Number of new builds per year/style of construction.-a query

CLAPTON

Cornucopia wrote: »

Yes. More specifically, the big builders have had it mostly their own way and are spectacularly under-delivering, IMHO for their own selfish reasons.

Against that background, I think that only the State can intervene to get things working in the public interest.

looking at their accounts for the period 2008-2010/11, I don't see anything there that shows they confirms your view.

Cornucopia

CLAPTON wrote: »

looking at their accounts for the period 2008-2010/11, I don't see anything there that shows they confirms your view.

Why so far back?

To be clear, I'm not actually suggesting that we depose them in a bloodless coup, more that we should look at whether other types of build can be encouraged alongside them.

CLAPTON

Cornucopia wrote: »

Why so far back?

To be clear, I'm not actually suggesting that we depose them in a bloodless coup, more that we should look at whether other types of build can be encouraged alongside them.

several of them nearly went bankrupt then because of the low level of sales
that seems inconsistent with the view that low sales leads to higher prices and higher profits

there is nothing stopping new builders entering the market, except the dysfunctional planning laws

Cornucopia

CLAPTON wrote: »

several of them nearly went bankrupt then because of the low level of sales
that seems inconsistent with the view that low sales leads to higher prices and higher profits

Do we need Economics 101?

there is nothing stopping new builders entering the market, except the dysfunctional planning laws

And the fact that the big builders are holding lots of land.

CLAPTON

Cornucopia wrote: »

Do we need Economics 101?

no idea what 101 is

And the fact that the big builders are holding lots of land.

thats a planning issue

Cornucopia

CLAPTON wrote: »

no idea what 101 is

101 is the introductory course in a US degree programme.

CLAPTON

Cornucopia wrote: »

101 is the introductory course in a US degree programme.

one can be too cryptic (or even simply wrong)

Cornucopia

CLAPTON wrote: »

one can be too cryptic (or even simply wrong)

You think I'm wrong? About "101" or about an excess of demand over supply potentially leading to higher prices?

CLAPTON

Cornucopia wrote: »

You think I'm wrong? About "101" or about an excess of demand over supply potentially leading to higher prices?

supply and demand determine price in some circumstances

but that doesn't mean that the profits of a company rise if they restrict supply, which I thought you were suggesting

Cornucopia

CLAPTON wrote: »

supply and demand determine price in some circumstances

Yes.

but that doesn't mean that the profits of a company rise if they restrict supply, which I thought you were suggesting

It really depends on the exact scenario.

Overall, I am suggesting that the big builders are limiting supply in some circumstances to suit their own agendas. Going into that further, and in the light of the risk of land purchase costs being defrayed over time, it seems like there is a triple imperative at work - (a) to make absolutely sure that excess demand ensures a speedy sale, (b) to maintain tight control over costs, and (c) to encourage prices upwards.