The north/south divide

System

I'm not saying it's not great, just that in the long term if property values are below replacement costs it is not sustainable as houses do not last forever and if new ones can not be built except at a loss then they won't be built.!

i genuinely dont understand what youre saying. my house that i was originally referring to is about 1950s and is very well built. I cant see it falling apart and needing replacing anytime soon. (unlike a lot of new build estates).

even if it did then surely it would have ran its course and been used for enough years to pay for itself and thus have been worthwhile???

as far as i am concerned. i am a mum with 3 kids and a house isnt an investment opportunity but more security. its a roof over our heads with the freedom to do to it as we please. I understand that others buy and sell with the intention of moving on and upgrading etc.

movilogo

Opportunities are definitely more in London area. Pay is better but cost of living is way more expensive. At the end of month, you'd have less money to have fun.

House price in South East is insane.

I feel lifestyle is way better in the North. Traditionally British, laid back and have community feeling.

In London everyone runs after money all the time. People don't have time to pause, think and look around on all sides

Good luck whatever you do.

chucknorris

movilogo wrote: »

House price in South East is insane.

But that equity (when the house is paid for) isn't necessarily lost, my parents for example moved from the North East to Southampton and lived there for over 12 years, then they moved back to Northumberland when my father retired. So despite paying more housing, they got it back when they downsized back to the North East.

westernpromise

movilogo wrote: »

I feel lifestyle is way better in the North.

It's cold, there's nothing to do and the locals all speak and dress badly.

chucknorris

westernpromise wrote: »

It's cold, there's nothing to do and the locals all speak and dress badly.

You have obviously never lived in the North, there are loads of things to do up there:

Whippet racing
Keeping pigeons
Growing vegetables

It might be cold up there, but when it gets really cold (like now) you can always wear two tee shirts, instead of just one.

westernpromise

I've lived in Birmingham and Stafford, which are as far north as I care to go. Since they tightened up the gun laws, there's been no reliable way to protect yourself from polar bears and other ravening northerners.

kingstreet

westernpromise wrote: »

I've lived in Stafford, as far north as I care to go. Since they tightened up the gun laws, there's been no reliable way to protect yourself from polar bears and other ravening northerners.

... and they've moved ravening Mancunians to Stafford to guard against your possible return, mate!

Thrugelmir

michaels wrote: »

I'm not saying it's not great, just that in the long term if property values are below replacement costs it is not sustainable as houses do not last forever and if new ones can not be built except at a loss then they won't be built.

Why do property values have to be above replacement cost? Properly maintained old housing stock could last for decades. Builders make good margins on building and selling new property. Somewhere between 15% and 25%. Then there's the concept of modular homes which should build cost somewhat.

https://www.legalandgeneral.com/modular/

mollycat

Cakeguts wrote: »

If you live in London you don't get to live in the tourist areas that people love to visit. You get to live in a suburb somewhere and commute into London to work. Depending on how much you earn depends on not only what you can buy but where you can buy it. There are a lot of not very nice areas. Nice areas are very very expensive.

Wasnt talking about living in the "tourist areas".
That isnt where we spend (most of) our time

Areas I was referring to being able to just about afford were typically Zone 4.

Do you think we researched and almost moved 10 years ago thinking we would end up in a property in Covent Garden or Marylebone?!

Why would you assume someone that knows London very well, but lives far from it, on too little salary to live in it,is an idiot?

GreatApe

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Why do property values have to be above replacement cost? Properly maintained old housing stock could last for decades. Builders make good margins on building and selling new property. Somewhere between 15% and 25%. Then there's the concept of modular homes which should build cost somewhat.

https://www.legalandgeneral.com/modular/

Property prices need to be above replacement cost because the country will probably need another 10 million homes in our lifetime. Builders can't build for below cost in fact they need cost plus a profit margin.

Yes different construction methods could help lower costs but I wouldn't be a betting man on lower costs for building homes when the last 100 years seems to show costs for building homes doesn't fall. Generally any little increase in productivity is eaten up by higher regulations adding cost

Also property is a cyclical business its not right to look at one years margins. Some of the big builders lost billions in 2008/9 so its better to look at maybe a 20 year average margin.