Do you want house price to rise or fall?

lisyloo

Malthusian wrote: »

This just illustrates that it's about preference and nothing but preference. In your position I would have bought the studio flat. But I have always been willing to pay a premium to not have to live with other people. For me "quality of life would not be any better" does not compute, but we're all different.

I’ve stayed in a few studio flats and I would not want to live in one.
Some fridges make a noise as the thermostat turns them on and off. I sleep pretty well, but there were times I found that really disturbing I.e. when you’re trying to get off and once you’ve noticed it then it’s worse.
Other places the fridge did not make clicking or buzzing noises.
Fridges also pack out heat and studios can be hot.

I am glad we tried some short term serviced apartments, but there are compromises to be made that won’t suit everyone.

snowqueen555

Malthusian wrote: »

This just illustrates that it's about preference and nothing but preference. In your position I would have bought the studio flat. But I have always been willing to pay a premium to not have to live with other people. For me "quality of life would not be any better" does not compute, but we're all different.

Goes with anything. if i want to buy a TV, do I buy the most expensive thing I can get just because I could afford it? Not really, I still want value for money.

A 1 bed with bills would take up 60% of my income in my hometown. I share my current house with one other person in a 3 bed, I get a lot of space with my own bathroom, garden etc and pay a good price. I can't complain.

don't get me wrong, I am not complaining, just saying this is my situation. I will move up north in a few years if my situation stays the same, hopefully it will be a good thing.

I could get a 2 bed house (albeit not in the best areas) in a lot of places right now in many northern cities, just giving it a few years down here to see how I go.

phillw

snowqueen555 wrote: »

Goes with anything. if i want to buy a TV, do I buy the most expensive thing I can get just because I could afford it? Not really, I still want value for money.

That is a category mistake. TV's depreciate in value and become worthless, so buying the cheapest that will meet your needs before it becomes worthless will save you money. When it breaks you can repeat the process, you don't need to ever become an early adopter.

Houses appreciate in value, so buying more expensive will save you money in the long term. If you buy a 1 bed flat and then want to start a family years later, you can find that you can no longer afford to buy the same kind of house you could have bought when you bought your flat.

Herzlos

You also need to factor in the cost of selling/buying/moving, so it may be cheaper to buy a £200k house first, if you can afford it, than to jump up in a series of steps.


That said, I wish I'd started in a 1-bed flat instead of a 2-bed house, purely because I overstretched myself a bit and ended up in negative equity.

snowqueen555

phillw wrote: »

That is a category mistake. TV's depreciate in value and become worthless, so buying the cheapest that will meet your needs before it becomes worthless will save you money. When it breaks you can repeat the process, you don't need to ever become an early adopter.

Houses appreciate in value, so buying more expensive will save you money in the long term. If you buy a 1 bed flat and then want to start a family years later, you can find that you can no longer afford to buy the same kind of house you could have bought when you bought your flat.

I would say it is a categorical mistake to assume that house prices will appreciate and to buy something that takes up too much of your income.

Doesn't matter if it is a TV, could be another item or asset, I do like to look for "value". A one bed is not value for me. In most situations a 2 bed makes most sense to me, so I can rent out the spare room.

To me my first house buy will probably be for many many years. I think it is just a different outlook so I respect your viewpoint but it isn't the same as mine.

phillw

snowqueen555 wrote: »

I would say it is a categorical mistake to assume that house prices will appreciate and to buy something that takes up too much of your income.

You can say that, but apart from some short term volatility, history would disagree.

snowqueen555 wrote: »

Doesn't matter if it is a TV, could be another item or asset, I do like to look for "value". A one bed is not value for me. In most situations a 2 bed makes most sense to me, so I can rent out the spare room.

Can you think of an asset other than houses that has pretty much always appreciated? I can't. But should you buy 1 at £10 and then another 5 years later at £100 or when they are £10 buy 2? If in 5 years time you realise you only need 1 then you can sell the spare for £100. Whether you keep it or not you've made £90

If you can afford a 3 bed house then you can rent out two rooms instead of 1, if you then need the rooms for your family and can afford to get rid of the renters then you don't need the extra cost of moving.

snowqueen555 wrote: »

To me my first house buy will probably be for many many years.

That is the same for most, which is why they buy as large a house as they can in the first place.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree with using assets which always depreciate in value to justify buying something that has always appreciated.

snowqueen555

phillw wrote: »

You can say that, but apart from some short term volatility, history would disagree.



Can you think of an asset other than houses that has pretty much always appreciated? I can't. But should you buy 1 at £10 and then another 5 years later at £100 or when they are £10 buy 2? If in 5 years time you realise you only need 1 then you can sell the spare for £100. Whether you keep it or not you've made £90

If you can afford a 3 bed house then you can rent out two rooms instead of 1, if you then need the rooms for your family and can afford to get rid of the renters then you don't need the extra cost of moving.



That is the same for most, which is why they buy as large a house as they can in the first place.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree with using assets which always depreciate in value to justify buying something that has always appreciated.

I know I can move up north and get a house, it's no always a good idea to buy as soon as you can and I think it is dangerous to assume prices will always appreciate.

As I said, buy smart, same with anything. I don't want to be mortgaged to the hilt, which is what I will be if I bought down here right now.

It is no different to buying stock. Just because it keeps going up, doesn't necessarily mean you need to jump in asap. It is also bad practise to jump in for fear of missing out.

I am looking to make the best decision myself, and that isn't to buy asap.

That is why I am planning a move up north where my money will stretch further.

phillw

snowqueen555 wrote: »

It is no different to buying stock. Just because it keeps going up, doesn't necessarily mean you need to jump in asap. It is also bad practise to jump in for fear of missing out.

It is very different to buying stock. The stock market is hugely volatile as people are constantly putting money into and out of a particular stock. The housing market is more resilient because of the cost of moving (in time, money and people not liking change).

snowqueen555 wrote: »

I am looking to make the best decision myself, and that isn't to buy asap.

You can't ever know if it's the best decision until it's too late. Buying early obviously hasn't worked for everyone, but it works out in way more cases than it doesn't. The inverse is true, putting off buying could be the right decision but it's very unlikely.

FWIW I'm someone who didn't buy asap and sure it worked out ok for me, but I would have been multiple times better off if I hadn't waited.

snowqueen555 wrote: »

That is why I am planning a move up north where my money will stretch further.

There is nothing wrong with moving if you can't afford to buy where you are. However there is a difference between someone who is not going to buy because they are moving in six months and someone who isn't going to buy because maybe one day they'll move to a cheaper area, who ultimately never does.

trf1960

People always want property to fall in value until they buy a house and then want it to rise in value ... and quickly !

homeless9

Some new build 2 bed homes on the Surrey/Hampshire border are priced at around £420,000...

It's plain ridiculous.

House prices are 20% too high in general.

How much have wages gone up on average in the past 10 years compared to house prices increases?