MSE News: House asking prices rise 3.5%

cwcw

ukcarper wrote: »

It’s a fact that Brit compares the two set of figures but as the sets of figures are arrived at in totally different ways it doesn’t make Brits figures fact. I believe best figure is about 8% provided by RICS I think.

Brit's figures are facts, but as you say, it's a flawed comparison.

ukcarper

That’s the problem isn’t it the only sensible way to tell how much a house is overpriced or not is to compare it to sold prices of similar houses. I expect there are houses that are 30% overpriced as are there are houses priced correctly. But to pluck figures out of the air and say that’s how much prices are is ridicules and judging by the number of post asking what a typical reduction is shows people still do not understand.

ukcarper

cwcw wrote: »

Brit's figures are facts, but as you say, it's a flawed comparison.

Not quite the figures Brit uses are facts but he presents his conclusion as fact which they clearly it is not because as you say they are seriously flawed.

Just as Breadlines example doesn’t prove the norm is a few %.

cwcw

ukcarper wrote: »

Not quite the figures Brit uses are facts but he presents his conclusion as fact which they clearly it is not because as you say they are seriously flawed.

Just as Breadlines example doesn’t prove the norm is a few %.

Yes I think we're saying the same thing. The facts are the Rightmove index tends to be around 30%+ above the others, and that difference is fact. The validity of any comparison is flawed, however; a point ironically missed by both Breadlinebetty and Brit himself.

DRP

ukcarper wrote: »

That’s the problem isn’t it the only sensible way to tell how much a house is overpriced or not is to compare it to sold prices of similar houses. I expect there are houses that are 30% overpriced as are there are houses priced correctly. But to pluck figures out of the air and say that’s how much prices are is ridicules and judging by the number of post asking what a typical reduction is shows people still do not understand.

I totally agree that if a house is marketed above the average for the market/type/condition and doesn't sell, then it is overpriced.

But, if the same house is marketed above the average for the market/type/condition and does sell, then what does that make it ? :A overpriced, but lucky!?

I guess I am saying that the asking price, the sold price and 'market conditions' are only the tip of the iceberg when trying to analyse what lies behind an unpredictable, illogical and complex transaction.

'Average' conceals a multitude of situations and really, there is no such thing as an representative house, vendor or transaction.

ukcarper

DRP wrote: »

I totally agree that if a house is marketed above the average for the market/type/condition and doesn't sell, then it is overpriced.

But, if the same house is marketed above the average for the market/type/condition and does sell, then what does that make it ? :A overpriced, but lucky!?

I guess I am saying that the asking price, the sold price and 'market conditions' are only the tip of the iceberg when trying to analyse what lies behind an unpredictable, illogical and complex transaction.

'Average' conceals a multitude of situations and really, there is no such thing as an representative house, vendor or transaction.

I agree comparing sold prices is only a starting point and two seemingly identical houses can be very different.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

gadgetmind wrote: »

Well, quite.

As selling prices have plummeted, asking prices have mostly sailed on without seeming to notice.

Now -
http://www.retirementinvestingtoday.com/2012/08/the-greater-fool-uk-house-price-index.html

Read the comment section of that blog post, or this months update where the author has change the title away from greater fool index, to find out why you and brit are wrong on this topic.