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!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
We're aware that some users are currently experiencing errors on the Forum. Our tech team is working to resolve the issue. Thanks for your patience.
Aberdeen. ASPC Q3 2011. Most properties in most areas falling.
Comments
-
The facts and the graphs I've presented speak for themselves.
I'm not interested in your attempts now to deflect of tangent.IveSeenTheLight wrote: »reference your bold summation
Can we? Let's look at the data: -
Aberdeen City Transaction Levels (Jul-Sep 11) - 1343
Aberdeen City Transaction Levels (Apr-Jun 11) - 1041
Up 29.0% in the quarter
Aberdeen City Resedential Value Sales (Jul-Sep 11) - £255238,605
Aberdeen City Resedential Value Sales (Apr-Jun 11) - £190,225,963
Up 34.2%
Aberdeen City Detached Average (Jul-Sep 11) - £335,384
Aberdeen City Detached Average (Apr-Jun 11) - £345,277
Down 2.9%
Aberdeen City Detached sales (Jul-Sep 11) - 153
Aberdeen City Detached sales (Apr-Jun 11) - 104
Up 47.1%
Aberdeen City Semi-Detached Average (Jul-Sep 11) - £227,157
Aberdeen City Semi-Detached Average (Apr-Jun 11) - £229,485
Down 1.0%
Aberdeen City Semi-Detached sales (Jul-Sep 11) - 195
Aberdeen City Semi-Detached sales (Apr-Jun 11) - 135
Up 44.4%
Aberdeen City Terraced Average (Jul-Sep 11) - £187,765
Aberdeen City Terraced Average (Apr-Jun 11) - £174,983
Up 7.3%
Aberdeen City Terraced sales (Jul-Sep 11) - 370
Aberdeen City Terraced sales (Apr-Jun 11) - 311
Up 19.0%
Aberdeen City Flats Average (Jul-Sep 11) - £142,732
Aberdeen City Flats Average (Apr-Jun 11) - £138,210
Up 3.3%
Aberdeen City Flats sales (Jul-Sep 11) - 625
Aberdeen City Flats sales (Apr-Jun 11) - 491
Up 27.3%
Actually, the data shows that : -
153 Detached fell on average £9,893
195 Semi detached fell on average £2,328
348 Aberdeen City Properties fell on average £5,653
370 Terraced rose on average £12,782
625 Flats rose on average £4,522
995 Aberdeen City Properties rose on average £7,593
Whilst we cannot implicitly define that most properties in most area rose, the data certainly point to that as opposed to the OP's blanket statement:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
The figures of course speak for themselves.
0 -
The figures of course speak for themselves.
Indeed, and your absolute desperation to use the latest QoQ results to try and gain some mythical points that the area has decreased £13k in the quarter does not consider that the same index rose £17k from Q1 to Q2.
I don't recall anyone proclaiming that the Q2 was denefiting from rampant HPI, thus why would anyone get their knicker in a twist to the figures returning to above Q1 levels.
Context and analysis geneer.
Context and analysis:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
Hiya Light. Thought you were letting the numbers speak for themselves. :rotfl:IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Indeed, and your absolute desperation to use the latest QoQ results to try and gain some mythical points that the area has decreased £13k in the quarter does not consider that the same index rose £17k from Q1 to Q2.
I don't recall anyone proclaiming that the Q2 was denefiting from rampant HPI, thus why would anyone get their knicker in a twist to the figures returning to above Q1 levels.
I never mentioned Q1 to Q2 light. You did.
I simply presented the facts.
But lets see. Massive £17K spike + whopper of a £13K fall.
Or what Light would call, stagnation. :rotfl:
I think not.0 -
I never mentioned Q1 to Q2 light. You did.
I simply presented the facts.
Context and analysis geneer.
Context and analysisBut lets see. Massive £17K spike + whopper of a £13K fall.
Or what Light would call, stagnation. :rotfl:
I think not.
When you consider the impact by the methodology, it's probably yes.
When you look at the wider picture, the latest Q3 results are +0.93% (IIRC) above that 4 3/4 year average.
But your not one to consider the figures and methodology are you.
Have a nice day
:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Context and analysis geneer.
Context and analysis
:rotfl:When we look at ROS YOY figures you want to analyse quarterlies. When we look at quarterlies you want to analyse more long term. But not yoy.
You're quite a wriggler light.
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »When you consider the impact by the methodology
In english please.
What does that even mean.IveSeenTheLight wrote: »it's probably yes.
probably not. "normal seasonal variations". Sorry. no.IveSeenTheLight wrote: »But your not one to consider the figures and methodology are you.
Have a nice day
:rotfl:Rich coming from you Light. You seem to want to consider any methodology other than whats been tabled.
Including some goofy methodology you've made up yourself.IveSeenTheLight wrote: »When you look at the wider picture, the latest Q3 results are +0.93% (IIRC) above that 4 3/4 year average.
When you look at the picture frames and ignore the picture you mean.
:T0 -
-
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »the facts are clear for all to see.
Indeed they are....IveSeenTheLight wrote: »As you have no other input worthy of further discussion on this thread, I bid you a good day.
My original input was quite worthy of discussion actually.
You simply didn't want to discuss it. I think we can all see why :rotfl:
And a good day to you sir.0 -
So why did you post them?My clear and regularly expressed view on this is that the overall averages are heavily skewed by low volumes and two tier markets.
This makes them less than useful in identifying real trends. ...
"A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members." ~ Mahatma Gandhi
Ride hard or stay home :iloveyou:0 -
Indeed they are....
My original input was quite worthy of discussion actually.
You simply didn't want to discuss it. I think we can all see why :rotfl:
And a good day to you sir.
A leopard never changes it's spots.
Despite additional relevant expansive information, you choose to continue to blinker your view.
I've acknowledged Q2 to Q3 is down, I've also explained Q1 to Q2 rose by more.
I've tried to get you to consider the methodology to an extent you accepted, yet you still bash out the headline figures despite the additional information that has been presented.
Your views may be blinkered, but you have not fooled the majority who are able to see past your fogging of the facts.:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards