original point and I have nothing further to add. 'Average House prices' dont give an accurate account of the intrinsic value of property when the sample data is limited and when it is suspected that 10s of thousands of people are in negative equity.

...when the sample data is limited, and also when the distribution of sales around the quoted 'average' is unclear and unstated, etc etc....

IveSeenTheLight

googler wrote: »

...when the sample data is limited, and also when the distribution of sales around the quoted 'average' is unclear and unstated, etc etc....

this is why you look at a broader picture.
The sample size for Scotland can be taken over the last three years and show a stagnated effect.
3 years data is not limited

IveSeenTheLight

Just wondering if Graham will answer the question posed.
It was part of an answer to a question posed by Graham, so it would have been nice to get a responce.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Why do those outwith Aberdeen have such a fixation on the area.

Why do people from outside Aberdeen make such posts as this when the topic of Aberdeen had not been discussed in the thread previously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham_Devon
The man is wrong. He does not say that Aberdeen will of course survive any world disaster

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham_Devon
You can change the figures?

LOL, Hamish will be making his way around Aberdeen

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham_Devon

Now, take th ebenefits system away, take human rights away....i.e, our living standard advances....and we will be back where you describe faster than you can say "aberdeen is different though".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham_Devon
And if everything else fails, Hamish pops up with tales of the stupendiously super Aberdeen and everything = supply and demand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham_Devon
Or is this something else that only happens in Aberdeen and you simply cannot question it
.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham_Devon
The 1st one may create jobs "somewhere" in europe. Not the UK, which we were discussing.

The second ones the jobs "could be" created at "some time".

The third one is to power homes in Aberdeen. So obviously these jobs will not be created, as Aberdeen has it's own microclimate, microeconomy, microhumans, and micro everything else. So it's going to have it's own far better power too.



There are probably loads more as above where you are the first to bring Aberdeen into the discussion, however I think you get my point from the few shown above

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I haven't run.

Since your not running, would you mind answering the question I asked based on the facts I presented above?

Why do people from outside Aberdeen make such posts as this when the topic of Aberdeen had not been discussed in the thread previously?