What to do with Kirstie & Phil ?

FTBFun

That's all well and good - but again did these programmes make any difference to house prices?

To which my answer would be no.

Location, Location has been on TV fairly recently (not a repeat, a new series) so I don't believe what you been asserting about people MEWing etc is actually the case. From what I've seen, its just about finding the right house and making a programme about it. That's it. I think a lot of what you've said above about them "extending their finances" only exists in your head.

shortchanged_2

RabbitMad wrote: »

I agree - how many people invite 4 strangers who they have nothing in common with into their house and try to cook them a meal just because they watch "come dine with me"

There's a slight difference here in that these programmes tap into the inner greed of people by showing them how easy it can be to make money from buying and selling property.

I do honestly believe that these types of programme have contributed to over inflating the housing market by encouraging people who may never have thought of going into property development at giving it a go.

Many people are sensible enough to make their minds up but don't forget there are many people who are often sold things by clever salespeople that they don't really want!

FTBFun

shortchanged wrote: »

There's a slight difference here in that these programmes tap into the inner greed of people by showing them how easy it can be to make money from buying and selling property.

I do honestly believe that these types of programme have contributed to over inflating the housing market by encouraging people who may never have thought of going into property development at giving it a go.

Many people are sensible enough to make their minds up but don't forget there are many people who are often sold things by clever salespeople that they don't really want!

IMO if people were influenced it would have been a drop in the ocean compared to those who would have bought a house anyway.

I doubt we're going to agree on this point.

shortchanged_2

FTBFun wrote: »

I doubt we're going to agree on this point.

I agree with you on that point.

Graham_Devon

FTBFun wrote: »

That's all well and good - but again did these programmes make any difference to house prices?

To which my answer would be no.

Location, Location has been on TV fairly recently (not a repeat, a new series) so I don't believe what you been asserting about people MEWing etc is actually the case. From what I've seen, its just about finding the right house and making a programme about it. That's it. I think a lot of what you've said above about them "extending their finances" only exists in your head.

Alright, if you say so.

Graham_Devon

RabbitMad wrote: »

I agree - how many people invite 4 strangers who they have nothing in common with into their house and try to cook them a meal just because they watch "come dine with me"

Rather, how many will think "oh, I think I'll give that meal a try tommorow night".

No ones suggesting people only bought houses because they saw location location. Only suggesting the programme did put stuff in the forefront of peoples minds. If people on the TV can make 20k painting alounge magnolia....we should give that a go....or, "hey, Elsie, check this out, this couple bought another house by using the equity in their existing house...surely we could do that". Etc.

Your example of inviting 4 strangers round suggests were trying to make out loads of people decided to employ people to find them houses. Not quite what we were saying.

torontoboy45

Graham_Devon wrote: »

No.

The point of location location was to tap into rising house prices and make a programme out of it. Many others jumped in, including a place in the sun, amongst others such as sarah beeney telling people how to buy and sell houses to make a quick profit.

Location Location was sponsored by B&Q was it not? So obviously B&Q thought it was quite influencial to have their brand associated to it, and viewers would be inspired by the programme.

Is it just out of pure coincidence that these programmes have now gone, and went when it started to tumble?

Many on location location, or I should state relocation, were using existing mortgage funds, MEW'ing, and buying another house, sometimes 2 more, by using equity or extending mortgages to the absolute maxium. It was Kirtsy & Phils job to then go and find their investment property, and include all the figures on how much it will rent for / how much it will be worth in a few years. The whole point, the whole focus was HPI.

Then we get to Kirsty talking into her weird glass type phone, and doing the deal, and working with them to find ways of extending finances to buy this brilliant investment.

Then we had the usual location location "buy this house, knock down that wall, you'll make 10k for when you sell it, quick, buy it now before you miss this opportunity".

Then there was Kirsty and Phil going abroad, to buy up excellent investments abroad by using equity in the home in the UK. "Now is the time" says Kirsty, strike while the iron is hot, says Kirsty, proclaiming this will never ever go wrong, just extend the mortgage, you'll be rich....this property in france will net you a 4% yield, or you could make a killing as a holiday let sell it in 10 years and double your profits.

No doubt you'll not see the link between the downfall of the market, and the removal of these programmes, and see that as pure coincidence.

I am saying that without the votes from the public, x-factor wouldnt exist. Without HPI, location location (and the myriad of other programmes) cease to exist.

oh there's a connect between hpi and the ramping progs alright but to what degree is anyone's guess; if only 100 people bought into kirsty's dream the market would have disorted albeit v.slightly.

p and k may well squeal about 'entertainment' being the driver of LLL but they were allowed to pass the series off as financial advice; I don't recall seeing any disclaimers.

and before anyone talks about 'mug' punters and caveat emptor:
C4 has a public remit, dontchaknow.

what would I do with them? ensure they never worked in any medium ever again.

DervProf

FTBFun wrote: »

That's all well and good - but again did these programmes make any difference to house prices?

To which my answer would be no.

Location, Location has been on TV fairly recently (not a repeat, a new series) so I don't believe what you been asserting about people MEWing etc is actually the case. From what I've seen, its just about finding the right house and making a programme about it. That's it. I think a lot of what you've said above about them "extending their finances" only exists in your head.

Two people going to view two similar houses, same asking price, but different areas.

Person 1 had been on a diet of LLL etc. Person 2 hasn`t seen any property !!!!!!.

Who's likely to offer the highest price ?

OK, let's make it a bit easier. The person who has been watching LLL happens to be looking at a property in an area that has recently been featured on LLL, and Kirsty said "it`s an area where prices are on the up". Again, think about which person will put in the highest offer.

I predict your answer will be something along the lines of "huh, you don`t think Person 1 will really be influenced by what Kirsty said, do you ?".

I`ll just add that the vendor of the property that Person 1 is viewing also saw the same episode of LLL where Kirsty said that prices were on the up.

Hypothetical nonsense just to prove my point ? I`d say this scenario was probably more common than you might think.

ninky_2

do you really think phil and kirsty are personally totally responsible for these shows. the format of locationx3 was invented before they were cast to front it. if it wasn't them it would be someone else.

there is also a whole team of producers and researchers on these programmes casting the properties and fact finding about the state of the local property market etc. phil and kirsty just present this information.

the problem with our culture / view of history etc is we see everything in terms of individuals when in fact they are merely part of a social movement.

property programmes do not create an obsession with house prices - they reflect the obsession in society as a whole. this is how they find such loyal and large audiences. for example if a programme was to be made and aired that tried to popularise something that was completely opposed to the zeitgeist it would die a death.

DervProf

ninky wrote: »

do you really think phil and kirsty and personally totally responsible for these shows. the format of locationx3 was invented before they were cast to front it. if it wasn't them it would be someone else.

there is also a whole team of producers and researchers on these programmes casting the properties and fact finding about the state of the local property market etc. phil and kirsty just present this information.

the problem with our culture / view of history etc is we see everything in terms of individuals when in fact they are merely part of a social movement.

property programmes do not create an obsession with house prices - they reflect the obsession in society as a whole. this is how they find such loyal and large audiences. for example if a programme was to be made and aired that tried to popularise something that was completely opposed to the zeitgeist it would die a death.

I don`t care if P & K are responsible for these shows, they have been made and broadcast, in large quantities. Do they cause an obsession with house prices ? I don`t know, but I get the feeling that they certainly help to nurture any obsession.

Look at what football has become. Large media coverage has sold many a Man U shirt to many a 13 year old who's never been to Old Trafford, and probably never will. Without the media coverage, would as many shirts have been sold ? I`d say most likely not.