Halifax November: -0.9% MoM -0.6% QoQ -1.0% YoY

JonnyBravo

DervProf wrote: »

If what this character is saying is true, why the ":(" ? Some people do get some luck, no need to be unhappy about that, unless you are jealous.

Has the word sarcasm been rubbed out in your dictionary?

marlonthemagnificent

A FTSE 100 executive typically received an average of £2.7m in 2010, according to the research by Incomes Data Services, which analysed payouts of salaries, bonuses and long-term incentive plans the last financial year."



err...i never claimed to be on anything like that.....in fact i never said i was anything other than a director

i think you are confusing a director with global chief executive....the two things are a world apart......

i think some people have completely misinterpreted and misunderstood my comment as some fabricated self-aggrandisation....which it was not

Jimmy_31

Sibley wrote: »

There are some pretty decent people posting on this thread.
I'd just like to say. I'm probably coming to the end of my time on these type of forums.


The only reason I ever joined HPC in the first place was because of all the negative stuff they used to post on all the newspaper comments sections. That's where I noticed them. They always used to promote the site and put the web address.

At the time I was thinking of selling my house in UK and moving to Thailand full time. Probably about 5 years ago now roughly.
I remember landing at Heathrow being greeted with the newspaper headlines (in the Express actually.:)) 'House prices to crash'

I thought 'great, that's all I need'

After a few days research I actually thought it was possible to happen. Everything did look in place.

All these HPC people were loving it. Now I have no problem with people making money and if people had sold to rent etc and were on a winner then good luck to them. I would have respected their clever judgment.

However, They were really gloating and laughing at the thought of 'sheeple' which represented people like myself. (Just a normal working bloke with a family) losing their home allowing them to pick up a bargain.

Thread after thread of abuse, p.taking and gloating.
I noticed they had completely taken over newspaper comments sections and were trying to get everyone to buy into their crash theory.

Then it all went wrong for them. The government sent out the message that it would support home owners. Mortgage rates were cut to 0,5% and all the other help.

That really was the end of it. The perfect storm was never going to happen.

I never claimed to be brain of Britain but I said right from the start. MP's and rich people usually have huge property interests. Not only that the banks are locked into the property market.

Maybe because I live in corrupt Thailand. I don't know but I can assure you of one thing. If the people who control the country look like they will lose their dough they move the goalposts so it doesn't happen.

So, the HPC gang and there big plans were thwarted.

Instead of taking their medicine and letting the so called bulls they had been hammering into the ground return the favor they banned them. Pretty cowardly.

The clever bears knew the game was up and bought.
All you have left are the young priced out or people with no means to buy (Geneer) who just want to see people lose their home and be in the same boat as them. The thought of somebody owning a home while they cannot is ruining their lives.

I do agree that there is a type of BTL landlord who would be offensive. I used to work for one. Fly boy car dealer with about 10 hell holes on interest only mortgages. He is the type that would be bankrupt had interest rates not dropped.
I can understand people being angry these types have not suffered and are being supported by savers money.

Then again, you also have hard working people who decided to invest in a BTL property and take care of their tenants.
My own case. I just want to rent my house out and live abroad. Not really hurting anyone. Never had a problem with my tenants who I class as friends.

Most of the stuff I post is to give the nasty bears a jab with a sharp stick. Not really serious.

I know my comments on the Express stories rattle their cages and to be honest I think even Sarah O Grady probably raises a smile.
I think she's got the same idea as I have.

Anyway, there you have it.

.

Did you preorder your wife or did you buy her when you got to thailand ?

IveSeenTheLight

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

.

Did you preorder your wife or did you buy her when you got to thailand ?

Fascinating addition to the thread.
Is it really required?

That said I only went back three ages and none of the posts seem to be on topic.

This board really has dropped in quality.
No wonder it's hidden

geneer

robmatic wrote: »

Don't you think it's a little childish to have to categorise everyone on here as either a 'bull' or a 'bear', using your own special definitions, when many of these people wouldn't do so themselves? Or is it an autistic thing?

Don't you think its a little childish to pretend the "bull/bear" thing doesn't exist.

Besides, your howls of protest would have more credibility if they weren't usually directed at just a couple of bearish posters.

I don't recall you giving Hamish or JulieQ a hard time about it.

geneer

Graham_Devon wrote: »

No having a pop here, but he appears to be getting more attention while on ignore, than he does off it!

:rotfl:You've noticed that have you?

There does tend to be a bit of a repeating pattern.



Chucks latest is text book,

• page after page of intensive argument,
• inevitable descent of discussion into pedantry, ad hominem attacks, diversionary side arguments, mindless unsubstantiated assertion
• fantastic melt down (occasionally chess related),
• mea culpa "I let myself fall to geneers level"
• desperate scrabble for moral high ground
• repeated announcements across multiple threads that "geneer is on ignore" usually incorporating embittered lengthy rambling personal attacks.

Lets not forget the fact that many of those characters were asked to place me on ignore by the forum team (as I was asked to with them) to avoid the risk of being banned in future.

geneer

wotsthat wrote: »

Hey Geneer. All of those posters have you on ignore.

If you can manage a grown up conversation maybe you'll find that more people will engage with you in the future.

If they could manage a grown up conversation they wouldn't have embarassed themselves to such a degree that ranting on about "ignoring" is their last best get out.

:rotfl:I've had no lack of people engaging me Wotsthat. Often at length across page after page after page. Funny how with these guys it takes long, obsessive, extended, discussions to learn that they didn't want to be talking to me.

geneer

Dan: wrote: »

Haha Bad move. That expalins a lot. thanks.

STRing in 2007 was a bad move?
Please explain.

robmatic

geneer wrote: »

Don't you think its a little childish to pretend the "bull/bear" thing doesn't exist.

Besides, your howls of protest would have more credibility if they weren't usually directed at just a couple of bearish posters.

I don't recall you giving Hamish or JulieQ a hard time about it.

I will readily admit (and did so earlier, but typically you need to construct a straw man argument about it) that you and a handful of other posters buy into the bull/bear thing. It quite clearly exists as a minor, albeit vocal, aspect of the board. I just think that it's more than a little weird and somewhat sad that you can't participate in any discussion without using these bizzarely defined categories that don't exist in real world discourse.

I don't necessarily agree with Hamish or JulieQ's viewpoints but they both post without your childish argumentative style, so why would I give them a hard time about it?

geneer

robmatic wrote: »

I will readily admit (and did so earlier, but typically you need to construct a straw man argument about it) that you and a handful of other posters buy into the bull/bear thing. It quite clearly exists as a minor, albeit vocal, aspect of the board. I just think that it's more than a little weird and somewhat sad that you can't participate in any discussion without using these bizzarely defined categories that don't exist in real world discourse.

You are of course quite wrong. Your laughable attempt to ignore the bear/bull divide is more geared around your compulsion to deliver a cheap shot than any semblance of reality.

And newsflash, this isn't the real world. We're not chatting at a bus stop. This is a microcosm. I have to laugh at the implication that your a cooler more suave type of obsessive interner forum poster. :rotfl:

robmatic wrote: »

I don't necessarily agree with Hamish or JulieQ's viewpoints but they both post without your childish argumentative style, so why would I give them a hard time about it?

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:Another non-bull comes displays a obvious bullish bias. Credibility fading.

Though of course your much demonstrated propensity for stalking me across the forum delivering witless one liners kinda ended your argument before it started.