ROS: Scotland Reaches ANOTHER new peak price.

kriss_boy

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Funily enough, I have actually checked some individual house prices in Aberdeen, as there are now a good number of houses that sold in 2006/2007 which have sold again for higher prices in 2010.

So the average, AND the price of individual houses, are both higher now than in 2007.

Excellent news.:beer:

Care to give examples? How do you know the properties that have apparently accrued 20K in value havent had 30K rennovations or extensions spent on them...

I live in Scotland and I have little incentive to will my property into dropping in value- possibly stunting our chances of upsizing next year.

However I fail to see any increase in property prices in Fife when like for like flats have dropped in value from 85K to 70K and 3 bed semis in decent areas have fallen from 140K down to 120K.

Everyday I see bargain properties relisted at lower asking prices but still there are no takers...

googler

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Oh wait, I had a look on street view.

...and you live .... where?

googler

kriss_boy wrote: »

Care to give examples? How do you know the properties that have apparently accrued 20K in value havent had 30K rennovations or extensions spent on them...

Hamish gave 4 or 5 examples in another thread a month or so ago, but good point about renovations.....

I'm East of Central Belt, and asking prices in the main seem to be way below peak. Reports from the Edinburgh SPC now, finally, admit that the average is skewed by the sales at the higher price bands and lack of sales at the low end.

IveSeenTheLight

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Well it certainly was different this time.

Back to a new peak in just 3 years.

Remarkable resiliance.

Not as resilient as last time (90's) where Aberdeen recovered within 1 year

IveSeenTheLight

Dirk_Rambo wrote: »

its a strange discusion as no one really wants to live in fried marsbar land

LOL, I'd rather live in Aberdeen than West Bromwich, I hear it is a sh!thole according to some others in here.
I wouldn't know though as have never been there, so may be discrediting it on the basis of others comments.

IveSeenTheLight

kriss_boy wrote: »

Care to give examples? How do you know the properties that have apparently accrued 20K in value havent had 30K rennovations or extensions spent on them...

I live in Scotland and I have little incentive to will my property into dropping in value- possibly stunting our chances of upsizing next year.

However I fail to see any increase in property prices in Fife when like for like flats have dropped in value from 85K to 70K and 3 bed semis in decent areas have fallen from 140K down to 120K.

Everyday I see bargain properties relisted at lower asking prices but still there are no takers...

Did we not do the Fife / Kirkcaldy debate before.
Full of facts from the ROSEA etc yet you preferred to refer to your mass of clippings from local papers etc.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=36210669&postcount=35

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.

googler

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I must remember to ask some how they ended up here next time I'm out. :think:

You actually have time to leave your computer and go out for any length of time between each of your postings here?

kriss_boy

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Did we not do the Fife / Kirkcaldy debate before.
Full of facts from the ROSEA etc yet you preferred to refer to your mass of clippings from local papers etc.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=36210669&postcount=35

We've spoken about it many times and I offered Hamish numerous reasons as to why the intrinsic value of property is not equal to the average price of recently sold properties.

Obviously sold prices are a good indicator, the best we have, but when sample numbers are low and we have more complex factors involved I dont think quoting sold figures is relevant.

If sold prices remain constant over the next 4 or 5 years then to me that would indicate their intrinsic value was lower in 2008/2010.

Few people will sell at a loss- they cant afford too. There are less first time buyers at the moment so that would suggest the demograph of properties isnt as concentrated around the lower end of the market also.

Coupled with the fact that rennovations and extensions normally only add value which is something many people will have to do in a stagnant market! Theres so many properties to choose from people can be fickle.

IveSeenTheLight

kriss_boy wrote: »

There are less first time buyers at the moment so that would suggest the demograph of properties isnt as concentrated around the lower end of the market also.

I'm sure this can be discounted as the CML shows similar percentages of FTBers are still buying.
So yes, there are less, but you agree there are less transactions and thus the similar percentage is maintained.

114 out of 300 = 38%
57 out of 150 = 38%
38 out of 100 = 38%

So you can see the lower number (FTB example) has reduced, but so did the higher value (transactions)

The outcome is still a similar percentage of transactions

kriss_boy wrote: »

Coupled with the fact that rennovations and extensions normally only add value which is something many people will have to do in a stagnant market! Theres so many properties to choose from people can be fickle.

I think in the last couple of years the number of extensions would also had been reducing.
People were cautious of the market and job security.

My personal thought is that people extend when they are confident, have money / credit available and don't want to move from their home location.

Could it not be that there are less extentions now that before the cruch happened?

If you are going to use this in your debate it would be good if you could provide some facts for us to discuss better.

kriss_boy

Youre asking me to provide facts yet the volume of properties sold in Scotland in June 2010 only represented approx 0.28% of the housing stock. How can such a miniscule volume represent the value of the remaining 99.7% of properties.

I stand by my original point that logically people are more likely to sell their properties for a profit than a loss... and so those currently in negatively equity as a result of the crash remain excluded from many of the indicators of property values.

I put in offer after offer in 2007/2008 on beat up 1 bed, ground floor flats at around 75K with no luck. Fast forward 2 years and my mate had the luxury of having first dibs on half a dozen 2 bed, rennovated flats in the same street. He got his for 73K.

To me its blatantly obvious house prices are notably lower today than they were in 2007. At least in Fife they are!