Halifax -0.5% MoM -2.3% YoY

Rinoa

geneer wrote: »

This from Columbo.
I think I may have burst something.

As always the bulls operate with the self awareness of a garden shed and zero notion of irony.
The jaw dropping hypocricy is exquisite.

We still await your counter argument to justify renting whilst Edinburgh prices doubled. :rotfl:

geneer

Rinoa wrote: »

We still await your counter argument to justify renting whilst Edinburgh prices doubled. :rotfl:

Oh Rinoa. An off topic attack on an individual rather than dealing with the discussion in hand.

With this you are really spoiling us.

Rinoa

geneer wrote: »

Oh Rinoa. An off topic attack on an individual rather than dealing with the discussion in hand.

With this you are really spoiling us.

90% of your posts include personal attacks.

Did you mention hypocricy a couple of posts back.

geneer

Rinoa wrote: »

90% of your posts include personal attacks.

Did you mention hypocricy a couple of posts back.

Oh, and another personal attack from Rinoa.
This isn't looking good for the old feller.

robmatic

geneer wrote: »

Oh Rinoa. An off topic attack on an individual rather than dealing with the discussion in hand.

With this you are really spoiling us.

It's the last refuge of the embittered, or something like that.

geneer wrote: »

Could be worse.
Instead of buying 1/2 a house in 2007, he could have bought two flats.

geneer wrote: »

Pretty much what you were saying when you bough in 2007 wasn't it.

Yes, I may mock.

geneer wrote: »

Don't you mean sell your half house and move into a fully rented house?

geneer wrote: »

Just your job you need to worry about then.

geneer wrote: »

Don't be too hard on Rinoa. He's retired.
He has his lucid days and his bad days.

geneer wrote: »

Wotsits is hugely tedious. He's quite entertaining though. Once you suss him out he drops the attempts at pedantry and strawmen and simply follows you around making inane irrelevant comments.
He's like a fortune cookie. You never know what kind of uninteresting statement he's going to make next.
He certainly fails to keep me on my toes thats for sure.

geneer wrote: »

Oh dear. Someones hacked his parents internet password again.

geneer

robmatic wrote: »

It's the last refuge of the embittered, or something like that.

:rotfl:Thanks rob. I am flattered.

But you don't appear to know the definition of "hypocrite".
I can't say I've ever claimed not to engage in petty one-up-manship, so that has to rule me out.


As opposed to say, someone who on this very thread makes a spectacularly sanctimoniuos scrabble for the moral high ground despite the fact that he's one of the most obsessive off topic dummy spitters on the forum.

wotsthat

and the 'Geneer sentence randomiser' award goes to..

...oh Geneer again.

(I wish I could get sanctimonious in scrabble)

geneer wrote: »

As opposed to say, someone who on this very thread makes a spectacularly sanctimoniuos scrabble for the moral high ground despite the fact that he's one of the most obsessive off topic dummy spitters on the forum.

joguest

Linton wrote: »

I think you underestimate the complexity...

In normal circumstances most sellers are also buyers, mainly of more expensive houses. So an economic limit on demand also constrains supply. The concept of people choosing to delay selling until prices increase is unrealistic - people cant sell until they can buy. They cant buy until the credit is available for their next house.

For these reasons, an increase in the availability of credit will lead to a quick increase in both demand and supply. But supply is ultimately limited by the total number of houses which cannot move as quickly. Until this constraint is resolved house prices must in general increase.

At the other extreme, even if new demand drops off completely there will always be some supply because of forced sales - death, inability to pay the mortgage and employment. I believe we are close to this situation at the moment.

Thanks for the response. It's true that a contraction in prices leaves some in negative/little equity and unable to move, which has the effect of removing some buyers/sellers from the middle of chains. But those individuals simply cease to exist as far as the market is concerned (there are less buyers, but also less sellers - it's important here to distinguish between the number of sellers and economic supply - they are not the same thing).

I agree with you that if demand drops off completely then the market will become more dominated by forced sellers (as happened in 2008). It was the elasticity of supply in 2008 that led to such a drastic reduction in sales volumes. That elasticity was partly through some people being too indebted to sell (which shouldn't make much of a difference to price though - they're pretty much out of the equation and as equally they can't buy), but predominantly because of the attitude of people in delaying selling their houses in the hope of prices recovering.

I know several people that have delayed selling on such grounds - usually keeping hold of a house after they moved to another area for work. Those people aren't heavily indebted on their houses either - they could easily have afforded to take a hit. And this is before we get on to the investment side of things - BTLs are essentialy discretionary purchases - buying and selling at the right time is surely part of the game (this is where BTLs usually jump in and tell us they're in it for the long term!)

I can remember going to get my hair cut a couple of years ago and the barber telling me how it's a good idea to hold on to (my wife's) property and wait for prices to recover (I'd just moved jobs) - that's how popular the sentiment has been over the last couple of years. So, I'll have to disagree with you about people delaying selling. I know plenty of discretionary delay-sellers (unfortunately including my wife).

joguest

Anyway, getting back to the increasing volumes discussion. Here's what a house price crash looks like (in case anyone should come across one and wonder's what it is). These are house prices in Co. Durham (down almost 30% from peak and coming to an area near you sometime soon):


A couple of observations:

Volumes increased very slowly between 1995 and 2000 despite the fact that prices were falling very slowly. This is what is likely to happen in the wake of a crash. Around 2000, volumes were probably at their long-term mean (10 years after the crash began). Volumes then went up (with prices) during the bubble. At the moment, prices are crashing, but volumes remain quite steady (on a below mean level). I would expect this to continue until prices roughly stagnate, then if it follow the same pattern as last time, with prices very slowly declining whilst volumes slowly increase.

Obviously, if things remain the same in the economy (low wage inflation) then the nominal falls are likely to represent a larger proportion of the real term falls than last time. However, this could all change if we get some serious wage inflation following a decent leg down (assuming we don't go the Japanese way).

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

joguest wrote: »

there are less buyers, but also less sellers.

There's also a difference between discretionary vendors/buyers and needy vendors/buyers.

Jack and Jill have a house. They might fancy moving to another house, or they might not. If getting a mortgage becomes difficult, or expensive, or the choice of houses is not good, or the economic picture is uncertain, they'll just stay put. This reduces both supply and demand in equal measure.

John and Gillian don't have a house, they live with parents, but they're getting married and then a baby is on the way. They NEED a house, either bought or rented.

Pierre and Paulette are being transferred here from overseas for a 5 year contract. They NEED a house, either bought or rented.

Jeremy and Janet are getting divorced, they NEED two houses where before they only had one.

In my opinion, a large percentage of house sales in the last few years before the crash were discretionary. A large percentage of sales today are not.

The only statistic the housing market needs to worry about over anything but the very short term is a simple one.

There are 250,000 to 270,000 additional households created every year. And only around 100,000 houses being built.

If this continues for more than a very few years, the available stock will be zero. And the consequences of that would be uncomfortable for all concerned, sellers, buyers and renters.