House prices & disjointed reporting from the BBC

House prices & disjointed reporting from the BBC

Author
Discussion

pikey

Original Poster:

7,702 posts

286 months

Friday 3rd April 2009
quotequote all
I read an article on the BBC news site today...

Friday, 3 April : House prices 'drop 1.9% in March'. UK house prices fell by 1.9% in March compared with the previous month
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7980813.stm

.. which reminded me of one I read on the same site yesterday

Thursday, 2 April : 'Surprise bounce' in house prices. House prices rose in March for the first time since October 2007
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7977683.stm

Apart from disjointed reporting, it also highlights how these reports can't be relied upon. I note the source in one is the Nationwide and in the other, the Halifax. Maybe they provide mortgages on completely different houses....?




blindswelledrat

25,257 posts

234 months

Friday 3rd April 2009
quotequote all
BUt it isn't the BBC's disjointed reporting is it?

Article one reports that the nationwide declared a house price rise according to its figures and article two repots that the Halifax reports a fall according to its figures. WHich both do.

WHy is that the fault of the BBC?

pikey

Original Poster:

7,702 posts

286 months

Friday 3rd April 2009
quotequote all
Because they run both articles independently, missing the point that they are both unreliable because of the other.

A more balanced story would be looking into why one says higher and the other says lower.

scotal

8,751 posts

281 months

Friday 3rd April 2009
quotequote all
pikey said:
Because they run both articles independently, missing the point that they are both unreliable because of the other.

A more balanced story would be looking into why one says higher and the other says lower.
Noel will be along in a sec to give you chapter and verse, but all the housing indexes are flawed.
NW and Halifax are giving figures on what they see..... so if their business is not representative (and given the state of both of them at the moment i would say it might not be, despite their size) their indexes will be similarly flawed.
Equally rightmove use asking prices to give a view on where housing is headed (and they have already admitted that's flawed.
The land Registery is so far behind they have no real idea if they are flawed or not (They shouldn't be what with them recording every transaction, but who knows if they are right or not)

There is one firm that does a survey or surveys, but seeing as that firm is a property investment company I'm not sure their figures are to be trusted.

Localisation is where its at for Housing at the moment i think.
If your area is getting clobbered it matter not that somewhere 200miles away is holding firm.

scotal

8,751 posts

281 months

Friday 3rd April 2009
quotequote all
Wurls said:
The media only have the ability to report, not to analyse.
But they do spend an awful lot of time analysing these days.......

pikey

Original Poster:

7,702 posts

286 months

Friday 3rd April 2009
quotequote all
By the way, I don't much care for which one is correct.

My point is that I think they should run a story mentioning the other report and detailing the differences.. or a story that two surveys report the opposite and looking into what the reality is.

scotal

8,751 posts

281 months

Friday 3rd April 2009
quotequote all
Wurls said:
scotal said:
Wurls said:
The media only have the ability to report, not to analyse.
But they do spend an awful lot of time analysing these days.......
They try but are completely useless at it themselves and don't consider their responsibilty. When they ask externally for an opinion they ask those that are completely useless at it.
I completely agree..... but if its any consolation the Mortgage trade press are exactly the same if not worse. They have a horrible habit of asking very vested interests for their views on any piece of news, which makes the articles laughably skewed.

For instance today, reporting on yesterday's NW survey they asked the head of a proprty investment firm what he thought; which was rather bullish.
They also asked the head of a firm that buys from distressed owners... guess what he was down beat on the news.....


Tony*T3

20,911 posts

249 months

Friday 3rd April 2009
quotequote all
It would be like the BBC saying on one report that MMGW is causing the sea to rise, and on another say MMGW is causing the sea to fall.

They wouldnt do that, would they.....

limpsfield

5,896 posts

255 months

Friday 3rd April 2009
quotequote all
pikey said:
By the way, I don't much care for which one is correct.

My point is that I think they should run a story mentioning the other report and detailing the differences.. or a story that two surveys report the opposite and looking into what the reality is.
but in fairness they did do part of this.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7980813.stm

"The month-on-month change is in contrast to the "surprise bounce" of 0.9% in March reported by the Nationwide Building Society.

But, on Thursday, the Nationwide warned against reading too much into its short-term price rise figure, saying that it was too early to suggest the bottom of the market had been reached. "

TedMaul

2,092 posts

215 months

Friday 3rd April 2009
quotequote all
scotal said:
Localisation is where its at for Housing at the moment i think.
If your area is getting clobbered it matter not that somewhere 200miles away is holding firm.
A point missed by most people. Like everything else, house prices will fluctuate due to supply and demand, but it seems that certain areas were massively over priced in the first place. As these areas realise how much their houses are actually worth, they may see larger drops.

Last year I offered 340k on a house that was listed at 400k as that is what I believed it to be worth. The Estate Agent did a sort of fake surprise laugh and asked if i was joking and made some rude comments. I gave her my reasons, previous sale prices from the Land Registry, general trends in the area, but I was given some story about these type of houses across the country being in constant demand etc. House is still for sale 14 months later, on the market at 340k and the estate agent is struggling. As you say, it really only matters what is going on in your own area, regardless of the national picture.


Edited due to cack handedness with the quote


Edited by TedMaul on Friday 3rd April 12:43

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

221 months

Friday 3rd April 2009
quotequote all
Isnt this the reverse of the situation in January when the halifax reported a 1% increase whilst the nationwide posted a further decrease.

Whist I agree you can read too much into month by month figures quoted by either company - I think it does indicate that the slide is beginning to slow or bottom out. You would expect in any variable data set for results to fluctuate above and below the mean.

Personally I think any "recovery" will be very slow - but increasing fluidity in the market can only be a good thing.

Edited by Moonhawk on Friday 3rd April 12:50