Rightmove Feb - Asking prices surge 3.1% as sellers demand higher prices

System

Mexas wrote: »

I don't know, i haven't got a clue where they pull them from. I'd challenge anyone to search RM and find me a property in Manchester that has increased its asking price during this month. I've honestly not seen one and I search religiously every day. The only places i could see this happening are Didsbury, Chorlton, Heaton Chapel and Hale. Not a chance anywhere else.

This statistic only applies to asking price at time of initial listing.

Property asking prices rarely ever increase post-listing, even during the last boom.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Generali wrote: »

-
I don't see this as a particularly bullish report. The headline number is but if you get into the meat of the report they are pretty bearish about everything except the very top end of the market.

They're certainly bearish about the prospects for young people buying houses, noting that BTL lending is expanding as the banks view it more favorably than FTB lending, and absent an increase in FTB lending, the young of today are doomed to a generation of renting as professional landlords hoover up the limited stock available.

As for prices, they note the first 6 weeks of 2011 is virtually a mirror of the first 6 weeks of 2010, and they expect little change in the market this year, so not really that bearish, although not bullish either.

They also note the stock per agent has decreased for 6 months in a row, whilst buyer interest is very high, and that the big limiting factor for the majority of people, whether FTB's or movers, is still the ongoing mortgage rationing..... Which we all knew anyway.

doire_2

Sibley wrote: »

Smeagold, Graham Devon, The Fox, Doire, Dr Gloom, Bruce Banner, all of HPC website and all the bears on here.......


You boys have taken a hell of a beating today :rotfl:

Yes sibley sure we have. Asking prices...yes that asking prices :rotfl: up by 3.1% and im beaten. !!!! it im throwing in the towel. Im buying now before i miss the boat.You were right sibley.

Funny i viewed a house yesterday that was 220k in May 2008 and is now asking offers around £149,950. Kitchen was too small though

Graham_Devon

Well at least asking prices are in favour again.

We need a bounce-o-meter of some sort to show when asking prices are in favour and when they are not, and don't actually mean much to the price paid.

doire_2

Nick Hopkinson, Director of PPR Estates, said: “With house sales volumes remaining on the floor even the estate agents acknowledge that current asking prices are more a reflection of home seller fantasy than what anyone else will really pay in 2011 for property across most of the UK."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/8336465/House-prices-fears-amid-huge-supply-of-properties-for-sale.html#

Mexas

Joeskeppi wrote: »

This statistic only applies to asking price at time of initial listing.

Property asking prices rarely ever increase post-listing, even during the last boom.

Ah right, it still seems like a duff statistic though.

AD9898_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

is still the ongoing mortgage rationing..... Which we all knew anyway.

I'd be interested to know what you think should be the correct amount of mortgage funding available (there was roughly £350 billion at peak) and where this money would come from (we know a good proportion of that money was raised on the back of junk assets).

Also, what do you believe to be a fair mortgage multiple, baring in mind that using high joint multiples is fairly risky at the best of times, and at this time of low wage inflation, rising unemployment and IR's that could only go one way, could be catastrophic for a family if the multiple is too high.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

AD9898 wrote: »

I'd be interested to know what you think should be the correct amount of mortgage funding available (there was roughly £350 billion at peak)

As much as is needed to lend at reasonable LTV's and LTI's.

I'd suggest 350 bn is probably about right though.

and where this money would come from (we know a good proportion of that money was raised on the back of junk assets).

False. You know nothing of the sort.

The performance of UK mortgage backed securities has been very good. Even Northern Rocks "bad bank", split off to contain the very worst of it's MBS tranches with all the 125% loans, returned a profit last year in excess of £300,000,000.

Also, what do you believe to be a fair mortgage multiple, baring in mind that using high joint multiples is fairly risky at the best of times, and at this time of low wage inflation, rising unemployment and IR's that could only go one way, could be catastrophic for a family if the multiple is too high.

Having two incomes is safer for a family or lender than just one. It means that the chances of that household falling to zero income if both lose their jobs simultaneously is virtually nil.

In this recession, 97 out of 100 people that were in full time work before it, are still in full time work today. And of those that do lose a job, most are back in work within 6 months.

And mortgage arrears are decreasing, despite unemployment increasing at the moment, and are pretty low anyway. Only a few hundred thousand out of nearly 12 million mortgages.

So no, I don't accept your use of inflammatory language like "catastrophic" or "risky" to describe joint mortgages.

As for multiples, it's not really the best way to look at it. As a percentage of after tax income is better, with more for those with no other expenses, and less for those that have kids or other debts.

On that ratio, the peak was 68% reached in 1990, and the current of 29% is below the long term average, which is 37%.

Everyones circumstances are different, but I'll give you my own as an example.

When we bought our latest house 4 years ago, we had no kids (and no desire for kids) dual incomes, no debts, and significant other assets. We borrowed just short of 200K, which was around 3 times joint (basic, excluding bonuses) salary.

Since then, our income has grown rapidly, we've had promotions, bonuses, and above inflation pay rises throughout. Our mortgage is now less than 1.5 times joint, thanks to Merv's low rates and our overpayments, and our savings have increased as well.

Obviously, we were a good risk for the bank even though the mortgage was nearly 6 times one of our salaries. We would have remained a good risk for the bank even if one of us had lost our jobs. Mrs McT's pay rise at her last promotion is more than our entire scheduled mortgage payment each year (before overpayments).

Everyones circumstances are different, like I said, which is why using blunt tools like LTV or LTI are just wrong. And stating that any 6 times income or 100% mortgage is risky is nuts. It clearly isn't.

brit1234

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Are you suggesting this statistic is in some way false?

No, but Rightmove asking prices are new listings only, it doesn't include all the falls of existing properties.

System

brit1234 wrote: »

No, but Rightmove asking prices are new listings only, it doesn't include all the falls of existing properties.

Oh I never knew