UK subprime

StevieJ

Loopgames wrote: »

).

BTL are investments (I agree there) and can be considered as a 'business' but there is no guarantee of retirement income at the end..it all depends how it has been managed through that time (if the owner treats it like a business).

No guarantee with any other business either.

ess0two

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Oh I'm bored of you already Reno. Can't be bothered with jumping through hoops just to discuss what you stated.

Dont take your ball home,thought you'd made killing on xcite energy in the past?

RenovationMan

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Oh I'm bored of you already Reno. Can't be bothered with jumping through hoops just to discuss what you stated.

Yes, or you saw where I was going with this an beat a hasty retreat.

I'll answer in your absence and point out that from what I had read of your posts, you did quite badly and lost quite a large percentage of your money. Expand that to gambling with a pension pot of perhaps £50k or more and you can see why a lot of people would want to do BTL.

RenovationMan

Loopgames wrote: »

Owning shares is not the same as owning a business...theoretically it is a share of a company but public shares are more fluid than that whilst privately owned companies have their owners invest their time and money in the business.

I don't think it is correct to compare shares with a directly owned business which you have complete influence over (to one you haven't).

BTL are investments (I agree there) and can be considered as a 'business' but there is no guarantee of retirement income at the end..it all depends how it has been managed through that time (if the owner treats it like a business).

I was making the point that any business is an investment, whether the investment comes from shareholders or from a sole trader putting his redundancy money into a new startup is immaterial, it's still an investment that pays a return of share dividends or income.

The point I was making about shares is that they don't just pick themselves and a lot of money can be lost if you pick the wrong ones. I'd argue that it takes as large an investment of time to learn to trade successfully as it does to run a BTL. Though usually a property does not lose all of its value like a share can (i.e. Northern Rock, Enron, etc.)

NB: For the record, I don't have any money invested in property other than my home and all of my savings are invested in shares, funds, corporate bonds and gilts. I therefore have no VI in BTL.

Graham_Devon

ess0two wrote: »

Dont take your ball home,thought you'd made killing on xcite energy in the past?

Not me, no.

wotsthat

RenovationMan wrote: »

I'll answer in your absence and point out that from what I had read of your posts, you did quite badly and lost quite a large percentage of your money. Expand that to gambling with a pension pot of perhaps £50k or more and you can see why a lot of people would want to do BTL.

Day trading is effectively gambling without needing to go to a bookies or casino. Your average person considering BTL probably isn't thinking "shall I get a BTL or day trade volatile energy stocks online".

I'd suggest that BTL owners are older people responding to poor savings rates. i.e. realising they need to take more risk to, potentially, make a better return.

So more likely they're in the mindset high income fund or BTL.

Loopgames

RenovationMan wrote: »

Though usually a property does not lose all of its value like a share can (i.e. Northern Rock, Enron, etc.)

The property may not lose all of its value but the investment in a property may do...if you sell in negative equity as an example you not only lose the value of your 'investment' but you also pay more than your original investment (any outstanding debt and associated costs). With shares you just lose your investment and have no more debt on it unless you borrowed the money to begin with. Some may say in this case property is not safer than shares as per your example. But most of the points are agreed thus far.

Thrugelmir

RenovationMan wrote: »

Expand that to gambling with a pension pot of perhaps £50k or more and you can see why a lot of people would want to do BTL.

I prefer having holdings in over 600 companies within a tax efficient wrapper. Solid even if unspectacular. A single BTL isn't even tax efficient and is a pure punt in investment terms.

shortchanged_2

RenovationMan wrote: »

NB: For the record, I don't have any money invested in property other than my home and all of my savings are invested in shares, funds, corporate bonds and gilts. I therefore have no VI in BTL.

Well Renoman you have stated in the past that you are considering going into to BTL and I think you just want reassurances that it will give a good return.

homelessskilledworker

RenovationMan wrote: »

Answer my question and it'll answer yours. How well have you done with your share dealing?



Did I? I think you need to re-read my post.

How comes it's allways you bickering with somone??