BBC: Scottish Property Prices Reach All Time High

geneer

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I simply prefer to link facts instead of subdiffusion so it's clear to anyone reading the forum to make their own minds up.

You'll have seen I back up posts with facts and links for others to delve into the details should they wish.

Now, do you wish to make a point on any of the links / facts I posted or do you wish to make your own point / fact / link?

Look who it is. Again. Worst flounce ever.
(as its your fourth or fifth on this very thread thats saying something).
Also very amusing.

Sorry Lite. But you don't appear to have answered the question.

Who could have saw that coming. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

IveSeenTheLight

geneer wrote: »

Look who it is. Again. Worst flounce ever.
(as its your fourth or fifth on this very thread thats saying something).
Also very amusing.

Sorry Lite. But you don't appear to have answered the question.

Who could have saw that coming. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I did

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I simply prefer to link facts instead of subdiffusion so it's clear to anyone reading the forum to make their own minds up.

You'll have seen I back up posts with facts and links for others to delve into the details should they wish.

Now, do you wish to make a point on any of the links / facts I posted or do you wish to make your own point / fact / link?

Despite trying to get you to openly discuss the facts (I'm guessing you not happy with the latest releases) I'll just wait until you are or the next set of stats are available.

Maybe they'll be more to your liking.

geneer

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I did



Despite trying to get you to openly discuss the facts (I'm guessing you not happy with the latest releases) I'll just wait until you are or the next set of stats are available.

Maybe they'll be more to your liking.

Still looks like you're unable to answer that very simple and very salient question honey.

But thats ok. The answer is self evident.

MiserlyMartin

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

See, I told you Scotland wasn't overvalued.

Its still too much. Prices in Scotland are nuts, can't see why either as there is little work. I suppose the free NHS parking and subscriptions paid for by London is worth a few bob though. Who are the mugs here?

geneer

Oh look. ESPC has adopted a 3month sliding average for 2011.
That should help sort out the "noisy" data lite keeps spacking on about.

IveSeenTheLight

geneer wrote: »

Oh look. ESPC has adopted a 3month sliding average for 2011.
That should help sort out the "noisy" data lite keeps spacking on about.

Why not provide a link so we can attempt to see and discuss what your referring to?

In the meantime, I see there is a new release
http://www.espc.com/house-price-news/edinburgh-house-price-reports/january-2011.html#Edinburgh

http://www.espc.com/EspcPageMedia/MarketWatch/2011/201101_TABLE.pdf

I can't seem to find details such as the number of properties ESPC represents.

geneer

http://www.espc.com/house-price-news/edinburgh-house-price-reports/january-2011.html#Edinburgh

In the three months to January the average house price in Edinburgh stood at £214,222 following an annual increase of 1.1%.

The rise in the overall average was fuelled by a change in the mix of properties selling, with larger homes accounting for a greater proportion of sales than normal.:)

Comparison of ‘like-for-like’ prices for homes of similar size reveals that in most cases values are around 5% lower than 12 months ago:).

The number of homes for sale remains above historic norms allowing buyers more success in negotiations :)with sellers. Around three out of four Fixed Price sales over the last three months were completed for less than the asking price:).

The likelihood remains that prices will ease back by 3-5% in most areas:) during the first half of 2011 before levelling off later in the year.

http://www.espc.com/EspcPageMedia/MarketWatch/2011/201101_TABLE.pdf

How about some Spamish style statw@nk.
"+1.1% All is well.....so long as you include the half million town houses". :rotfl:

IveSeenTheLight

geneer wrote: »

http://www.espc.com/house-price-news/edinburgh-house-price-reports/january-2011.html#Edinburgh





http://www.espc.com/EspcPageMedia/MarketWatch/2011/201101_TABLE.pdf

How about some Spamish style statw@nk.
"+1.1% All is well.....so long as you include the half million town houses". :rotfl:

Hmmmm.
Those are the links I posted.
Still can't see the details of these stats such as the number of properties sold.

Incidently, if it were the townhouses that was "skewing" the data, wouldn't the cty centre all properties show a positive YOY %?

Indeed as the article states it's larger homes that are affecting the average.

From the table, only the 4 bed detached in the sburbs showed a YOY increase, with some major changes in the other categories.
Makes you wonder is the low transaction levels are affecting the data.

geneer

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Hmmmm.
Those are the links I posted.

Yes indeed. Ironic, no?
Hard to find them of course.
On has to google ESPC and click on market watch to find them. :T

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Hmmmm.
Still can't see the details of these stats such as the number of properties sold.

Incidently, if it were the townhouses that was "skewing" the data, wouldn't the cty centre all properties show a positive YOY %?

Indeed as the article states it's larger homes that are affecting the average.

From the table, only the 4 bed detached in the sburbs showed a YOY increase, with some major changes in the other categories.
Makes you wonder is the low transaction levels are affecting the data.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:Thanks for confirming that the data is indeed skewed by a single, very expensive house type, whilst all other areas are showing a significant fall.

That does seem to totally corroborate what I said last autumn and regularly since.

Now, what was your point again. :A

IveSeenTheLight

geneer wrote: »

Now, what was your point again. :A

how about the points I was making here: -

geneer wrote: »

I can't seem to find details such as the number of properties ESPC represents.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Still can't see the details of these stats such as the number of properties sold.

geneer wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:Thanks for confirming that the data is indeed skewed by a single, very expensive house type, whilst all other areas are showing a significant fall.

That does seem to totally corroborate what I said last autumn and regularly since.

Another point would be that you've been saying it's townhouses that's skewing the data.
That's not what the ESPC link is showing as city centre properties are down whilst it's suburb 4 bed detached that are propping up the market.

With so many areas down and only one marginally up, it really does indicates the likelyhood of extreme minor transaction levels that the ESPC are calculating this over, hence my query on the number of transactions

Note you've changes from town houses to "a single, very expensive (average is lower than the 1/2 million townhouses you inferred were skewing the data) house type"