The absolute fallacy of the average bull argument.

LisbonLaura

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Except of course, in the threads specifically discussing the difference between nominal and real house prices.

Like this one.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2544505

Thxs Hamish, you are on the ball more than ever.
Saves me bothering to look; not that I would anyway.

Have a HUG

Loughton_Monkey

geneer wrote: »

So heres the big secret:-

Averages prices are based on, y'know, an average.
It can be made up of lots of smaller averages.
There is no such thing as the average house.

Good common sense. But too obvious to be understood by a lot of the posters around here.

The only averages I've ever seen are about a small sample of houses that have sold in a period. Most of us don't live in a house that has been bought or sold in that period. So it's meaningless. Especially when the whole ball game for FTP deposits has changed so significantly.

So you think your house has gone down by 15%? Well what if you paid 10% more for it than you should in the first place? What if you screwed the desperate seller down an got it for 20% less than the proper price?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Rinoa wrote: »

Indeed, when you add on 5 years rent it's:




...plus a further £30k or so.

Indeed.

No wonder he's permanently angry.

It's like a bear version of Bruno....

Sibley

I don't mean to sound horrible here.

You have Group A sitting in houses. Load of equity and paying small mortgages.

The others are renting off group A and helping them get even richer.

It not only seems pointless arguing with them. Now I actually feel guilty.

DervProf

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

A few examples.....

162, Forest Avenue, Aberdeen, AB15 4UN
-Dec-2009 £280,000
Dec-2006 £255,500

98, Union Grove, Aberdeen, AB10 6SA
Jun-2010 £130,000
Apr-2007 £91,500

305, Union Grove, Aberdeen, AB10 6TD
May-2010 £121,121
Oct-2007 £115,000

57, Chapel Street, Aberdeen, AB10 1SS
Jun-2010 £170,000
Mar-2007 £156,777

58e, Chapel Street, Aberdeen, AB10 1SN
Jun-2010 £145,000
Aug-2006 £110,000

398, King Street, Aberdeen, AB24 3BY
Jun-2010 £125,000
Dec-2007 £124,000

394, King Street, Aberdeen, AB24 3BQ
May-2010 £132,500
Oct-2007 £130,501

I think we're done here.....

Yes, you must be "done" after compiling that list. I hope you've cleaned up after yourself.

You seem to have an obsession with property prices in your local area. Some of my friends think that I spend a little too much time thinking and talking about the economy. Pre-crash, I was talking about the property market quite a lot. But you, Hamish, take it to another level. I can't say that I know how property prices are doing in my local area. I suspect they may be down a little over the last year or two. TBH, I'm not really bothered, I'm just glad that the madness of pre-2007 is over.

julieq

To be fair, the people who bring up the Aberdeen market are invariably the bears. Hamish answers questions when asked, but usually makes general points.

DervProf

julieq wrote: »

To be fair, the people who bring up the Aberdeen market are invariably the bears. Hamish answers questions when asked, but usually makes general points.

To be fair, my point was accurate, Hamish does seem to be rather obsessed with property prices in his local area. That was the point I made, and I think it is a valid one.

Anyway, the bears might bring up the subject of Aberdeen quite often, I wonder why ?

julieq

Because bears like ad hominem attacks Derv.

Hamish has been spot on with his analysis and predictions throughout the crisis. That is now a matter of historical record. So the only tactic now is to misrepresent one part of what he's posted - local prices in Aberdeen - as a generalised obsession to attempt to discredit him as a poster.

It's pretty shameless but demonstrates that the bear arguments can't sustain themselves on their merits (let alone by any transference of prediction into reality). It just becomes a succession of sarcastic ad hominems. Hamish posts: the bears quote Aberdeen prices. Sibley posts: the bears talk about Thai brides. It's all the more striking when you don't come here that often.

Going back to the original subject, the "average bull" has called the crisis pretty much right at all turns. Which does kind of cast doubt on the idea there's any particular fallacy in the argument. The proof of the pudding is in the eating and all. On the other hand the "average bear" is still waiting for big falls. Should tell you something.

DervProf

Julieq,

To be honest, I am a rather unusual "bear". I have a home, I stand to inherit a home, so you would have thought that I would want house prices to rise. The fact is that I'm not that bothered about my own financial gain from property (I've made myself financially comfortable without the aid of property investment). I look at the property market from a fairly "neutral" position. I am not a FTBer, nor do I rent. I simply own a modest home, bought with a resonable (15%) deposit and mortgage which didn't cause me any financial hardship. I'd like others to have the same opportunity that I did, less than two decades ago. As far as I can see, the average 25 year old will not be able to save a 15% deposit and take on a smallish mortgage like I did. I happen to think this a bad thing, a backwards step for the population of the UK. People who celebrate this seem selfish and greedy, that is how I see it, and I don't mind pointing it out to those who display those traits.

geneer

Londonsu wrote: »

I WAS going to read your post but before I did I noted that you had signed off with SIMPLES

Sorry any post that ends with a quote from a rubbish ad with stupid meerkats aint worth my time bothering about

Does exactly what it says on the can.