House Prices "Heavily Undervalued" says Times article

CLAPTON

the reality is we need to build more houses; if done in sufficient numbers the price will fall

shortchanged_2

CLAPTON wrote: »

the reality is we need to build more houses; if done in sufficient numbers the price will fall

So why don't we build more?

We are told that the demand is there so what have builders got to lose apart from a drop in house prices of course.

Builders just need to change tact and sell bigger volumes with lower margins. Problem solved.

But it won't happen because there are too many people in high places with a vested interest in keeping house prices high.

ukcarper

shortchanged wrote: »

So why don't we build more?

We are told that the demand is there so what have builders got to lose apart from a drop in house prices of course.

Builders just need to change tact and sell bigger volumes with lower margins. Problem solved.

But it won't happen because there are too many people in high places with a vested interest in keeping house prices high.

Are builders margins excessive are the mortgages available for all the new buyers.

CLAPTON

shortchanged wrote: »

So why don't we build more?

We are told that the demand is there so what have builders got to lose apart from a drop in house prices of course.

Builders just need to change tact and sell bigger volumes with lower margins. Problem solved.

But it won't happen because there are too many people in high places with a vested interest in keeping house prices high.

There skills needed to build more houses are readily available and there are plenty of building firms both large and small.

The reasons why we don't build more houses are partly due to the difficult of getting a mortgage with a reasonable LTV, the restrictive planning laws that make land very expensive, the costs that are imposed on new build houses (infrastructure levies and having to subsidise social housing).
The result is that many new build houses are too expensive in relation to the existing stock so potential buyers would rather buy existing stock.

A start has been made with the new HTB system for new properties but often they are still poor value for money.

If the market was allowed to work then plenty of properties large and small could be built.

OffGridLiving

shortchanged wrote: »

So why don't we build more?

Goodness me, how many times has you had this and other questions answered for you to vanish and then ask the same questions all over again on another thread?

I do hope you respond to people who have taken time to answer your question and put a counter argument if you disagree, otherwise you're stuck in an internet equivalent of Groundhog Day.

shortchanged_2

OffGridLiving wrote: »

Goodness me, how many times has you had this and other questions answered for you to vanish and then ask the same questions all over again on another thread?

I do hope you respond to people who have taken time to answer your question and put a counter argument if you disagree, otherwise you're stuck in an internet equivalent of Groundhog Day.

Because there is no genuine reason why builders don't build more.

As everyone is saying there is huge demand there. Therefore you have a market.

Or is the only real reason builders won't build more is because they are afraid prices will drop.

Of course the likes of Hamish will say builders won't build what they can't sell. Well if there's plenty of demand then that means property is overpriced if it isn't selling then but there is of course mortgage rationing as well.

chucky

shortchanged wrote: »

Because there is no genuine reason why builders don't build more.

It's been explained to you too many times the reason why. Are you really in that much denial?!

Trying to explain it to you would mean you running away or getting your online buddies to disrupt the topic of the thread but let's throw one out there for you...

Planning requirements...

OffGridLiving

shortchanged wrote: »

Because there is no genuine reason why builders don't build more.

In your opinion. People have given various reasons for why they think builders can't build more (planning laws, land costs, etc.) but you seem to want to dismiss those reasons out of hand without even trying to formulate a rebuttal.

Instead of just stating "houses are too expensive because I say so" or "builders can build houses cheaply because I say so", why not build a cohent argument to support your case?

I'd start with building an example where you price in the cost of land, labour, materials, advertising, interest on loans and prove that the builders are making large enough margins on house sales that they could drastically cut their sales costs.

If nothing else it might wake you up from this simplistic mindset where things can be done just because you say they can.

CLAPTON

shortchanged wrote: »

Because there is no genuine reason why builders don't build more.

As everyone is saying there is huge demand there. Therefore you have a market.

Or is the only real reason builders won't build more is because they are afraid prices will drop.

Of course the likes of Hamish will say builders won't build what they can't sell. Well if there's plenty of demand then that means property is overpriced if it isn't selling then but there is of course mortgage rationing as well.

If you are correct then you could make a fortune by building houses and just under cutting the big boys and still make an absolute fortune.

Or is there a secret mafi_a that stops a chap like you do that?

shortchanged_2

chucky wrote: »

It's been explained to you too many times the reason why. Are you really in that much denial?!

Trying to explain it to you would mean you running away or getting your online buddies to disrupt the topic of the thread but let's throw one out there for you...

Planning requirements...

So thousands of pieces of undeveloped land WITH planning permission granted and builders just sitting on them.

What's that about then?