MW: Britain's housing market is an unexploded economic bomb

Pimperne1

geneer wrote: »

Because in 2006 they predicted house prices would crash in 2008. :rotfl:

As opposed to,say, predicting they would land softly.

They did better than that, they predicted the crash as early as 2004.

abaxas

Pimperne1 wrote: »

They did better than that, they predicted the crash as early as 2004.

Location, location, location.

Lots of areas have seen no 'crash', when others are more crashy then a crashy thing crashing into a crash (eg Newcastle town centre.)

If 30% lower aint a crash, !!!!!! is

LisbonLaura

Pimperne1 wrote: »

They did better than that, they predicted the crash as early as 2004.

Thus interest rates were lowered further to keep the madness going.
If they had not been lowered you would probably not have bought your later properties?

geneer

Pimperne1 wrote: »

They did better than that, they predicted the crash as early as 2004.

Around the same time the bulls were predicting a soft landing as I recall.

Pimperne1

geneer wrote: »

Around the same time the bulls were predicting a soft landing as I recall.

I don't think they would be "bulls" then.

geneer

Pimperne1 wrote: »

I don't think they would be "bulls" then.

You would be mistaken.
Yeah, Nationwide, Halifax, Columbo (Rinoa). All well know bears.

You would have thunk it. :rotfl:

geneer

Pimperne1 wrote: »

2001-04 house prices rose
2004 bulls predicted soft landing
2004 prices rose 10%
2005 bulls predicted soft landing
2005 prices rose 4%
2006 bulls predicted soft landing
2006 prices rose 8%
2007 bulls predicted soft landing
2007 prices rose 5%
2008 bulls predicted soft landing
2008 house prices dropped by 15%
2009 bulls inexplicably keep predicting soft landing.
2009 prices rose 3%
2010 bulls rely on semantic masturbation to stay in the game
2010 prices fell by 1%
2011 Pimp has nervous breakdown

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Pimperne1

geneer wrote: »

You would be mistaken.
Yeah, Nationwide, Halifax, Columbo (Rinoa). All well know bears.

You would have thunk it. :rotfl:

Nationwide predicted a 9% rise in 2004:

http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi/2004_Forecast.htm

That would have meant house prices climbing from £140,225 to £152,845 (but they were wrong, house prices only rose to £152,444).

So whilst I wouldn't describe a Building Society as being a "bull" I would say that their prediction was bullish. One thing it certainly wasn't, however, was a prediction of a "soft landing".

Pimperne1

Halifax predicted a rise of 8% at the beginning of 2004 and then doubled that forecast to 16% half way through the year:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2888608/Halifax-doubles-forecast-on-house-price-inflation.html

So whilst I wouldn't describe a Building Society as being a "bull", I would say that their prediction was bullish. One thing it certainly wasn't, however, was a prediction of a "soft landing".

Pimperne1

Columbo (Rinoa) seems to have joined the Housepricecrash website in Feb 2006 and Singing Pig in Oct 2005. Do you have an earlier link so that I can see whether all three of your statements were up to your usual standard of proof? What doesn't seem to be in doubt though is that you joined HPC in Dec 2005 expecting a crash and house prices in Edinburgh have gone up £50k since Jan 06.

Look at "Edinburgh-Monthly" tab - its less noisy.

http://www.espc.com/EspcPageMedia/MarketWatch/ONGOING_MARKET%20WATCH_QUARTERLY.xls