Is Crashy an estate agent?

westernpromise

Gwendo40 wrote: »

Ah the wonders of selectively editing other peoples posts... when you know full well the point I was making is that I'm not some ''bitter renter'' who has missed out and that even though I'm a mortgage free homeowner I'm capable of seeing that rampant, policy driven HPI hasn't been a good thing for a huge proportion of society, in fact not even a good thing for many home owners who find themselves priced out of being able to move up the fabled 'property ladder'

Well, obviously he's going to edit your post selectively. What would be the point of editing it randomly?

You speak as though HPI has been something done by some home owners to others. You may as well bleat about rain being wet.

chucknorris

westernpromise wrote: »

Crashy's "advice" is patently worthless - but explained by his being an estate agent. What does the panel think?

I think Crashy being an estate agent is about as likely as a Dracula being a priest.

kingstreet

Finchy2018 wrote: »

Why would an agent advise to sell a house for the less than it's worth? They'd get less commission...

All the agents I worked for would have agreed a fixed fee at that kind of asking price, rather than percentage of sale price.

Malthusian

Gwendo40 wrote: »

Ah the wonders of selectively editing other peoples posts... when you know full well the point I was making is that I'm not some ''bitter renter'' who has missed out and that even though I'm a mortgage free homeowner I'm capable of seeing that rampant, policy driven HPI hasn't been a good thing for a huge proportion of society

HPI has been a wonderful thing for a huge proportion of society. It makes houses far more affordable because it encourages mortgage lenders to lend and allows the masses to sink huge amounts of money (mostly borrowed) into houses, knowing that they won't lose it.

If houses were depreciating assets then only the super-rich could afford them, as only the super-rich could afford to sink hundreds of thousands of pounds of wealth into an asset that would eventually become worthless. And almost nobody would get a mortgage as the asset would be no good as security, and the few who could would pay the same interest rate as on car loans.

By the same mechanism it is also wonderful for renters, as if house prices consistently went down, rents would be higher to cover the cost of depreciation.

If house prices stayed the same, the same would apply to a lesser extent due to opportunity cost. Landlords would demand higher rents to compensate them for having their wealth tied up in property with zero capital growth when they could sell it and invest in the stockmarket, or stick it in the bank with no risk and effort.

Perpetually increasing house prices enable the man and woman in the street to realistically aim for getting a mortgage, buying their own house and painting it whatever colour they want, whereas if a house was not an appreciating asset they would never be able to afford such a huge outlay and would rent for their lifetime.

The only section of society for whom HPI is not a good thing is those with unrealistic expectations and no interest in making their expectations realistic, either by bringing themselves up or their expectations down. And HPI isn't what is making them miserable.

A large section of society will never be homeowners as they can't cope with the responsibility, which is also why they can't budget and save up a deposit. It would be grossly irresponsible to encourage them to buy a house as they would be miserable when the toilet stopped working or the roof started leaking. HPI is good for them because they pay much lower rent as described above.

need_an_answer

It will be interesting to see how crashy responds to this thread.

I never once believed he was an estate agent ...but perhaps he will now reveal his true identity.

getmore4less

Commercial private renting gross yields were at least 10% in the old(not that long ago) days.

You need a ROI on any business.

Cheap money put prices up and rent yields down.

triathlon

lisyloo wrote: »

I think it’s much simpler than that.
Crash gives bad advice because he’s a crash troll.
I doubt many people follow his advice which would only be appropriate for a distressed sale.

People just need to bare in mind the philosophy of the crash troll a decade ago was that the UK economy was on the verge of a financial meltdown. The remaining crash trolls left now have gone from predicting an economic to now hoping and wanting one, which is sick in my view.

Pre 2007 there was a good argument out there that a property downturn on the back of a financial crisis was possible, and I enjoyed reading many of the posts that advocated that scenario though not agreeing, used to love grumpgits posts from Motley Fool for example.

Newnoel

need_an_answer wrote: »

...perhaps he will now reveal his true identity.

I really laughed at that time when the Count of Nowhere accidentally disclosed his name and occupation on here.


Seems he was a so-called "recruitment consultant" in Northampton.

westernpromise

Yes - didn't he recruit truck drivers, or something?

Newnoel

westernpromise wrote: »

Yes - didn't he recruit truck drivers, or something?

Yes - evidently a man of great talents!