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
Most property types in most areas of aberdeen falling YOY.
Comments
-
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »I beg to differ.
Those figures have gone a bit silent eh.
Looks like you're having to do all the talking. :rotfl:0 -
Those figures have gone a bit silent eh.
Looks like you're having to do all the talking. :rotfl:
The figures talk for themselves and your posturing to try and deflect to a small subset without considering the context or methodology speaks volumes.
Have a good day geneer.:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »The figures talk for themselves and your posturing to try and deflect to a small subset without considering the context or methodology speaks volumes.
:rotfl:Not really accurate are you Light.
Context: YOY comparison of overall averages and break down of property types.
Methodology: ROS. Averages.
Figures:
Aberdeen City Average Price +0.1%.
Aberdeen City Detatched -10.3%.
Aberdeen City Semi-Detatched -4.4%.
Aberdeen City Flats -1.6%.
Aberdeen City Terraced. +3.7%.
Analysis. Whilst overall averages may be marginally up YOY, most property types show YOY falls.
With detatched and semi-detatched being fairly significant falls. (between 10 and 15% in real terms no less).
It would therefore be innacurate (and misleading) to characterise the figures as demonstrative of stagnation, when its quite clear that, on closer inspection, they are not.IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Have a good day geneer.
Having a pretty good week actually.
Same to you light.0 -
:rotfl:Not really accurate are you Light.
Context: YOY comparison of overall averages and break down of property types.
Methodology: ROS. Averages.
Figures:
Aberdeen City Average Price +0.1%.
Aberdeen City Detatched -10.3%.
Aberdeen City Semi-Detatched -4.4%.
Aberdeen City Flats -1.6%.
Aberdeen City Terraced. +3.7%.
Analysis. Whilst overall averages may be marginally up YOY, most property types show YOY falls.
With detatched and semi-detatched being fairly significant falls. (between 10 and 15% in real terms no less).
It would therefore be innacurate (and misleading) to characterise the figures as demonstrative of stagnation, when its quite clear that, on closer inspection, they are not.
Having a pretty good week actually.
Same to you light.
dear oh dear oh dear.
Still choosing to ignore the methodology I see.
For those wishing to consider a deeper analysis and cotext rather than the headline chosen figures geneer has provided, here is the previous quarterly report.
http://www.ros.gov.uk/pdfs/ros_statistical_report_apr-jun2011.pdf
Aberdeen City Average Price +0.1%.
Aberdeen City Detatched -10.3%.
Aberdeen City Semi-Detatched -4.4%.
Aberdeen City Flats -1.6%.
Aberdeen City Terraced. +3.7%.
compare that in the Q2 release
Aberdeen City Average Price +3.4%.
Aberdeen City Detatched +10.0%.
Aberdeen City Semi-Detatched -3.1%.
Aberdeen City Flats +4.2%.
Aberdeen City Terraced. -1.1%.
Nobody crowed about the Q2 figures as most realise the methodology does not mix adjust or use repeat sales regressions methods.
Therefore the figures utilised are simple the average of the properties sold in that period, hence can suffer from variation because of that methodology.
Some may choose to ignore that methodology, most people will embrace the understanding to consider the figures in context
I've shown before the broadline average figues.
Maybe showing the breakdown will help.
When I have a moment.
:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »dear oh dear oh dear.
Still choosing to ignore the methodology I see.
For those wishing to consider a deeper analysis and cotext rather than the headline chosen figures geneer has provided, here is the previous quarterly report.
http://www.ros.gov.uk/pdfs/ros_statistical_report_apr-jun2011.pdf
Aberdeen City Average Price +0.1%.
Aberdeen City Detatched -10.3%.
Aberdeen City Semi-Detatched -4.4%.
Aberdeen City Flats -1.6%.
Aberdeen City Terraced. +3.7%.
compare that in the Q2 release
Aberdeen City Average Price +3.4%.
Aberdeen City Detatched +10.0%.
Aberdeen City Semi-Detatched -3.1%.
Aberdeen City Flats +4.2%.
Aberdeen City Terraced. -1.1%.
Thats nice light.
Of course by "deeper analysis and cotext(Sic)" you mean your chosen alternative narrative.
Your fighting against a case that only you have fabricated my friend. I can only guess this is because you really don't like the Q3 figures put forward.
As to the same light, what do you say light? Stick or twist.
When the market stabilises, where will they be. Spike or trough?IveSeenTheLight wrote: »
Nobody crowed about the Q2 figures as most realise the methodology does not mix adjust or use repeat sales regressions methods.
Sorry, you're claiming no ones been crowing about the transitory price spikes? No ones been frothing about "new peaks". :rotfl:
You're not being very honest are you light.IveSeenTheLight wrote: »
Therefore the figures utilised are simple the average of the properties sold in that period, hence can suffer from variation because of that methodology.
Some may choose to ignore that methodology, most people will embrace the understanding to consider the figures in context
I've shown before the broadline average figues.
The "broadline averages" I've demonstrated are essentially meaningless. Its right there in my OP.
The "broadline averages" you yourself have been forced to abmit are meaningless.
Yeah, thanks for posting those on the many many times you've shown them before.IveSeenTheLight wrote: »
Maybe showing the breakdown will help.
I dare say. But thanks anyway for, yet again, posting a chart of those meaningless "broadline averages".0 -
Sorry, you're claiming no ones been crowing about the transitory price spikes? No ones been frothing about "new peaks". :rotfl:
You're not being very honest are you light.
Care to show the link to the Q2 peack thread?I dare say. But thanks anyway for, yet again, posting a chart of those meaningless "broadline averages".
The broadline data does paint a picture and can be useful if analysed and taken in context.
Give me a few days till I have time to compile the "broken down" data.
Hopefully then your dropped the clutched straws surrounding the Q3 data.:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Care to show the link to the Q2 peack thread?
Yawn. Full pump action petantry mode engaged it seems.
I didn't specifically say Q2 "new peak" thread.
I said "new peaks". Generally.IveSeenTheLight wrote: »The broadline data does paint a picture and can be useful if analysed and taken in context.
Give me a few days till I have time to compile the "broken down" data.
Hopefully then your dropped the clutched straws surrounding the Q3 data.
:rotfl:What clutched straws light? I merely presented the data.
I'll say it again. You're the only one compelled to construct and discuss an alternative narrative.0 -
Yawn. Full pump action petantry mode engaged it seems.
I didn't specifically say Q2 "new peak" thread.
I said "new peaks". Generally.
:rotfl:What clutched straws light? I merely presented the data.
I'll say it again. You're the only one compelled to construct and discuss an alternative narrative.
Context and analysis. Not liking it so much, eh?0 -
Context and analysis. Not liking it so much, eh?
Not sure about that Rob.
I am in fact quite tickled by the fact that a number of my often repeated claims about these high level averages have yet again been demonstrated as correct.
I'm also enjoying the fact that light is so compelled rail againts the figures, despite his protests that they don't mean much.
Its also quite humerous that the YOY figures are distinctly negative for a number of house types, as Hamish McTavish has always maintained that YOY is his prefered measure.
I'm glad you asked.
And I thank you for your another considered, thoughtful and intelligent contribution to ongoing discussions.0 -
Yawn. Full pump action petantry mode engaged it seems.
I didn't specifically say Q2 "new peak" thread.
I said "new peaks". Generally.
What this means is?
[geneer defence]
Nobody claimed that Q2 was a "new peak".
Nobody boasted about it.
I know, I'll make a general reference that cannot be tied down.
[/geneer defence]
Hmmm, the latest peak (just so happens that it's Q2 and the below graph shows it's the highest peak) has not been raised.
So your referring to lower peaks (generally)
Your obviously trying deperately to move this onto a conversation / discussion you've had with other posters.
P.S. there have always been seasonal trends, even if those trends in the HPI years resulted in a lower rate of increase :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
- 354.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards