December Nationwide MoM +0.4%

Graham_Devon

Bored now.

Ta ta.

chucky

Really2 wrote: »

I posted above price rose around 2.5% and fell around 2.1%.

It was not a volatile year at all most probably the least volatile year in the last 10 years.

The only volatile data was Halifax October, which looks like an anomaly in their data as it was not replicated on any other index, and it saw a sharp correction the following month.

that's the point - only the Halifax shows any real volatility.

this is why the desperate on this forum cling desperately to the large monthly drop on the Halifax that was cancelled out in following two months after that.

i'd give up now Really, his response says it all - the facts are presented but does a runner when he gets discredited once again.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Bored now.

Ta ta.

Procrastinator333

Batchy wrote: »

Your right, im not disputing the indices, what I am disputing, is real world... prices just havent moved massively.

Expectations are the same as 2008/09/10... its just the indices are making a lot of noise.

Maybe I am just being too picky. If we applied the same movements to petrol, starting the year at 100p. It would have peaked at 104.1 and fallen back to 99.6p. I think you would notice that rise and fall, but only marginally. Think I'm going to leave this point be from now on...

chucky

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

Maybe I am just being too picky. If we applied the same movements to petrol, starting the year at 100p. It would have peaked at 104.1 and fallen back to 99.6p. I think you would notice that rise and fall, but only marginally. Think I'm going to leave this point be from now on...

you're right in saying that but you can't use monthly numbers to define stagnation - you'd never be able to do it, it would be too volatile.

you have to take macro numbers to define it, monthly numbers would be just noise.

it's like a rising share price - it never goes up in a straight line.

Generali

Really2 wrote: »

To add, prices went up around 2.5% in the first 6 months and fell back about 2.1%.

The nationwide data is about as flat as it gets, when was the last time there was a year with so little marginal change?

The year to Sept 2009 was +0.01%. The year to Aug 1994 was -0.02%.

The smallest calendar year change since 1991 was 1994, up 1.3%.

The biggest increase in a year was the year to Jan 2003, up 26.5%
The biggest increase in a calendar year was 2002, up 25.3%.

The biggest decrease in a calendar year was 2008, down 15.9%.
The biggest decrease in a year was the year to Feb 2009, down 17.6%.

All those are in nominal terms. Clearly the falls in real terms in the early 90s would be far higher as inflation was running at or about double figures I think but I'm too lazy adjust for inflation right now.

Procrastinator333

chucky wrote: »

you're right in saying that but you can't use monthly numbers to define stagnation - you'd never be able to do it, it would be too volatile.

you have to take macro numbers to define it, monthly numbers would be just noise.

it's like a rising share price - it never goes up in a straight line.

Agree monthly numbers are pretty useless, it is the quarterly numbers that offer the balance of timeliness vs relevance. The first 7 months of the year, the quarterly movement was positive, the last 5 it was negative. 5 months where the quarterly figure is negative sounds like falling prices to me.

People often say the data can't be used as a forward indicator and to a degree I agree. But it is interesting to note that in the last 24 months, the direction of the quarterly % in 22 out of 24 months was the same as in the prior month.

undetterred

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Bored now.

Ta ta.

another refreshing classic

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

We are seeing minor fluctuations, both up and down, which ultimately result in stagnation.

And I rather suspect another year of stagnation is on the cards as well.

Procrastinator333

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

We are seeing minor fluctuations, both up and down, which ultimately result in stagnation.

And I rather suspect another year of stagnation is on the cards as well.

There has not been an upward movement in the Nationwide quarterly index for 5 months now.

Batchy

IMO we wont see falls in 2011... basically because we wont see pay cuts... we saw them in 2008/9 but none planned 2011.
private sector especially have ground to make up.
Public sector get pay freezes.

unless that changes then there wont be any significant movement IMO