How far will house prices fall [volume 4]

[Randy Winkman]

turbobloke said:

On the one hand.



On the other hand.

http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/update/2014-10-2...

Public or private - the people at the top are doing OK. That's the modern world for you. We're going into reverse in that respect.

Edited to add that those people probably aren't the ones in the pub with the cheap beer.

Edited by Randy Winkman on Thursday 11th December 07:11

[XJ40]

Randy Winkman said:

Public or private - the people at the top are doing OK. That's the modern world for you. We're going into reverse in that respect.

I agree with that. Those at the top, the capitalist and those with professional careers seem to be doing well and can afford expensive house prices, the rest have been feeling the squeeze. It'll be interesting to see if this trend continues in the coming years and we move towards a kind of neo-Victorian wealth distribution, with a rich rich and a poor poor again.

To be honest I don't see the trend changing that much, those with money and in demand skills will prosper, and there seems to be an oversupply of low skill workers globally to limit wage growth there. If wages in China, India, etc. continue to rise then I guess Africa will eventually be the next source cheap labour, if those guys can get there act together?

Over here, the government has tried to intervene with minimum wage, tax credits, raised personal tax allowance, etc. but there's only so much they can really do to fight against the economic reality isn't there.

Edited by XJ40 on Thursday 11th December 09:37

[menousername]

XJ40 said:

I agree with that. Those at the top, the capitalist and those with professional careers seem to be doing well and can afford expensive house prices, the rest have been feeling the squeeze. It'll be interesting to see if this trend continues in the coming years and we move towards a kind of neo-Victorian wealth distribution, with a rich rich and a poor poor again.

To be honest I don't see the trend changing that much, those with money and in demand skills will prosper, and there seems to be an oversupply of low skill workers globally to limit wage growth there. If wages in China, India, etc. continue to rise then I guess Africa will eventually be the next source cheap labour, if those guys can get there act together?

Over here, the government has tried to intervene with minimum wage, tax credits, raised personal tax allowance, etc. but there's only so much they can really do to fight against the economic reality isn't there.

Edited by XJ40 on Thursday 11th December 09:37

I agree entirely with the risk of a neo-Victorian wealth distribution, would say it has already begun

[Mr Whippy]

menousername said:

XJ40 said:

I agree with that. Those at the top, the capitalist and those with professional careers seem to be doing well and can afford expensive house prices, the rest have been feeling the squeeze. It'll be interesting to see if this trend continues in the coming years and we move towards a kind of neo-Victorian wealth distribution, with a rich rich and a poor poor again.

To be honest I don't see the trend changing that much, those with money and in demand skills will prosper, and there seems to be an oversupply of low skill workers globally to limit wage growth there. If wages in China, India, etc. continue to rise then I guess Africa will eventually be the next source cheap labour, if those guys can get there act together?

Over here, the government has tried to intervene with minimum wage, tax credits, raised personal tax allowance, etc. but there's only so much they can really do to fight against the economic reality isn't there.

Edited by XJ40 on Thursday 11th December 09:37

I agree entirely with the risk of a neo-Victorian wealth distribution, would say it has already begun

There are too many variables to say for sure, but even the 'poor' today live better off than the wealthy of many years ago.

We have to remember that a wealth gap that extends only at the wealthy end isn't so bad, versus one that extends at both ends.


As long as the 'normal' people keep a check on things and exercise their powers to disrupt the status quo now and again then things shouldn't get too out of hand.

If they sleep walk into something silly over a few generations, then that is their own fault.

Dave

[jonah35]

Reposessions outside of London can still be bought cheap. Eg houses that sold for £80k in 2006 going for £45k now, houses sold for £100k going for £60k, flats bought for £120k going for £50k.


It's not massive money but if london saw these falls of c. 40% plus then that would be a big problem.

The way I see it is these houses will slowly but surely regain their 2007 levels but next year could provide a boost

But, no question about it, it's easy to buy a £60k house and get £450pm. Not a bad way to get a 'pension' in some people's eyes. £12k down and the rent covers the mortgage. In 30 years surely it will be worth more than £60k.

Personally I think it is these northern properties that will soar post april 2015 when people cash in pensions to buy BTL properties and perhaps 30% gains will be made next year on these type of properties.

They are just too cheap.

Edited by jonah35 on Thursday 11th December 21:59

[Pork]

jonah35 said:

Reposessions outside of London can still be bought cheap. Eg houses that sold for £80k in 2006 going for £45k now, houses sold for £100k going for £60k, flats bought for £120k going for £50k.


It's not massive money but if london saw these falls of c. 40% plus then that would be a big problem.

The way I see it is these houses will slowly but surely regain their 2007 levels but next year could provide a boost

But, no question about it, it's easy to buy a £60k house and get £450pm. Not a bad way to get a 'pension' in some people's eyes. £12k down and the rent covers the mortgage. In 30 years surely it will be worth more than £60k.

Personally I think it is these northern properties that will soar post april 2015 when people cash in pensions to buy BTL properties and perhaps 30% gains will be made next year on these type of properties.

They are just too cheap.

Edited by jonah35 on Thursday 11th December 21:59

Where are they?

[burwoodman]

Pork said:

jonah35 said:

Reposessions outside of London can still be bought cheap. Eg houses that sold for £80k in 2006 going for £45k now, houses sold for £100k going for £60k, flats bought for £120k going for £50k.


It's not massive money but if london saw these falls of c. 40% plus then that would be a big problem.

The way I see it is these houses will slowly but surely regain their 2007 levels but next year could provide a boost

But, no question about it, it's easy to buy a £60k house and get £450pm. Not a bad way to get a 'pension' in some people's eyes. £12k down and the rent covers the mortgage. In 30 years surely it will be worth more than £60k.

Personally I think it is these northern properties that will soar post april 2015 when people cash in pensions to buy BTL properties and perhaps 30% gains will be made next year on these type of properties.

They are just too cheap.

Edited by jonah35 on Thursday 11th December 21:59

Where are they?

The numbers are valid and look attractive however there was a poster on these boards (Groat?) who had something like 200 BTL, all on a yield and he mentioned the quality of tenant meant some issues with getting paid and damage caused. Maybe that is £20k flats not £60k ones. BUt on the face of it I agree that it's an interesting proposing.

[menousername]

Mr Whippy said:

even the 'poor' today live better off than the wealthy of many years ago.



Dave

you sure?

[jonah35]

burwoodman said:

Pork said:

jonah35 said:

Reposessions outside of London can still be bought cheap. Eg houses that sold for £80k in 2006 going for £45k now, houses sold for £100k going for £60k, flats bought for £120k going for £50k.


It's not massive money but if london saw these falls of c. 40% plus then that would be a big problem.

The way I see it is these houses will slowly but surely regain their 2007 levels but next year could provide a boost

But, no question about it, it's easy to buy a £60k house and get £450pm. Not a bad way to get a 'pension' in some people's eyes. £12k down and the rent covers the mortgage. In 30 years surely it will be worth more than £60k.

Personally I think it is these northern properties that will soar post april 2015 when people cash in pensions to buy BTL properties and perhaps 30% gains will be made next year on these type of properties.

They are just too cheap.

Edited by jonah35 on Thursday 11th December 21:59

Where are they?

The numbers are valid and look attractive however there was a poster on these boards (Groat?) who had something like 200 BTL, all on a yield and he mentioned the quality of tenant meant some issues with getting paid and damage caused. Maybe that is £20k flats not £60k ones. BUt on the face of it I agree that it's an interesting proposing.

Most northern towns.

Yes groak was his name.

These more expensive ones have normal tenants, nurses, police, managers of pubs etc.

a professional person could buy one per year cash if he bought with a friend. They are cheap!

[turbobloke]

menousername said:

Mr Whippy said:

even the 'poor' today live better off than the wealthy of many years ago.



Dave

you sure?

MrW may be along soon but possibly the idea goes along the lines of a relative lack of dysentery and ringworm linked to free or or paid-for or affordable healthcare, income or welfare sufficient to provide for household labour saving gadgets that remove the need for staff that only the richest could afford, also enough to pay for internet connections and smartphones and plasma TVs all of which didn't exist back then, increased mobility such that the cheapest modern cars are more luxurious and safer and outperform the old world models that only the richest could afford, virtually everyone can holiday abroad if they want to unlike the past, life expetancy of the poorest these days is approaching that of the wealthiest in previous eras (depending on how far back you want to go) etc.

[MajorProblem]

menousername said:

Mr Whippy said:

even the 'poor' today live better off than the wealthy of many years ago.



Dave

you sure?

Queen Victoria didn't have a 50" LCD TV OR PS4 did she...

[jonah35]

menousername said:

Mr Whippy said:

even the 'poor' today live better off than the wealthy of many years ago.



Dave

you sure?

Better food, healthcare, foreign holidays, better transport, gadgets, tv, indoor bathroom, Central heating, electricity, running hot water, that's all good.

They may live in a smaller house though.

[98elise]

burwoodman said:

Pork said:

jonah35 said:

Reposessions outside of London can still be bought cheap. Eg houses that sold for £80k in 2006 going for £45k now, houses sold for £100k going for £60k, flats bought for £120k going for £50k.


It's not massive money but if london saw these falls of c. 40% plus then that would be a big problem.

The way I see it is these houses will slowly but surely regain their 2007 levels but next year could provide a boost

But, no question about it, it's easy to buy a £60k house and get £450pm. Not a bad way to get a 'pension' in some people's eyes. £12k down and the rent covers the mortgage. In 30 years surely it will be worth more than £60k.

Personally I think it is these northern properties that will soar post april 2015 when people cash in pensions to buy BTL properties and perhaps 30% gains will be made next year on these type of properties.

They are just too cheap.

Edited by jonah35 on Thursday 11th December 21:59

Where are they?

The numbers are valid and look attractive however there was a poster on these boards (Groat?) who had something like 200 BTL, all on a yield and he mentioned the quality of tenant meant some issues with getting paid and damage caused. Maybe that is £20k flats not £60k ones. BUt on the face of it I agree that it's an interesting proposing.

It was groak, and he bought very cheap properties in scotland. He also ran a lettings agency and a pay day loan company.

[Targarama]

98elise said:

burwoodman said:

Pork said:

jonah35 said:

Reposessions outside of London can still be bought cheap. Eg houses that sold for £80k in 2006 going for £45k now, houses sold for £100k going for £60k, flats bought for £120k going for £50k.


It's not massive money but if london saw these falls of c. 40% plus then that would be a big problem.

The way I see it is these houses will slowly but surely regain their 2007 levels but next year could provide a boost

But, no question about it, it's easy to buy a £60k house and get £450pm. Not a bad way to get a 'pension' in some people's eyes. £12k down and the rent covers the mortgage. In 30 years surely it will be worth more than £60k.

Personally I think it is these northern properties that will soar post april 2015 when people cash in pensions to buy BTL properties and perhaps 30% gains will be made next year on these type of properties.

They are just too cheap.

Edited by jonah35 on Thursday 11th December 21:59

Where are they?

The numbers are valid and look attractive however there was a poster on these boards (Groat?) who had something like 200 BTL, all on a yield and he mentioned the quality of tenant meant some issues with getting paid and damage caused. Maybe that is £20k flats not £60k ones. BUt on the face of it I agree that it's an interesting proposing.

It was groak, and he bought very cheap properties in scotland. He also ran a lettings agency and a pay day loan company.

Not sure things are so easy these days, now the government gives housing benefits to the people, who are then supposed to pay the landlord. Now I wonder how much rent arreases (sp?) have risen at the bottom end of the market since this rule changed. Mistake by the government this one.

[98elise]

jonah35 said:

menousername said:

Mr Whippy said:

even the 'poor' today live better off than the wealthy of many years ago.



Dave

you sure?

Better food, healthcare, foreign holidays, better transport, gadgets, tv, indoor bathroom, Central heating, electricity, running hot water, that's all good.

They may live in a smaller house though.

You forgot cars

A bigger house as you say is probably the only thing the wealthy of the past had, and that would have been cold. You can only be in one room at once so more rooms doesn't always mean better.

If you see any period drama look at the stuff in bedrooms and living rooms. Its pretty basic living even for the rich.

[burwoodman]

Targarama said:

98elise said:

burwoodman said:

Pork said:

jonah35 said:

Reposessions outside of London can still be bought cheap. Eg houses that sold for £80k in 2006 going for £45k now, houses sold for £100k going for £60k, flats bought for £120k going for £50k.


It's not massive money but if london saw these falls of c. 40% plus then that would be a big problem.

The way I see it is these houses will slowly but surely regain their 2007 levels but next year could provide a boost

But, no question about it, it's easy to buy a £60k house and get £450pm. Not a bad way to get a 'pension' in some people's eyes. £12k down and the rent covers the mortgage. In 30 years surely it will be worth more than £60k.

Personally I think it is these northern properties that will soar post april 2015 when people cash in pensions to buy BTL properties and perhaps 30% gains will be made next year on these type of properties.

They are just too cheap.

Edited by jonah35 on Thursday 11th December 21:59

Where are they?

The numbers are valid and look attractive however there was a poster on these boards (Groat?) who had something like 200 BTL, all on a yield and he mentioned the quality of tenant meant some issues with getting paid and damage caused. Maybe that is £20k flats not £60k ones. BUt on the face of it I agree that it's an interesting proposing.

It was groak, and he bought very cheap properties in scotland. He also ran a lettings agency and a pay day loan company.

Not sure things are so easy these days, now the government gives housing benefits to the people, who are then supposed to pay the landlord. Now I wonder how much rent arreases (sp?) have risen at the bottom end of the market since this rule changed. Mistake by the government this one.

OT- Yes Groak. I enjoyed his musings. Wonder what happened to him.

[Mr Whippy]

turbobloke said:

menousername said:

Mr Whippy said:

even the 'poor' today live better off than the wealthy of many years ago.



Dave

you sure?

MrW may be along soon but possibly the idea goes along the lines of a relative lack of dysentery and ringworm linked to free or or paid-for or affordable healthcare, income or welfare sufficient to provide for household labour saving gadgets that remove the need for staff that only the richest could afford, also enough to pay for internet connections and smartphones and plasma TVs all of which didn't exist back then, increased mobility such that the cheapest modern cars are more luxurious and safer and outperform the old world models that only the richest could afford, virtually everyone can holiday abroad if they want to unlike the past, life expetancy of the poorest these days is approaching that of the wealthiest in previous eras (depending on how far back you want to go) etc.

Exactly.

Worst case scenario I live out my life without oddles of cash, but live a happy healthy and content life without materialistic trappings and I'm more than happy with that as a human outcome on this planet... it's still FAR more than many could expect even today, never mind our fellow Englanders a hundred years ago.

All extra wealth does is add materialistic benefits I think. Yes I can buy a bigger TV, a shinier car, a bigger house, holidays with posher food and nicer bed sheets, etc etc.

In the end the necessities to live a happy, healthy, contented long life are all there today, even for the poorest.


Indeed the only real issue I see today is super-high density st housing stock, which generally breeds a less nice environment for humans to be at their best and happiest.

A cynical person might say that keeping people in these places is good for business. If they could look out over open fields every morning and go for a walk, they'd begin to question the need to bother buying their big tellies or fancy phones to escape from the misery that may be present in a dense urban environment.

Dave

[economicpygmy]

Mr Whippy said:

Indeed the only real issue I see today is super-high density st housing stock, which generally breeds a less nice environment for humans to be at their best and happiest.

A cynical person might say that keeping people in these places is good for business. If they could look out over open fields every morning and go for a walk, they'd begin to question the need to bother buying their big tellies or fancy phones to escape from the misery that may be present in a dense urban environment.

Dave

Very true, unfortunately its lost on many...

[9mm]

economicpygmy said:

Mr Whippy said:

Indeed the only real issue I see today is super-high density st housing stock, which generally breeds a less nice environment for humans to be at their best and happiest.

A cynical person might say that keeping people in these places is good for business. If they could look out over open fields every morning and go for a walk, they'd begin to question the need to bother buying their big tellies or fancy phones to escape from the misery that may be present in a dense urban environment.

Dave

Very true, unfortunately its lost on many...

Is there a prize for correctly naming the country that photo was taken in?

[Randy Winkman]

9mm said:

economicpygmy said:

Mr Whippy said:

Indeed the only real issue I see today is super-high density st housing stock, which generally breeds a less nice environment for humans to be at their best and happiest.

A cynical person might say that keeping people in these places is good for business. If they could look out over open fields every morning and go for a walk, they'd begin to question the need to bother buying their big tellies or fancy phones to escape from the misery that may be present in a dense urban environment.

Dave

Very true, unfortunately its lost on many...

Is there a prize for correctly naming the country that photo was taken in?

Or where we copied it from?