House prices, £247 or £170

gazzabboi

So to be clear then, the £170k figure means nothing. £247 is the actual average.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

gazzabboi wrote: »

So to be clear then, the £170k figure means nothing. £247 is the actual average.

Not exactly.

170K is, give or take, the average national price of a "typical" house.

Usually considered to be a 3 bed terrace/semi.

250K is, give or take, the "average" mean (add up all the prices and divide by number of houses) price of all houses. The median will be lower, but not as low as 170K.

They're both correct, just measuring different things.

To confuse things further, the average price of an FTB house is more like 130K.

And the average price of newbuilds is higher than the average price of existing houses.

They all measure different things.

It might be easier to know what the question, or required information, is, rather than trying to guess the answer?

TruckerT

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Not exactly.

170K is, give or take, the average national price of a "typical" house.

Usually considered to be a 3 bed terrace/semi.

250K is, give or take, the "average" mean (add up all the prices and divide by number of houses) price of all houses.

They're both correct, just measuring different things.

To confuse things further, the average price of an FTB house is more like 130K.

And the average price of newbuilds is higher than the average price of existing houses.

They all measure different things.

It might be easier to know what the question, or required information, is, rather than trying to guess the answer?

But it all boils down to a 'headline' figure of £247k, and the media just love headlines (Annie and Ant have recently had a discussion on here about headlines).

In recent years, the headline figure has always been around £165k.

It's all just bollox, innit...

TruckerT

Loughton_Monkey

Annie_Nameless wrote: »

.....I'm not sure what Hamish seriously wants to discuss. Is it statistical theory, or is it actual house prices?

A bit rich isn't it?

gazzabboi steps in with a query. Hamish steps in with a most rational and correct answer. What's wrong with that? Just because he's Scottish doesn't mean we should abuse him.

Loughton_Monkey

chucknorris wrote: »

I think you are correct, I think the mix is usually one part gin to two parts tonic. But obviously seasoned drinkers like yourself and I are free to adjust this mix.

Indeed. I am much more 50:50. I am economising and tonic is so expensive these days......

TruckerT

It would be interesting to know whether we were supposed to heartened by the figure of £247k, or dis-heartened. Either result would probably lead to an increase in gin consumption, and I wonder if the Gordon's people had been invited to sponsor today's headline.

TruckerT