Now this is a Property Bears nightmare

robmatic

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Do you meet the lending criteria though? Many people aren't.

Yes, I'm pretty sure I meet the lending criteria. It seems to be a really good time have a low LTV.

Fella

ess0two wrote: »

You argued the toss about saving rates /deposits / houses being flat etc etc.

As if you were waiting to buy as i read it?

What can I tell ya, you read it wrong. Re-read it & you'll see that at no point did I ever say or imply I was saving for a house.

Fella

robmatic wrote: »

My mortgage deal ends this summer so I had a quick look this morning at rates... crikey. I hadn't realised how cheap they were now. Looks like I'll be fixing for 5 years with no fee for a rate of less than 3% per year and will be paying off my mortgage in super quick time.

I don't understand why more people aren't looking to do this personally (fix low for 5 years). Choice of mortgage is always a gamble but this looks an exceptionally good one to me. Also a good opportunity to shorten whatever the term on your mortgage, why renew for 25 years or summat if you can easily afford the repayment on a much shorter term. I hate all debt though, including mortgages, so am a firm believer in paying them off asap (not a universal view, some people like to get funky with debt versus investments but whilst that's true in theory I think the psychological aspect of no mortgage outweighs it.)

Thrugelmir

robmatic wrote: »

Yes, I'm pretty sure I meet the lending criteria. It seems to be a really good time have a low LTV.

LTV is relative. £200k of one million is only 20%.

Still requires income to service £200k.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

To be expected, and really just a continuation of current policy.

Although hopefully he'll be a bit less conservative than King, and increase liquidity support through more direct means.

Apart from, after a meeting with George Osborne, Mark Carney has been told his expectations are unrealistic.

Apparently, many were concerned about the prospect of further dampening household spending through higher inflation.

The chancellor, who met Mark Carney, the BoE governor designate, for a drink on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday night, is worried that Mr Carney accidentally set up unrealistic expectations of a revolution in monetary policy in a December speech. The chancellor still wants the new BoE governor to be more active in ending economic stagnation, but does not believe that the bank needs to target nominal gross domestic product to ensure such a change. Aides to the chancellor say he thinks a move to make the inflation target more flexible is likely to be sufficient, even if that might require a change in the annual remit given to the BoE.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Apart from, after a meeting with George Osborne, Mark Carney has been told his expectations are unrealistic.

Has he?

Have a read of what you quoted. A commentator says that Carney met with Osborne for a couple of drinks; where does it say that he's been told his expectations are unrealistic?

'Aides to the Chancellor' say that a more flexible approach to inflation is sufficient rather than targeting nominal GDP (which other commentators reckon is Carney's expectation).

A lesson in the spin and BS of commentators?

It's the BoE, whatever happens will be conservative and Carney's approach will, apart from subtle differences, be pretty much the same as King's.

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Has he?

Have a read of what you quoted.

Yes - it's in the text I quoted.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Yes - it's in the text I quoted.

No it's not.

The text is this....

The chancellor is worried that Mr Carney accidentally set up unrealistic expectations of a revolution in monetary policy in a December speech. The chancellor still wants the new BoE governor to be more active in ending economic stagnation, but does not believe that the bank needs to target nominal gross domestic product to ensure such a change. Aides to the chancellor say he thinks a move to make the inflation target more flexible is likely to be sufficient, even if that might require a change in the annual remit given to the BoE.

but they've added a bit in commas...

The chancellor, who met Mark Carney, the BoE governor designate, for a drink on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday night, is worried that Mr Carney accidentally set up unrealistic expectations of a revolution in monetary policy in a December speech. The chancellor still wants the new BoE governor to be more active in ending economic stagnation, but does not believe that the bank needs to target nominal gross domestic product to ensure such a change. Aides to the chancellor say he thinks a move to make the inflation target more flexible is likely to be sufficient, even if that might require a change in the annual remit given to the BoE.

So we've gone from a commentators opinion on the Chancellor's thought process; added in a snippet about Carney and Osborne meeting for a couple of drinks and arrived at 'Carney is told by Osborne that his expectations are unrealistic.

Fair enough I'm being a pedant but what you think is in the text is based on what you want to be there. It's quite a skilled use of English - combine an opinion (what the Chancellor thinks) with a fact (they were in the same room) to assert that the said opinion was discussed over nibbles.

Did anyone hear this discussion? Sounds a little indiscreet.