Average Rent soars to £876, up 2% in 3 months...

Percy1983

Is Oldham not a part of the national picture?

You never seem to both about Hamish posts about rises around him.

So its only discuss the average (if increasing) and areas which are increasing?

Rinoa

Percy1983 wrote: »

Is Oldham not a part of the national picture?

You never seem to both about Hamish posts about rises around him.

So its only discuss the average (if increasing) and areas which are increasing?

Hamish has never attempted to devalue the importance of national average prices. We all come from different areas. If, when debating house prices, every poster makes a counter argument that their own street, village, town is different to the national average, then debate soon becomes pointless.

ukcarper

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

No, the 13% figure is the Nationwide national house price rise since feb 2009.

Fair enough but that’s as bad as the bears comparing everything with 1995.

geneer

geneer wrote: »

Yes Hamish. You strangely elected to use the phrase"on either a quarterly or annual basis". Therefore ignoring a number of regions which have shown falls on either a quarterly or annual basis.


Hey, did you notice that rents are now in fact cheaper than they were in March 2008.
Context baby. Context.

And "!!!!!!" he's gone. :T

geneer

Rinoa wrote: »

Hamish has never attempted to devalue the importance of national average prices. We all come from different areas. If, when debating house prices, every poster makes a counter argument that their own street, village, town is different to the national average, then debate soon becomes pointless.

What Hamish, yourself, and numerous others try to do on a regular basis is infer that the national average is more meaningful and all encompassing than it actually is.

It patently is not. This has been pointed out on numerous occasions. So I will say it again....I can only conclude that by insisting on making such statements, you are deliberately setting out to misinterperet and mislead.

heathcote123

geneer wrote: »

What Hamish, yourself, and numerous others try to do on a regular basis is infer that the national average is more meaningful and all encompassing than it actually is.

It patently is not. This has been pointed out on numerous occasions. So I will say it again....I can only conclude that by insisting on making such statements, you are deliberately setting out to misinterperet and mislead.

Wasn't someone trying to imply renters spend only 600 a month recently...

Rinoa

geneer wrote: »

What Hamish, yourself, and numerous others try to do on a regular basis is infer that the national average is more meaningful and all encompassing than it actually is.

It patently is not. This has been pointed out on numerous occasions. So I will say it again....I can only conclude that by insisting on making such statements, you are deliberately setting out to misinterperet and mislead.

Nice try, but we know why you don't like the national averages. It's because they say what you don't want to hear i.e. prices stabilising. You'd rather hide behind individual towns and geographical areas where you'll always be able to fudge the issue and find the odd exception to the rule.

geneer

Rinoa wrote: »

Nice try, but we know why you don't like the national averages. It's because they say what you don't want to hear i.e. prices stabilising. You'd rather hide behind individual towns and geographical areas where you'll always be able to fudge the issue and find the odd exception to the rule.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:It was more than a nice Try Columbo. I appear to have knocked it out of the park. Because here you are trying to contradict my point by doing exactly what I said you were doing.

Exquisite.

geneer

heathcote123 wrote: »

Wasn't someone trying to imply renters spend only 600 a month recently...

Actually Fubra I was implying that the current spike can't really be retrospectively enacted throughout history by wishful thinking.


If course if we take Columbo's advice to heart (though he inexplicably has decided to ignore it at a crucial moment) we would be aware that the national average is essentially meaningless to lots of people.

Which is why if we look at Hamishes source, we see that average rents are between 560 and 662 across a significant proportion of the country.

Context and analysis fubs.
Say it with me.

Rinoa

geneer wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:It was more than a nice Try Columbo. I appear to have knocked it out of the park. Because here you are trying to contradict my point by doing exactly what I said you were doing.

Exquisite.

There you go again. Fudging the issue just as I said you would.