December Nationwide MoM +0.4%

Pimperne1

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Well it always is seasonally adjusted, so no point in trying to look at it some other way really. The index is what it is.

Graham, you have my admiration. Surely no-one has seen more false dawns than you and yet you remain upbeat. Good on you.

geneer

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

heh heh heh.......

The three month on three month rate of
change which smoothes out the monthly volatility of
house prices and is a better indicator of the recent trend

rose from -1.3% in November to -1.0% in December

heh heh heh.....:cool:

A bit of a damp squib this one.
I think even the worst trolls know they're on shaky ground.

martinbuckley

Its a fair few years since I studied maths, but I'm sure £162,763 (Dec 10) is less than £163,398 (Nov 10).

I do like these 0.4% monthly rises which knock £600 per month of the cost of a house!

geneer

Saynowt wrote: »

If that method is correct it's worthwhile pointing out that anyone who borrowed, say £200,000 in October 2007, has effectively had their debt reduced to £184,162 in 'real' terms.

Provided they've been getting tasty inflationary pay rise for the last three years yes.

twadge_face

twadge_face

twadge_face

Anyone want to explain those charts? I'm too stupid and/or lazy to care or bother.

kthxbye :money:

Pimperne1

!!!!!!_face wrote: »

Anyone want to explain those charts? I'm too stupid and/or lazy to care or bother.

kthxbye :money:

I think the first one is designed to make anyone who is not in the market feel better. Taking prices from when they started falling and ignoring all the years when they rose and then pretending that you can invest £20k in an asset worth £200k and expecting that you should see the £200k increase by inflation rather than the £20k. Not an expert though.

geneer

Pimperne1 wrote: »

I think the first one is designed to make anyone who is not in the market feel better. Taking prices from when they started falling and ignoring all the years when they rose and then pretending that you can invest £20k in an asset worth £200k and expecting that you should see the £200k increase by inflation rather than the £20k. Not an expert though.

Funny. But it wasn't that long ago all of the bulls were telling us how houses were just for living in. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Batchy

this is noise, quarterly is a good trend indicator, but not a predictor of the future, the fact is, prices are stagnant!

0.4% doesnt get more stagnant for 2010 for nationwide. anyone car to argue about a £500 difference for arguments sake.

End of... anyone marketing there property for the last 24 months will NOT have increased price from 2009/2010 nor reduced materially by comparison.

Compared to 2007 prices I would expect to see at least 15% falls still at todays prices.

These statistics just annoy me now... just how many house prices/mortgages are nationwide basing these statistics on?

10% of the market, if they are lucky... based on 50k worth of transactions ... about 5k transactions for the year, or 420 per month... come on, its really hardly worth getting excited about really!