Halifax December 2010 MoM -1.3% QoQ -0.9% YoY -1.6%

AD9898_2

Nice to see, especially if buying cash. Although lets be clear, without IR rises there will be no crash, a crash needs a large magnitude of forced sellers. A crash would therefore mean collapsing banks as losses are crystalized, another collapse would destroy the economy.

As much as I've said high house prices are bad for the economy as a whole, the time to have done something about it was around 2004. What is hoped for I think is 'real term' falls as inflation rises, unfortunately it's backfiring at this time as wage inflation is way behind.

So what is actually happening is mortgage holders who benefited from the dropping of IR's are now finding that the money saved is being eaten up by inflation in essentials.

What next ? who knows but there seems little light at the end of the tunnel.

Really2

joguest wrote: »

The stagnation argument is absurd as it involves looking at the sum of a rise in the first half of the year as well as the period of subsequent falls.

How does that compare to the Nationwide and LR.

Nationwide went up 2.5% and down 2.1% over a whole year the last month being an increase.

I would look at stagnation over all indexes not just this one as this seems to be the most irratic.

Prices have fallen recently and will continue to for so early this year, but if it goes 0.0% (give or take a few %) YOY 2011 based on a few months of nominal rises towards the end will you call that a rising market, or a stagnant year?

Nominal house prices fall and rise over any year, declines tend to be in the Spring and Winter, Gains in the summer and autumn.

In reality house prices have remained fairly static for the last 2 years and still have a bit to fall to breach the last fall's lows.

I expect this kind of pattern to go on for a few years yet, falls, rises, falls, rises, falls, rises.

You get the picture.:)

joguest

AD9898 wrote: »

Nice to see, especially if buying cash. Although lets be clear, without IR rises there will be no crash, a crash needs a large magnitude of forced sellers.

A buyers' strike (most of which is enforced by the current lending criteria, but will now be amplified by buyers holding back) will do it imho, without the need for a large number of forced sellers. The number of forced sellers is relatively high anyway, especially as a proportion of the current low sales volumes.

The_Fox_3

chucky wrote: »

true, they probably don't mean very much if you ignore any month that has risen and just look at the negative months.

mortgage rates are at record lows - in which country??

of course, anyone else with a different view to yours is wrong.
you are able to predict the future like all of the other HPC numpties who consistently get it wrong.

good luck with your future telling skills - i'm sure the travelling circus you're with pay you very well :T

Your a hostile little man Chucky, apart from telling lies.
You are a troll of the worst kind

1. i am not a HPC poster, no more than you, and don't tell me you never look on that site. And for the record i cannot stand the sire(again).

2. Interest rates are at record level in THIS country, Duhhh

3. I am still uncertain what is going to happen in the future, YES i would like to see 40% plus falls, whether it happens i have no idea. You play the high moral ground when all your really doing Chucky is what you accuse others of doing, ramping property you Bull.


Why i am wasting time with you i don't know, you have already been shown to tell lies on this board, how can anyone believe anything you post. You are here only to show your hate towards anyone that posts anything bearish, you are a hypocrite as well as being disingenious.

Really2

joguest wrote: »

A buyers' strike will do it imho,

OK

1) I have a 1 bed flat and have a child on the way.
2) I need to relocate because of my Job
3) I need to downsize. etc, etc.

Do you really think people will strike when you are talking about their lives.
To the vast majority of people house prices are fairly irrelevent as it is based on need. They are also quiet willing to get on with their lives for rather than worry about the paper 1.6% they would be better off on this one index.

A buyers strike wont happen, HPC was a buyers strike really, did that influence the market?
Did many fold when prices started to go up again?

joguest

Really2 wrote: »

How does that compare to the Nationwide and LR.

Nationwide went up 2.5% and down 2.1% over a whole year the last month being an increase.

I would look at stagnation over all indexes not just this one as this seems to be the most irratic.

Prices have fallen recently and will continue to for so early this year, but if it goes 0.0% (give or take a few %) YOY 2011 based on a few months of nominal rises towards the end will you call that a rising market, or a stagnant year?

Nominal house prices fall and rise over any year, declines tend to be in the Spring and Winter, Gains in the summer and autumn.

In reality house prices have remained fairly static for the last 2 years and still have a bit to fall to breach the last fall's lows.

I expect this kind of pattern to go on for a few years yet, falls, rises, falls, rises, falls, rises.

You get the picture.:)

The Nationwide Index is nominally 3.95% lower than it was in June (down from £170111 to £163398). The trend is consistent with the trend in the Halifax and the Land Registry (shifted back 3 months to account for the time lag). The Nationwide is the more accurate of the two lenders' data given the high correlation with the time-shifted LR data, however the Halifax index can't simply be dismissed - the trend is consistent, with falls from the April 2010 peak of 5.4% nominal (£170722 to £161498). If I was able to embed the graph it would show a picture of a trend that doesn't look much like stagnation.

RenovationMan

AD9898 wrote: »

So what is actually happening is mortgage holders who benefited from the dropping of IR's are now finding that the money saved is being eaten up by inflation in essentials.

I doubt that tenants are faring any better with inflation, especially if their rents increase in line (or in many cases, above) inflation.

For those lucky enough to be taking advantage of low mortgage rates, the monthly saving will be hundreds of pounds higher than their additional spend due to inflation.

wotsthat

The_Fox wrote: »

Thank you for being big enough to admit you was wrong:), many others on here would not

No problem.

Would you admit then that a person who wanted to buy in December 2004 should have done so instead of holding off waiting for a crash?

If they purchased then with a mortgage they'd have paid off around £24,000 by now. We'd need to see falls of another 15% before they'd even be in negative equity.

They could have rented I suppose and paid the landlords mortgage instead.

joguest

Really2 wrote: »

Do you really think people will strike when you are talking about their lives.

I'm waiting to buy (a larger house - quite happy sitting here mortgage free for the time being) and I personally know many people with very substantial deposits who are quite happy renting at the moment. So yes, people are striking, based on my own anecdotal evidence. Also, I'm seeing many houses being sold for much less than the percentage fall the indexes are suggesting.

Hundreds of thousands of potential vendors have delayed selling their houses over the last couple of years in the mistaken belief that prices would recover. That's a lot of pent-up supply.

Really2

joguest wrote: »

If I was able to embed the graph it would show a picture of a trend that doesn't look much like stagnation.

You mean like this one.

SA data looks the flatest in anytime for the last 10 years to me.