Where in London would prices be worst hit because of Brexit/Whatever?

Generali

cells wrote: »

There simply was not the scale of wealth a generation ago as there is today. China GDP is up almost 30x from 1990 and a lot of the other developing and arab states are up 5-30x too.

Like I keep saying to you, you look at history without fully appreciating how quickly the world has changed.

A lot of people also seem to not be able to get their minds across the fact that these numbers are not just numbers they are real wealth and capital. Sometimes I have to resort to quoting real things to get the message across Im sure you dont need it but nonetheless a quick google shows china sold 0.6 million cars domestically in 2000 and 21.1 million cars domestically in 2015.
That can be a guage of how rapidly the middle class is expanding in china in just 15 years the middle class has expanded by 30x. So to say the forign rich were not buying in London in 1990 is true but the reason is they didnt exist (to avoid sillyness I know there were rich people in the west and some other countries but they did not have as big a need to diversify as the russians or arabs or Chinese etc)







you still dont understand the scale of the global wealth that has developed in just the last 15 years nor do you appreciate that its still growing very rapidly.

London could indeed become unattractive to buyers foreign or domestic but that would be down to politics/tax and if our government is stupid enough to make london unattractive for investment then we will be shooting ourselves in the foot





If you had £10 billion and a business producing £500m a year for you and owned so many homes cars and boats you could not write down the address or location of them what would you care about your £10 million London house losing you £1m paper that year?

Thank you for being both patronising and insulting in a single post. Again.

I try to respect your views despite the fact that you quite clearly invent most of the statistics you post. I would appreciate it if you could stop insulting me as you have repeatedly.

Given that, according to Forbes, 64 people in the world are worth more than $13.18bn (£10bn) I think we can safely ignore their effect on the housing market in London.

Yes, the amount of wealth in the world has risen hugely and is, in part, responsible for things like the current level of house prices in London and negative yields on trillions of dollars worth of bonds. The fact is that people are searching for safe havens for their riches and Brexit may convince people that London is not a safe haven any longer.

If you looked at surveys of rich people and their attitude to wealth management you would understand that the chief driver of investment strategies among the very rich is not to lose money. If you have hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars kicking about you don't need to do anything much at all if you don't fancy it. The only thing that you do need to do is not lose money. The rich don't need to make a return, they just need to keep what they have. London has allowed the rich to have a store of value but if it no longer delivers then they will pull out their cash regardless.

cells

Generali wrote: »

Thank you for being both patronising and insulting in a single post. Again.

I am not aware I am doing either, if you point out the bits that you find patronising and insulting I will have a look and try to see what I am doing wrong

Given that, according to Forbes, 64 people in the world are worth more than $13.18bn (£10bn) I think we can safely ignore their effect on the housing market in London.

I think it would be better to look at the number of people with >£10m net or maybe >£20m net. I tried to look for that figure but couldnt find it in my quick search. There is also another factor eg a billionaire might buy property for their children, parents, and relatives too so although the others might not be billionaires they might have a similar spending power.

We already know for sure that lots of high end property is owned by arabs, russians, others so well above 64 households. Also againt he local rich will buy expensive London homes. eg the Londoner Adele who is supposedly worth some £85 million according to wiki. Her fame and fortune is collected all over the world but likely at least some of it will be in expensive london property

Yes, the amount of wealth in the world has risen hugely and is, in part, responsible for things like the current level of house prices in London and negative yields on trillions of dollars worth of bonds. The fact is that people are searching for safe havens for their riches and Brexit may convince people that London is not a safe haven any longer.

maybe. I think it more likely that the main thing that can put people off is taxes/politics so as long as westminster doesn't screw that up London will become one of the worlds cities for the global rich

If you looked at surveys of rich people and their attitude to wealth management you would understand that the chief driver of investment strategies among the very rich is not to lose money. If you have hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars kicking about you don't need to do anything much at all if you don't fancy it. The only thing that you do need to do is not lose money. The rich don't need to make a return, they just need to keep what they have. London has allowed the rich to have a store of value but if it no longer delivers then they will pull out their cash regardless.

There will be different people with different objectives. Those in less than 100% stable countries would rather have their money in London and lose 20% of it than keep it domestically and have the local !!!!!/politions/generals confiscate it. For some of these people there will also be the consideration of leaving their home country at some point and if they know some english its more likely that they will come to london than one of the other European nations. Plenty of very rich kids also come to study in English universities again giving them some roots here rather than elsewhere

tara747

sann420 wrote: »

You say that but do remember that the 10 full time employed chaps are willing to share that 1 bedder for a reason: Desirability

They won't be too desirable to women if they have 9 flatmates :rotfl:

cells

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/global-stock-market-cap-has-doubled-since-qes-start-2015-02-12

interesting article. seems to suggest financial assets are ~4x world GDP

If you assume 3.5% global 'GDP' growth that doubles world gdp over 20 years which would mean more or less financial assets would double adding some $300 trillion in global financial wealth. That does not include the larger stock of wealth which is infrastructure including homes.

Some of this $300++ trillion in additional global wealth is going to find its way to London. So long as the government does not strangle the golden egg laying goose via higher taxes or regulations

melanzana

100% Stamp Duty on non UK domiciled and resident purchasers.

100% Capital Gains Tax on the same cohort when selling.

Post Brexit anything is possible! Would leave property for the locals to buy.

The sunshine is affecting my brain obviously..

cells

melanzana wrote: »

100% Stamp Duty on non UK domiciled and resident purchasers.

100% Capital Gains Tax on the same cohort when selling.

Post Brexit anything is possible! Would leave property for the locals to buy.

The sunshine is affecting my brain obviously..

lower house prices and lower rents would result in significantly less

income tax
capital gains tax
inheritance tax
stamp duty

this is before you even consider the further economic impact of not having thousands maybe tens of thousands of very rich forigners spending lots of money in London retail and hospitality and other services.

If the lost taxation is £20 billion a year would you rather add £20 billion a year to income taxes or cut £20 billion a year from pensions and healthcare?


not to mention the easy workaround your idea by companies buying houses. So you would also have to ban foreigners owning uk company shares too. good luck with that

peter_we

chewmylegoff wrote: »

MIFIDII provides for firms from non EEA states to passport in to EEA ones as long as their home state is MIFID equivalent, so at least in theory all we need to do is implement MIFIDII and UK firms should be unaffected.

No way as good as passporting and no use to non finance services

peter_we

In fact, whilst over the past week we have indeed seen some price renegotiations these have been nowhere near 20% – on average across our region of offices they are just 6% and in this office specifically 10%. We have also seen examples of strong sales still being agreed such a house on Eccles road that we had 3 parties interested and went for over asking and although price renegotiations can be frustrating this does provide a great opportunity to those who are upsizing. A drop of 5% on your sale is quickly forgotten if you can pass that up the chain – we have two examples of clients actually making money out of the situation because they were able to negotiate more off their onward purchase than was required on their sale.

http://hamptonsbattersea.co.uk/buyers-and-sellers/market-update-6th-july-2016/

westernpromise

cells wrote: »

The next big economic miracle is going to be India.
Current Economy $2.1 trillion which is smaller than the UK. Most the country is still very poor

If it develops as rapidly as china did its going to be a $10-15 trillion economy (in todays money) over the next 20 years.

People have been saying that for years about India, in the same way they've been saying the TR7 was about to become a classic, that maglev trains are about to happen and that there'll be a colony on Mars in 20 years' time.

India keeps electing socialist governments which are more concerned with expropriating existing wealth and giving it to their supporters than with generating any more. Until their socialist parties evolve into pro-market parties they're going to stay poor.

cells

westernpromise wrote: »

People have been saying that for years about India, in the same way they've been saying the TR7 was about to become a classic, that maglev trains are about to happen and that there'll be a colony on Mars in 20 years' time.

India keeps electing socialist governments which are more concerned with expropriating existing wealth and giving it to their supporters than with generating any more. Until their socialist parties evolve into pro-market parties they're going to stay poor.

At their stage of development there is a lot of upside no matter what system they adopt. Already India is a much richer country than it was 20 years ago with GDP up about 5x in the period or for people who dont like GDP you can look at electricity consumption which has doubled over the decade

My view is that India is about 25 years behind China and it will get to at least where china is today