Rightmove April +1.7%

DervProf

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Says it all, really.

No improved buyer affordability.

If tesco's (and all other vendors of bread) increase the cost of a loaf by 1.7%, then there is no improved buyer affordability for bread.

If a number of property vendors increase their asking prices by an average of 1.7%, will they achieve a 1.7% increased sale price ? They may, or may not. Are they actually increasing vendor sellability (is that a word ? If not, it is now).

DexterA

Cleaver wrote: »

An area of terraced housing. Probably 2 bed terraces, often big properties, bit of outside space. Nice houses a lot of the time. These can be bought all over the North West for anywhere between £80,000 and £120,000, so well within reach of most FTBers here.

So this is what I'd call 'FTBer' land. The age doesn't really matter, the types of houses around me are probably the types of houses that are rarely bought by FTBers, and probably never have been. We certainly couldn't have afforded the house we were in as a FTBer, no matter what year. We bought a back to back 2-bed terrace instead.

Also, the use of the word 'unassisted' to describe a FTBer is neither here nor there. A FTBer is a FTBer, doesn't really matter whether they were assisted or not.

The round my way argument? Not typical of the country is it?

The average age of a FTBer is 30 something.

This has massive implications for future generations.

Denying a problem exists is selfish and lacks empathy.

Cleaver

the.ciscokid wrote: »

Ok thanks. What's the average salary of the FTB?

Dunno, and I don't really want to get in to an endless debate about averages. And I fully conceede that in many areas of the country FTBers are priced out, so I agree with you, probably.

But up here, in the North West (which is what I was talking about), there are plenty of decent FTBer houses for between £80,000 and £100,000. So a young couple could earn £15,000 each, save up ten grand as a deposit and then borrow between 2 and 3 times their salary to buy one of these houses. That sounds alright to me - theoretically you can basically earn just over minimum wage as a couple and still buy a nice house.

the.ciscokid wrote: »

If you don't mind me asking, how old were you?

I was 22 when we bought our first house (although I turned 23 a couple of days after buying). I was earning £21,000 and my wife (then girlfriend) around £15,000. The house was £130,000 and the year was 2003, not in the North West though. It was a nice house, and a bit bigger than others down that street. Most two bed terraces down that road are still available for between £85,000 and £140,000 depending on size and quality.

chucky

DexterA wrote: »

The round my way argument? Not typical of the country is it?

The average age of a FTBer is 30 something.

This has massive implications for future generations.

Denying there's a problem come across as selfish and lacks empathy.

to be fair to Cleaver - the average age of an FTB has been around 32 for about 20 years.

Cleaver

DexterA wrote: »

The round my way argument? Not typical of the country is it?

No. Can you pick out a quote where I said it was?

DexterA wrote: »

Denying there's a problem come is selfish and lacks empathy.

Where have I denied that there's a problem? What problem am I denying? If you look at my earlier posts I was saying that people selling houses are selling them for too much and should reduce their price. I then went on to say that my area isn't a typical FTBer area and never probably was. So to ask again, what problem am I denying?

Cleaver

iandury wrote: »

You started it (;

And besides I am only using the same logic as you guys to make a point

My point was that if sellers reduced their prices more people would be able to afford to buy houses. How is that 'childish logic'?

DexterA

chucky wrote: »

to be fair to Cleaver - the average age of an FTB has been around 32 for about 20 years.

I doubt that's true. I welcome evidence showing the above to be true.

chucky

DervProf wrote: »

If tesco's (and all other vendors of bread) increase the cost of a loaf by 1.7%, then there is no improved buyer affordability for bread.

If a number of property vendors increase their asking prices by an average of 1.7%, will they achieve a 1.7% increased sale price ? They may, or may not. They actualyy be increasing vendor sellability (is that a word ? If not, it is now).

the easy explanation to that is that you don't need 100% of people getting pay rises of more than 1.7% for them to be able to buy a loaf of bread. not everyone is a bread consumer using your anology.

it's just like not everyone will be or can afford to be a house buyer. i think it's somewhere around 30% of people need to be able to afford price increases for HPI to happen. there are exceptions when credit is not there for example.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

the.ciscokid wrote: »

What, averaging 32 years old?

If the age of unassisted FTB-s averages 37....

And the age of all FTB-s averages 32...

Then the age of assisted FTB-s must average less than 32.

80% of FTB-s are assisted. Therefore the average age of 80% of FTB-s will be less than 32. Late 20's at a guess.

During a time when houses were booming quicker than people were getting payrises and able to save?

And 100% mortgages were readily available.

I know, I know, you are alright Jack.

Doesn't change the fact that a 37 year old should have bought a house a very long time ago, when prices were spectacularly cheap.

They've failed to take advantage of record low wage multiples, failed to take advantage of excellent mortgage deals, and now wonder why they can't buy a house?

Cleaver

the.ciscokid wrote: »

Of course it does. A 37 year old is far more likely to need a family home.

Apologies for sounding like Hamish, but I have to ask a question here. Let's say you have a load of 37 year olds now who can't buy a home for their family. The question I ask is that if you knew you wanted a family home at the age of 37, what were you doing about it when you were 25?

Someone who is 37 now was 25 in 1999. House prices in 1999 were a lot more affordable than they are now. So why wasn't that 37 year old buying a FTBer house in 1999 when they were 25, trading up to a bigger one when they were 30 in 2004 (when their original house had almost doubled in value) and then look to trade up again now?

Look, I'm not really that interested in arguing about all this in any detail. We probably agree on the fundamental point I originally made: if sellers reduced their price it would enable more people to afford to buy houses.