We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
My dream house...
Comments
-
Well you got it wrong then didn't you?
I RENT a house in Bangkok sure, but I haven't stayed there for over a month.
I also RENT a really nice condo in Pattaya.
I have just RENTED a room in a 5* hotel in KL for the last 3 weeks.
I OWN a house in Loose Valley Kent UK and also OWN 50% of a house in central Maidstone.
I can't really see anything there to be ashamed of can you?
Not a yuppie by any means but it could be worse.
Your point is?
.
My point is simple. You stated that you live in Loose Valley. You don't. You live in Thailand, which makes you a very interesting psychological case because you're so obsessed with spending your time kidding yourself you are fighting and winning a one man campaign to keep house prices high in the UK.0 -
The boom effected the price of the house during the boom. But that's gone now, so we don't need to worry about it.
The value of that house is the sale price agreed between buyer and seller, so we don't know what that is yet. If that agreed price is £750,000, then we know the exact value of that house - it's £750,000. If it sells for £600,000, then that's the market price. There is no 'overvalued' or 'undervalued', it's worth what a buyer is willing to pay and what the seller is willing to accept. That's all anything is worth.
But we've been through this before Jimmy, and I think you had some problems grasping this concept.
Yes i know the true value of the house is what somebody eventually pays for it so you can stop acting the clever ar5e that you seem to think you are.
I think you know exactly what everyone means when they say overpriced, when i say it i mean it is overpriced because of the massive boom we have been through, if the boom hadnt happened then that house would not have an asking price of 750k and the boom happened because of irresponsible lending by the banks so to me these asking prices we see today are just boom prices so to me they are overpriced.
You talk about worth, people are paying 200k,300k for a 2 bed terrace in certain parts of the country, yes thats the price tag but no 2 bed terrace will ever be worth 200k to me so in my opinion its overpriced.
Im going to carry on using the term overpriced so if you feel the need to correct me then dont bother because you are getting quite boring now.0 -
Yes i know the true value of the house is what somebody eventually pays for it so you can stop acting the clever ar5e that you seem to think you are.
I think you know exactly what everyone means when they say overpriced, when i say it i mean it is overpriced because of the massive boom we have been through, if the boom hadnt happened then that house would not have an asking price of 750k and the boom happened because of irresponsible lending by the banks so to me these asking prices we see today are just boom prices so to me they are overpriced.
You talk about worth, people are paying 200k,300k for a 2 bed terrace in certain parts of the country, yes thats the price tag but no 2 bed terrace will ever be worth 200k to me so in my opinion its overpriced.
Im going to carry on using the term overpriced so if you feel the need to correct me then dont bother because you are getting quite boring now.
Just out of interest when do you think the boom started0 -
The value of that house is the sale price agreed between buyer and seller, so we don't know what that is yet. If that agreed price is £750,000, then we know the exact value of that house - it's £750,000.
I almost agree with that, but you are missing a couple of points.
First, there's the totally bonkers seller who manages to snare the totally bonkers buyer and manages to sell for more than everyone else thinks is the market value.
Second, and this is really the same point generalised, all buyers lie on a spectrum depending on the maximum price they'll pay for the house. It's probably a bell curve, but I don't know for sure because I don't think it's been researched. In other words, there'll be more buyers prepared to pay say £150k, fewer prepared to pay £160k, and a very small number prepared to pay £170k. In my view, the true market value is the mid-point of that spectrum. I don't think that's altered because a particular seller wants a quick sale and sells below the mid-point or another seller holds out for ages for a premium price.
So, I agree that the sale price is a good indicator of the market value, but I do not agree that it totally defines the market value as you seem to think.No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?0 -
You talk about worth, people are paying 200k,300k for a 2 bed terrace in certain parts of the country, yes thats the price tag but no 2 bed terrace will ever be worth 200k to me so in my opinion its overpriced.
Im going to carry on using the term overpriced so if you feel the need to correct me then dont bother because you are getting quite boring now.
I don't think it's worth arguing that current prices are not the market values. They clearly are, as plenty of transactions are taking place at these prices. Your real point, it seems to me, is that we are still in a bubble that has not burst. I agree with you. The trouble is that there is clearly huge political will to keep the bubble inflated, and the government is using savers' money (by keeping interest rates low) and tax money (by paying people's mortgages for them) to do that. I think the government's aim is to keep prices fairly stable and to let inflation reduce prices in real terms.No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?0 -
I almost agree with that, but you are missing a couple of points.
First, there's the totally bonkers seller who manages to snare the totally bonkers buyer and manages to sell for more than everyone else thinks is the market value.
I know exactly where you're coming from, but that doesn't matter does it? Take the famous tulip bubble from the 17th Century. They all knew what a tulip bulb was actually intrinsically 'worth' anything, in terms of what they were. But they came more and more desirable and more and more people wanted them, hence the price going up. A bulb in 1636 would have cost you a few florins, but for the first few months of 1637 a bulb was costing around 150 to 250 florins. Looking back, it's obvious that bulbs could never sustain this price. But what was the value of a bulb in January 1637? It was around 150 to 250 florins. It doesn't matter that the people buying and selling were 'bonkers', that was simply the market price.
So if someone comes along and buys Sibley's house for £1.3 million, then that's what that house is worth at that particular moment. Obviously you could look at average house prices for similar houses in the area and work out that most houses sell for much less, but that doesn't mean that that one data point should be ignored because it seems high.Second, and this is really the same point generalised, all buyers lie on a spectrum depending on the maximum price they'll pay for the house. It's probably a bell curve, but I don't know for sure because I don't think it's been researched. In other words, there'll be more buyers prepared to pay say £150k, fewer prepared to pay £160k, and a very small number prepared to pay £170k. In my view, the true market value is the mid-point of that spectrum. I don't think that's altered because a particular seller wants a quick sale and sells below the mid-point or another seller holds out for ages for a premium price.
There's a simpler way of looking at this, which is that the market sets the market price for an asset. It really is that simple. Obviously the housing market is a difficult example, as it's such a slow moving market, but it's still a market. By all means apply averages, or your own research as to what you perceieve as the 'correct value' for a house. But that's irrelevant really, as the market value is the one agreed between buyer and seller for an asset.
Take Lloyds shares, of which over 100 million sell every day. In fact, 114 million sold today. So how much is a Lloyds share worth? Well, at 8.08am people were willing to pay 54.06p, as that was a price agreed between buyer and seller. An exact same share sold for 54.93p just 40 minutes later. So was Lloyds bank worth 1.6%, or £718m more at 8.48am today than it was at 8.08am? Well, technically, yes. The value of a Lloyds is worth what people are paying for shares, it's just that that value fluctuates every single second. It's the same with the housing market really, just over much longer and with much lower volume. But we tend not to care that much about these fluctations and individual data points, we pick a moment in time (like once a month) and look at the averages to give us trends and overall pictures of what a market is doing.So, I agree that the sale price is a good indicator of the market value, but I do not agree that it totally defines the market value as you seem to think.
They are two different things to me. If the average house price down my street sells for £150k then that gives you an average value for a typical house down that street. So it would be accurate to say that a typical house down my street is worth £150k.
However, let's say I put my house up for sale (and let's say that there's nothing different about my house to all the others) for £150k but four people all love it and start bidding up and it sells for £200, then my house is worth £200k. You can, by all means, theorise that these buyers were all deluded and were idiots for paying so much for a house that is down a street with similar houses selling for £150k and you may well be right. But that doesn't matter. The fact is that something in the market meant that four people bid up the value of my home and deemed it worth £200k. So my house is worth £200k. The average street price is around £150k, so those types of houses could be thought to be worth £150k. The two statements are both valid in my opinion.0 -
also leaded windows...burglary risk not to mention dark and dingy
Doesn't look dark to me, particularly!stream / kent...high risk of flooding, not such a big deal when this was built prior to electricity and modern homes with expensive goods that can be destroyed as they would have just let it all dry out between floods. not so great now.
I really don't think you can look at a pic of a hosue and assume a high flood risk! It's not as if the whole of Kent just floods regularly.the bowing in the roof is not character, it's beams weakened by age i reckon from a time when they had less engineering savvy so instead relied on overengineering things like roof structures. they did however have plenty of mature trees and knowhow to replace when said heavy beams rotted / sagged. these days replacing a 'character' timber is far more costly and specialist.
replacing timbers was always expensive. That's why many timber-framed buildings have such low ceilings. From the Conquest onwards, people moaned about the price / difficulties of getting proper timbers.
However, timbers also settle, and sometimes are bowed without being either rotten or needing replacement. Timber framed houses also settle on clay, where more modern brick houses will need under-pinning.deathwatch and rot. not good.
Possible, not a given. You can and do treat timbers for beetle.lots of pokey rooms that were designed for another era. who has / wants a parlour these days?
2,000 sq feet, and 6 rooms plus bathrooms? that's huge in new build terms, not pokey at all!all in all i'm intrigued to know what is attractive about taking on the responsibility of a home like this and what a person would plan to do in it?
Each to his own. I'd imagine, though, a person would choose to live in it?...much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
I know exactly where you're coming from, but that doesn't matter does it? Take the famous tulip bubble from the 17th Century. They all knew what a tulip bulb was actually intrinsically 'worth' anything, in terms of what they were. But they came more and more desirable and more and more people wanted them, hence the price going up. A bulb in 1636 would have cost you a few florins, but for the first few months of 1637 a bulb was costing around 150 to 250 florins. Looking back, it's obvious that bulbs could never sustain this price. But what was the value of a bulb in January 1637? It was around 150 to 250 florins. It doesn't matter that the people buying and selling were 'bonkers', that was simply the market price.
So if someone comes along and buys Sibley's house for £1.3 million, then that's what that house is worth at that particular moment. Obviously you could look at average house prices for similar houses in the area and work out that most houses sell for much less, but that doesn't mean that that one data point should be ignored because it seems high.
There's a simpler way of looking at this, which is that the market sets the market price for an asset. It really is that simple. Obviously the housing market is a difficult example, as it's such a slow moving market, but it's still a market. By all means apply averages, or your own research as to what you perceieve as the 'correct value' for a house. But that's irrelevant really, as the market value is the one agreed between buyer and seller for an asset.
Take Lloyds shares, of which over 100 million sell every day. In fact, 114 million sold today. So how much is a Lloyds share worth? Well, at 8.08am people were willing to pay 54.06p, as that was a price agreed between buyer and seller. An exact same share sold for 54.93p just 40 minutes later. So was Lloyds bank worth 1.6%, or £718m more at 8.48am today than it was at 8.08am? Well, technically, yes. The value of a Lloyds is worth what people are paying for shares, it's just that that value fluctuates every single second. It's the same with the housing market really, just over much longer and with much lower volume. But we tend not to care that much about these fluctations and individual data points, we pick a moment in time (like once a month) and look at the averages to give us trends and overall pictures of what a market is doing.
They are two different things to me. If the average house price down my street sells for £150k then that gives you an average value for a typical house down that street. So it would be accurate to say that a typical house down my street is worth £150k.
However, let's say I put my house up for sale (and let's say that there's nothing different about my house to all the others) for £150k but four people all love it and start bidding up and it sells for £200, then my house is worth £200k. You can, by all means, theorise that these buyers were all deluded and were idiots for paying so much for a house that is down a street with similar houses selling for £150k and you may well be right. But that doesn't matter. The fact is that something in the market meant that four people bid up the value of my home and deemed it worth £200k. So my house is worth £200k. The average street price is around £150k, so those types of houses could be thought to be worth £150k. The two statements are both valid in my opinion.
I know i have asked you this before but are you sure you are not a teacher.0 -
these are rather nice, too, not far from Sibley's place:
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-18457410.html
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-17480343.html...much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards