This forum isn't the same anymore

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

macaque wrote: »

I think the bulls have bottled out won so there's no point arguing anymore.

Fixed that for you.

ILW

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Fixed that for you.

Surely with what even you say is likely to me a stagnant market for a while, wouldn't a draw be closer to the truth.

Sibley

I think it's got boring.

All the bears have had their say, their predictions etc etc.

The bulls the same.


Now nothing is happening. Houses are not rising or falling.

Stagnation.

We who own or are paying low mortgages. Those who rent are paying them off for somebody else.

That's what it boils down to.

I'm just happy the HPC team have been smashed. That's my mission accomplished.

nembot

Sibley wrote: »

I think it's got boring.

All the bears have had their say, their predictions etc etc.

The bulls the same.


Now nothing is happening. Houses are not rising or falling.

Stagnation.

Fair comment...

We who own or are paying low mortgages. Those who rent are paying them off for somebody else.

That's what it boils down to.

I'm just happy the HPC team have been smashed. That's my mission accomplished.

Tos*er... :rotfl:

IveSeenTheLight

ILW wrote: »

Surely with what even you say is likely to me a stagnant market for a while, wouldn't a draw be closer to the truth.

I don't agree with the "bulls" / "bears" stereotyping, but surely you must agree that being a homeowner in a stagnant market is better than renting (and aspiring to be a homeowner)?

In a stangant market, the homeowner is still paying down the mortgage, increasing equity and reducing the debt each month, while the renter is doing that for his landlord.

[note] Let's not go into a debate into the costs of renting / buying as we could show instances on both sides where it is cheaper and it becomes very individualised / specific instead of a general discussion
[/note]

Procrastinator333

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I don't agree with the "bulls" / "bears" stereotyping, but surely you must agree that being a homeowner in a stagnant market is better than renting (and aspiring to be a homeowner)?

In a stangant market, the homeowner is still paying down the mortgage, increasing equity and reducing the debt each month, while the renter is doing that for his landlord.

[note] Let's not go into a debate into the costs of renting / buying as we could show instances on both sides where it is cheaper and it becomes very individualised / specific instead of a general discussion
[/note]

On the one hand you want everyone to agree owning is better than renting. But you don't want to talk about the costs of owning vs renting. No doubt Hamish will be along to quote his 80% stat soon. The 80% stat that comes from Zoopla, the same place that noted 17% of house price falls a few months ago.

Stagnation is the perfect time to not buy for many FTB. Save hard, get in to the 20% deposit bracket. And if possible skip a rung or 2 on the housing ladder thereby saving on the transaction costs too.

Sibley

On the one hand you want everyone to agree owning is better than renting. But you don't want to talk about the costs of owning vs renting. No doubt Hamish will be along to quote his 80% stat soon. The 80% stat that comes from Zoopla, the same place that noted 17% of house price falls a few months ago.

Stagnation is the perfect time to not buy for many FTB. Save hard, get in to the 20% deposit bracket. And if possible skip a rung or 2 on the housing ladder thereby saving on the transaction costs too.

Whatever.

Personally I don't really care.

I joined these forums to counter attack a group of morons who were trying to talk up a big house price crash.

Really I need not have bothered. Nobody listened to them and prices didn't go down anyway.

Procrastinator333

Sibley wrote: »

Whatever.

Personally I don't really care.

I joined these forums to counter attack a group of morons who were trying to talk up a big house price crash.

Really I need not have bothered. Nobody listened to them and prices didn't go down anyway.

If your work is done, perhaps it is time to move on then? We can but hope.

julieq

Since the bears have declared that what they were expecting all along was a slight correction followed by a climb back followed by a period of stagnation, rather than the 70% falls and a return to 2.5x single salary for average house that was being suggested in late 2008, they now agree with the "bulls" original analysis pretty much completely - you can go back and read Hamish predicting the same thing precisely if you like. So on that basis I'm pleased to agree that the bears won the argument, even if in getting there they took a few wrong turns.

They will also win the argument about the cost of rental too. Because eventually they will realise that paying 40-60 years of rent compounding with inflation in a supply constrained market is likely to be a lot more expensive than paying a mortgage depreciating at inflation rates for 25 years with the odd bit of maintenance here and there. And when they do they will explain that they were right all along. Indeed many of them have already figured out how they were right all along and bought houses, but rather amusingly bought at the peak following the bounceback.

Being a bear means never having to ever confront the fact you took a poor decision.

StevieJ

julieq wrote: »

They will also win the argument about the cost of rental too. Because eventually they will realise that paying 40-60 years of rent compounding with inflation in a supply constrained market is likely to be a lot more expensive than paying a mortgage depreciating at inflation rates for 25 years with the odd bit of maintenance here and there. And when they do they will explain that they were right all along. Indeed many of them have already figured out how they were right all along and bought houses, but rather amusingly bought at the peak following the bounceback.

Being a bear means never having to ever confront the fact you took a poor decision.

But they were superb negotiators leading to a 40% discount