Nationwide. 29 May 2008. -2.5 (month) -4.4 (year)

Mr_Mumble

edit: see below

mitchaa

carolt wrote: »

I know that - I'd just be interested to see what the peak - to current trough figures are. As well as the annual figures.

Have already worked that out...

£173,583/£186,044 x 100

= 6.7% drop from peak in October 07 to June 08

mitchaa

Mr_Mumble wrote: »

(1 - (173,583/184,723)) * 100 = 6.03%

Wrong figure, that is not the peak figure.

£184,723 in Sept 07
£186,044 in Oct 07

neverdespairgirl

merlinthehappypig wrote: »

Much worse than I thought..

worse.....?

Mr_Mumble

mitchaa wrote: »

Wrong figure, that is not the peak figure.

£184,723 in Sept 07
£186,044 in Oct 07

Sorry , in my defense I took the number straight from Carolt's post

ruggedtoast

I eagerly await Mr Broderick's take on this. To pave the way for him I think it should be pointed out that house prices are substantially higher than they were in the overall past, and anyone who'd bought a wattle and daub hut in the middle ages on a 98% repayment SVR mortgage would by now be sitting on almost 100% equity.

brit1234

Here is the video response from Nationwide trying to say every thing is OK. All it needs to be perfect comedy is a few flamming people screaming and jumping off the building in the background.

http://www.bloomberg.com/avp/avp.asxx?clip=mms://media2.bloomberg.com/cache/vWo5nvIAXB_4.asf&vCat=/av

We are doomed, arhhhhhh.:rotfl:

wymondham

PasturesNew wrote: »

http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi/review.htm
http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi/historical/May_2008.pdf

Discuss.

I fancy just popping into the local sales office on a new estate round the corner and seeing what sort of day they are having today! :rotfl:

Maybe they'll offer a bigger fridge or something from today onwards to compensate and pull the buyers in??!!

WTF?_2

The good news spin this time is that there's more equity (and by implication, less danger of negative equity) than there was during the last crash:

Despite this, Ms Earley argued that the market was not heading for the same sort of crash as that seen in the early 1990s.

"First, fewer homeowners bought at the top of the market in this cycle," she said.
"This means a much smaller proportion of borrowers face the full effect of falls in prices than was the case in the 1990s.

"Secondly, today's borrowers have typically put down a larger deposit than their 1980s counterparts," she added.


Hmmm, given the amount of weeping and gnashing of teeth when LTVs went down to 95 and then 90% I have to wonder if the second point is valid. I suspect that the large amounts of equity released when people sold their homes at inflated prices to trade up helped push the overall 'level of deposit' figures up ... I wouldn't be surprised if FTBs are worse off.

As for the first, maybe - but anyone who bought since 05 is royally screwed. That's a lot of people. Throw in huge amounts of personal debt which also has to be serviced and the idea that people have more equity to play with looks distinctly dodgy too.

merlinthehappypig

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

worse.....?

I know - I thought about the use of the word 'worse' when I used it. I should have said 'a much sharper drop'.

It's obviously not bad news for most of us so 'better' would be more appropriate, but some people will see it as bad news.

I didn't want to celebrate too much if there are going to be people negatively affected.