Nationwide flatlining.... -0.1 MOM

adr0ck

dannyboycey wrote: »

I 'think' I know what your trying to say. However, average prices are not the best indicator for showing what happened in the early 90's as they are so easily skewed. We know for example, that many thousands of people had to wait a decade or more before coming out of negative equity. Suggesting that it wouldn't really matter if prices crashed, because all would be rosy again in 4 years time is a rather simplistic viewpoint to take.

yes very simplistic

and i did question the 4 years time frame....say 6 - 8 depending on where, what and how much etc etc

problem with comments on these boards is that their all pretty simplistic (they have to be for me to respond)

personaally i can see house prices fallng 5% - 10%

and flat prices falling 20 - 30%

very simplistic guess work

adr0ck

moneysavinmonkey wrote: »

I think that's very optimistic, certainly not possible in a 4 year time frame and as I said earlier, I'm even doubting that the next top will match this one.

I'm discounting general inflation.

the next top will go higher................................but it might take longer to get there

moneysavinmonkey

adr0ck wrote: »

the next top will go higher................................but it might take longer to get there

interesting theory. what's your reasons for thinking this?

adr0ck

just because it always has

Vaux-Hall

To be brutally frank, you can only use this sort of historical data to inform your opinion, not to predict what's likely to happen in the future. The world is an ever-changing place, and the circumstances that existed at times in the past do not necessarily now. Just because that crash lasted for a period of time doesn't mean this one (if it actually happens) will.

I'll give you an analogy. If you lived in 1950, you would probably say that it was very unlikely that a team would win the league/FA Cup double, as it had never been done.

If you lived in 1990 you would probably say once in the coming decade, as it was done once in the 60s, 70s & 80s.

However it was in fact done 5 times in 10 years (including 1 treble) because teams were playing on a much less even playing field (if you'll excuse the pun).

Conversely it's mathematically less likely be done now than in the 90s, as there are now 3 teams likely to win the league, and 4 the cup.

This is analagous to this thread, as it shows the danger of using long-term empirical data to predict the future: it doesn't work where there are a lot of variables.

There are five areas most likely to affect house prices this year:

i) sub prime losses in the UK/credit crunch
ii) interest rates (will the CPI come down of its own accord?)
iii) first time buyer confidence
(iv) supply & demand
(v) the ecconomy in general/employment (as opposed to unemployment) data

No one can accurately predict what's going to happen with each of the above, so any specific % predictions are simply guesswork.

But still much better than looking at shapes of graphs from 30 years ago. [Almost] totally irrelevant from a statistical point of view, I'm afraid.

neverdespairgirl

adr0ck wrote: »

it doesnt take 18 years to reach the top

the 18 year cycle includes minimum of 10 years growth

see below for average uk prices when we went into last downturn


1985 31,103
1990 59,785
1991 62,455
1992 60,821
1993 61,223
1994 64,755
1995 65,641
1996 70,534
we had 2 -3 years of lower prices from the highpoint and then prices were higher (than the last highpoint)

Major alert - inflation not taken into consideration!

Hoario54

Vaux-Hall wrote: »

To be brutally frank, you can only use this sort of historical data to inform your opinion, not to predict what's likely to happen in the future. The world is an ever-changing place, and the circumstances that existed at times in the past do not necessarily now. Just because that crash lasted for a period of time doesn't mean this one (if it actually happens) will.

Nor does it mean that it won't.

That's the funny thing about history, although "things" change (interest rates, jobs, money, who is best at football etc.), significant events still have a habit of repeating themselves despite not necessarily being created or caused by the same effect as they were previously.

adr0ck

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

Major alert - inflation not taken into consideration!

neverdespairgirl you should know that inflation has no consequence in the western world....i mean if it did that would mean interest rates certainly wouldn't be coming down next week

Vaux-Hall

Hoario54 wrote: »

Nor does it mean that it won't.

That's the funny thing about history, although "things" change (interest rates, jobs, money, who is best at football etc.), significant events still have a habit of repeating themselves despite not necessarily being created or caused by the same effect as they were previously.

Absolutely. Which is why history is useful for informing your decisions. My point is that there's really no point looking at historical data without looking at the precise circumstances surrounding it, so you can tell whether history repeated itself, or two totally disparate sets of circumstances produced the same results (i.e. correlation as opposed to causation).

Actually my point was that there's no point saying things like: "I think property prices will fall 10% next year", as there are too many unknowns for anyone to hazzard a reasonable guess, without at least adding a lot of provisos.

Otherwise someone might just as well start a thread about what the winning lottery numbers are going to be on Saturday.

Hoario54

Of course I know, but I am keeping them to myself...