BCR approaching 100%

Pete9501

westernpromise wrote: »

Another way of looking at this is as follows. The mortgage would have been £209 a month, but the rent would have been £523 a month. If he had bought in 2002 but paid £523 on the mortgage, i.e. repaid it at the rental level, he’d have cleared it after 7 years and 11 months, which is to say by 2010. He could have owned outright and been housed for nothing these last six years, but has instead made 72 further rent payments and must continue to do so indefinitely.

That really is quite sobering :eek:

Crashy_Time

wotsthat wrote: »

This might suit better...

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-58361270.html

Interestingly, there's a place on the same road with a long sales history

24, Caledonian Road, Edinburgh, Mid EH11 2DF
£121,617 Residential 04 Jun 2015
£111,236 Residential 29 Nov 2007
£105,105 Residential 28 Apr 2004
£73,000 Residential 06 Jun 2003
£71,000 Residential 26 Feb 2003
£72,000 Residential 19 Feb 2003
£76,000 Residential 11 Nov 2002
£36,500 Residential 26 Mar 2002

Can you imagine being someone who sold to rent in 1998?

If it was me I'd at least have a wry smile on my face as I offered financial advice to millionaires and home owners as I paid my landlord north of 6%.

Can you imagine being someone who "bought" in 2015?
Can you imagine being someone who spends every waking moment on here (preaching to about 12 regulars) because they are so insecure about their decisions?


IMO the flat is worth 50k, but lets see what it goes for.

Crashy_Time

Pete9501 wrote: »

That really is quite sobering :eek:

Yep, I would have been housed in Aberdeen while living in Edinburgh. Very sobering.....:rotfl:

Crashy_Time

onlyroz wrote: »

Don't you also need to take into consideration maintenance costs for properties that you own, which wouldn't be payable if you were only renting? E.g. new boiler, carpets, fixing the leaky roof, rewiring etc?

Yes, but let`s just have a laugh as wotsit has to eventually get his cities and rent amounts right before he stops posting his nonsense. In the meantime consider that even if this flat goes for 100k, the 2015 buyer has lost enough to pay rent on my present flat for 4.5 years in one transaction :eek:

Filo25

Crashy_Time wrote: »

Can you imagine being someone who "bought" in 2015?
Can you imagine being someone who spends every waking moment on here (preaching to about 12 regulars) because they are so insecure about their decisions?


IMO the flat is worth 50k, but lets see what it goes for.

To be honest what any of us on here think the property is worth is pretty meaningless, someone thought it was worth that price in the current market conditions, was willing to pay it and had the ability to pay it.

That's pretty much how you decide what something is worth in Economics, not what any of us would like us to be priced at.

Crashy_Time

Filo25 wrote: »

To be honest what any of us on here think the property is worth is pretty meaningless, someone thought it was worth that price in the current market conditions, was willing to pay it and had the ability to pay it.

That's pretty much how you decide what something is worth in Economics, not what any of us would like us to be priced at.

Tell that to the person trying to sell it for 20k less than they paid.

Filo25

Crashy_Time wrote: »

Tell that to the person trying to sell it for 20k less than they paid.

Market conditions change, brown stuff happens.;)

If I was waiting to buy a house at a price that I was certain would never go down in value, I would never buy one, no matter what the circumstances were.

wotsthat

Crashy_Time wrote: »

Can you imagine being someone who "bought" in 2015?
Can you imagine being someone who spends every waking moment on here (preaching to about 12 regulars) because they are so insecure about their decisions?

IMO the flat is worth 50k, but lets see what it goes for.

You'll never buy because you're too scared a property might fall in value and your valuation will never be within a negotiable amount of what a buyer will accept.

It's a smokescreen and why you can't bring yourself to say what you'd buy at - you'd have a panic attack if it ever happened and have to think up new excuses. God knows what went wrong when you were last a homeowner.

westernpromise

onlyroz wrote: »

Don't you also need to take into consideration maintenance costs for properties that you own, which wouldn't be payable if you were only renting? E.g. new boiler, carpets, fixing the leaky roof, rewiring etc?

Perhaps, but these tend to be trivial and substantially balanced by costs to renters that owners don't face (can't let out a spare room, more frequrnt moving costs, loss of deposits, etc). There may be marginal cases where they make the difference one way or the other, but 125% is not one of those.

wotsthat

Crashy_Time wrote: »

Yep, I would have been housed in Aberdeen while living in Edinburgh. Very sobering.....:rotfl:

Different city - same tragic maths I'm afraid.