How long can FTB-s afford to wait?

Procrastinator333

I agree there is a point in your op. There will be some who started or continued saving once the LTV rules became tougher. But there are also many who either couldn't afford to save or do not have the savvy to make themselves save. I actually think there will be quite a lot in this camp. But beyond agreeing the general principle of your point, nobody can ever prove or disprove the impact it will have. So probably have to leave it there.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

cost young FTB-s an absolute fortune if they are suckered into delaying purchase.

It was something like a year ago you were bleating on at me about how delaying was a bad idea. Yet a year on, my deposit is growing, another 12 months and I will be about on the 20% mark. We will also have skipped all of the lower rungs of the houseing ladder and all of the moving costs that ensue. And lets not forget about prices:

Land Registry: Down 1.7% YoY
Halifax: Down 2.9% YoY
Nationwide: Up 0.1% YoY

The QoQ are of course more telling about the current direction and they do suggest any price falls have moderated. But the point of this is I have lost nothing and gained a lot by waiting this far.

Jimmy_31

Todays word of the day is ANECDOTAL, Heres one for you hammish, if i based my house purchase on hard data like banks average house prices, or whatever data people looked at when buying a home for more than 4 times its normal value i would currently be in the s*it and sinking fast.

Id much rather do it the old fashioned way and look in the estate agents window and look at the price falls and look at the house pictures gathering dust after sitting there for 12 months or listen to my friends tell me they are probably going to lose the piece of s*hit new build they bought, (their words not mine).

Why do you so desperately want FTBs to jump in and by a house, im guessing a lot of the FTBs who never purchased during the boom did so for the same reasons as me, house prices became laughable so value for money had gone, not due to supply and demand but due to the banks illegal lending practices. can you not understand that it would eat away at people like me if they had fallen for the con, i didnt buy because house prices were a rip off and knew id be pi55ed off sat in my new house knowing i fell for a bankers bull5hit.

AndyGuil

Hamish, how long can FTB'ers wait? As long as is needed, time is in the FTB'ers hands. There are many including myself waiting for this market to bottom out. It is a slow mover but a downwards one. I'm not having any of my deposit worn away by house price falls and my rent is less than the house price falls. The mortgage rates are going to start going up soon because of Basel III and also BoE base rate increases.

abaxas

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Well it's you lot that wanted mortgage rationing, now you'll just have to live with the consequences.



Name one.

Lets see....

Northern Rock bankrupted and insolvent.

geneer

julieq wrote: »

Not enough to rescue your decision sadly

What decision would that be and why would it need rescuing?

julieq wrote: »

Not enough to rescue your decision sadly

Anyway of course prices can fall if no-one is buying at a time when confidence is zero. They bounced back quite close to the peak in absolute terms despite a very uncertain economic outlook and mortgage rationing which demonstrates the underlying demand. So if you're still holding out for a big further fall you need something much worse to happen than we had.

But obviously if you can shout me down aggressively enough everything will change and all the pain you caused yourself will disappear. You do believe in fairies, don't you?:rotfl:

Lovely.
The facade is starting to crack Julieq.
Your bitterness is breaking through.

geneer

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

No, I asked which point and got no response.

Ask again.

Because its so very heard to click back a page and see what you missed.

Though of course you know that I know that by "missed" I mean deliberately chose to ignore.

But let the games continue.

geneer

julieq wrote: »

Nice ad hominem mcc, so do you now want to tell us whether you think 2009 was the bottom?

If you do, I'm not sure I understand what point you're trying to make. If you don't, I think you're wrong. See you in a couple of years for confirmation.

Hilarious innit.

The bulls have gone from arguing about there not being a top to
where the bottom was.

I guess the constant moving of the goal posts is only to be expected, if you want the past to be forgotten.

Though not 2004 of course. Apparently its still ok to keep bring that largely irrelevant date up again and again.

geneer

julieq wrote: »

It's great to go back to Jan 2009 and having a look at what people were saying. There are some some surprises though - Graham explaining there's nothing wrong with 100% mortgages is one I was taken aback by (but he's quite right obviously). But at a period where things looked like freefall, the bears thought they were being proved right and some of the assertions are breathtakingly wrong.

You should pop back to 2007.
Should be a right old laugh how breathtakingly wrong some people got it.

geneer

julieq wrote: »

Well one prediction made multiple times then. Comes to the same thing ultimately. And you're right, a prediction without a timescale isn't even a prediction.

Ah yes. Because timing became so very important post crash didn't it.



Hey, I know an interesting story about that. https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3133650

macaque_2

HAMISH, I can only speak for one sector, speciality chemicals. My response to your comments are in blue.

What is the obsession you have with manufacturing?
A small manufacturing facility making high value chemicals can produce product with a value of £100-1000m per year. For each person the manufacturer employs, dozens of service jobs are created.

Mass manufacturing of cheap tat is dead in this country, and will never return. And good riddance I say.
Companies on the continent (especially Germany) are repatriating manufacturing processes from the far east at unprecedented levels for reasons of cost, quality, shipping costs and supply chain reliability.

And don't you see a logical inconsistency with calling for housing to be cheaper, just so that companies can pay less in wages? Not exactly what most bears had in mind, I'll wager. Its not about cutting wages. UK companies have a serious problem in finding and keeping the right people. Why should a person study for 10 years to qualify only to have 30% of their income confiscated in tax and 50% of their income confiscated by a lender or a BTL?

Now putting aside your assertion that companies could pay less if housing were cheaper (which is blatantly false, as we all know governments would just raise taxes to compensate), at the end of the day it doesn't matter how cheap houses are, you still can't compete with Indian or Chinese workers on $100 a month. There are still labour intensive industries but most modern manfuacturing plants use high levels of automation and employ very few people. If you go to India and China, you will find a lot of UK expats on high salaries.

Fixed that for you. Fixed that for you too.
For lots of reasons, the service sector in the UK cannot survive without a manufacturing base.