Risk

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I can't believe you have not read one of the many posts discussing this before.

Indeed I have. With more to come. As the successful few bat on behalf of their financially illiterate colleagues. Easy to talk about I. What's more difficult to comprehend is the we . As its the we that will determine the future direction of travel not I.

dryhat

As I said I'm not here to argue about whose investment is the best.

But what I do know is the majority of recent BTLers are unable to participate in any market which involves using your own money.

Without HPI and subsequent borrowing of more money most are unable to participate in any form of investing.
Houses happen to be something that you can borrow against and leverage up in order to particpate in; which to them makes it the only game in town.


No "equity" = no money.

This is why they want prices to rise.

100% fact and guaranteed.

chucknorris

Joeskeppi wrote: »

You spend a lot of wasted typing arguing with sockies and people so ridiculed with wrongness they need an extra account.

Yep I now suspect it is nearlynew too.

IveSeenTheLight

Joeskeppi wrote: »

You spend a lot of wasted typing [strike]arguing [/strike] debating with sockies and people so ridiculed with wrongness they need an extra account.

Well........
What else is there to do?
If the sockie accounts were wiped out, we'd maybe have more clarity and have more disparity, however the current relies upon pointing out the truth in case there are new visitors to this forum who may be conned by the sockies.

IveSeenTheLight

dryhat wrote: »

These recent BTL people go on about yield being the driving force of BTL.
The reason they go on about yield is because of lack of HPI.

Yet when you point out something providing a better yield than BTL for less hassle they dismiss it.

The reason?
They do not have any money to participate.

Without borrowing, they have no money.

Go on then, maybe you could answer the question Graham is reluctant to do so?

Originally Posted by IveSeenTheLight
What investment would you recommend in the current market that provides a return with a reduced risk basis?

dryhat

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Go on then, maybe you could answer the question Graham is reluctant to do so?

I'm not here to give investment advice.

My recent posts have been in reponse to a query asking about where I was investing some of my money.

You can carry on doing whatever.

I've done the property thing for years and have made my money.
I'm now semi-retired and I'm just trying a few different and new things.

One of those is lending to small businesses that can't get funding from banks for whatever reason.

I'm doing my bit for british business and making a few quid in income.

crash123

chucknorris wrote: »

I didn't miss your 'average' but I think you are assuming a lot there, unless of course you have spent a lot of time surveying residential property investors. Do you really think that you are qualified to comment on the 'average' residential property investor? I'm a chartered surveyor and have been an investor for almost 22 years but tbh I don't feel qualified enough to express an opinion as to the financial position of the 'average' investor.

chucknorris wrote: »

You don't have to be qualified to expres an opinion, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but you were dressing it up as fact, which it isn't.

As Purch says above, opinions are not facts (something I wish some of my dissertation students could get their head around).

EDIT: What really surprises me is that if you have been involved in investment property for years you don't realize that on average over the years it easily beats a 7% return. I accept in the relatively short timeframe of a downturn it will not, but property is not a short term investment.

Are you a chartered surveyor or a teacher?
Can you answer my question about rights of way. You should know all about these and restrictive covenants.

chucknorris

crash123 wrote: »

Are you a chartered surveyor or a teacher?

Why does it have to be 'or' and not both?

I am a chartered quantity surveyor by profession and now work as a university lecturer teaching quantity surveying undergraduates (to be honest I thought that would have been quite obvious).

EDIT: Re your 7.28 pm edit, You need to speak to a general practice surveyor (not a quantity surveyor about your query)

crash123

chucknorris wrote: »

Why does it have to be 'or' and not both?

I am a chartered quantity surveyor by profession and now work as a university lecturer teaching quantity surveying undergraduates (to be honest I thought that would have been quite obvious).

Can you answer my question about rights of way. You should know all about these and restrictive covenants.
I am very interested in this subject.

chucknorris

crash123 wrote: »

Can you answer my question about rights of way. You should know all about these and restrictive covenants.
I am very interested in this subject.

See above (the edit) a quantity surveyor's area of expertise is finance and contracts, you need to speak to a general practice surveyor.