lard

In a perfect world everyone would use auctions to buy and sell.... No gazumping, no gazundering, no underhand sales techniques, no chains falling through. True market value for buying and selling. No estate agents required. Pretty low costs for sales. 10 auction houses across the country once a month should just about cover it.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What ratio of properties are being sold at auction > vs traditional channels, at the moment? > > I don't know. But unless you have those stats to > hand, how can you say that auctions are the norm? I didn't say they were the norm. I'm saying you can use them to see real sold prices...prices that will appear on the land registry in a few months time...ie they are meaningful as a guide to where the market is now.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The problem is that reposessed properties at > auction traditionally go for up to 40% less than > the rest of the market, so this isn't a meanigful > comparison. > > Is buying at auction really becoming "the norm"? > Bit of a sweeping statement... Sweeping statement itself?? It's the quickest and most current way of seeing a comparison against land registry prices. This IS the market.

If it's just to get antibiotics etc just go to the walk in centre. New Cross walk in centre I went once I was the only one there just went straight in. If you phone them in advance they can tell you how many people are in there.

Another day another auction... Lordship Lane one bed flat for ?121,000 Lordship Lane flat

You are seriously advocating fining a kid wearing those trainer thingies? Unbelievable.

AcedOut Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A bike is a mode of transport, just like a > motorbike or a car. You are not allowed to ride > on pavements or through parks. And just because a > bike is powered by natural means, doesn't make it > exempt. Be thankful that you are unregistered and > free from road tax and obey the highway code! > > Rant over. What about rollerskates? Those trainers with wheels in? I think I am with DaveR on this one. Be considerate. Fine the inconsiderate. Don't fine people who are not doing any harm. Use some judgement.

The fact that our taxes have paid for 3 people to stand there and fine somebody for doing little wrong hasn't even been mentioned. And we wonder why we are facing tough economic times. Going to the dogs, I tell you. We're dooooomed.

3 of them together to fine cyclists probably causing no harm. The whole thing is pathetic.

These things always go in cycles. Always. If you investigate the different elements, you will get the same result that has been seen in the past. The most dangerous thought when these cycles appear to be panning out in the same way again... "its different this time" For anyone thinking that it is just doom-mongering, I'm afraid to say that the current cycle is mostly imitating the early parts of 1930s America. (!)(td):(

matthew123 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think that Labour will try everything to > re-ignite the economy / housing market as their > own political futures ride on it being a success. > We've seen it with stamp duty freeze / bank bail > outs / interest rates being slashed and now talk > of tax cuts. The Chancellor has already put > pressure on Banks to reduce their mortgage rates > in line with the BoE Base Rate, so I think sooner > rather than later they will exert massive > intolerable pressure for Mortgage borrowing to be > substantially eased. I think that will reopen the > gates... so IMHO we are now more or less at the > bottom of the East Dulwich housing slump. > > I might be wrong but that's what I think. They can't lend what they don't have. We can't spend what we don't earn. No amount of helping hand helped Japan or the US in the short or long run. We have already seen the stamp duty freeze have no effect whatsoever. The bottom line is the money has to come from "somewhere". You can only get this money as a nation by creating more and taxing more, or by spending less "running" yourself. Anything else is a ruse, which ultimately will fail. We must accept it has to run it's course, until it all becomes sane again. What would we accept as a "bleak outlook"? 2004 prices? 2002 prices? Things weren't necessarily bleak then, so a 40-50% fall to those kind of levels shouldn't necessarily be classed as "bleak" - merely returning to some sort of normality. Don't know why those auction figures were on that site..must be the guy who does them does them in his spare time.

Another auction. Not strictly ED but interesting ones from close by. Lot 119 Danby Street house Se15 sold for 250,000 previously Lot 199 Denmark Road, SE5 flat sold for ?119,500 Carnage across the board with the majority from HBOS with no reserve. The Camberwell flat was down 50% on it's previous sale. Some of the city centre flats in other areas of the country down 60-70% Camberwell Flat Auction Summary You can factor in a few of these previous higher prices being dodgy (overpriced deals "sold" to unsuspecting folk), but this is the current state in general. Forget prices you see in estate agent windows as these are meaningless in comparison to the real situation.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I know quids is very proud of his pyramid-selling > analogy, but it's not accurate. And while London's > financial sector may not ever been as dominant as > previously, the industry is far from over. > > I do agree that we need more diversification > though, but I don't think that manufacturing is > necessarily the way forward. The financial service industry should be just that - servicing the economy. When it creates it's own wealth out of proportion to the underlying economy then it is based on hot air. This is a classic pyramid. There is of course still an opportunity to service the "world market" which is what London became, but like house prices this individual part of the jigsaw became too inflated in comparison to the rest of the economy in this country. When things get pulled too far away from the equilibrium, then it can only lead to a snap back. This is not even counting all the toxic products they have been using to gamble. Everything needs to be more stable, more in balance, more in line with sustainable natural growth. Natural growth by creating "stuff" doesn't necessarily mean manufacturing, more just creating things or work which have value in the global marketplace. At the moment we spend too much on "ourselves", and when we rock up to the global market, we really don't have much to offer. Another thing imo that looks out of equilibrium is public sector spending, employment and pensions...all going to be a bit of a headache in the future.

What we need to start doing in this country is actually making good stuff that sells elsewhere. Everything else in whatever level of intricacy just perpetuates the pyramid.

Asset Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They're talking about how it will affect the > markets tomorrow. If it's anything like the rate > slash to 1% in the states a week or so ago the > markets will carry on dropping regardless. Exactly - it won't do anything. There's no point turning the steering wheel and applying your brakes when your car is already plummeting down the cliff. They should have done a few things a few years ago to avert this. The problem was never interest rates or desire for loans, the problem was bank funding. This has now given even less incentive for depositors, which means banks may have even less to loan.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The idea of lower interest rates is to encourage > spending and investment, get some liquidity in the > market, etc. It will also make it easier for > people to pay their existing mortgages, hopefully > resulting in fewer defaults and reposessions... > that has to be a good thing (for both homeowners > and banks). I think digging the country out of > recession has to be a higher priority than returns > on savings. Some will inevitably disagree (ie > those with large savings), but you can't please > everyone, and sometimes you need to look at what's > best for the country as whole. > > Anyway, as AcedOut says, inflation will start > falling soon, because commodities are plummetting > like a lead balloon. I think the people most likely to disagree (the prudent) are fed-up of bailing out those that always take (the reckless)

bon3yard Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not conviced by James at all but your right about > Gomez, hes poor. The Opposition knows they only > have to loft in a high cross and theres a 50/50 > chance Gomez will flap at it. So a good shot stopper but calamitous at crosses...James-10 years then.

I often find that if I have a petty grievance with something, the best way to fix the problem is to start a thread on an internet forum about it.

Even a 15% drop in prices is pretty big as a first year downturn. I would say the biggest turn ever (ie to go from rising to downwards so quickly). It's funny how people's mindsets have already changed, from "it will never go down" to "it's gone down 15% in a year"...but to suggest a 60% drop you are still seen as "scaremongering". As we see more hardship in the real economy we will see prices continue to fall, this is the bottom line. Strange how a 60% drop is said to be "scaremongering" when the equivalent 250% or so rise was seen as totally normal. It is the psychology of "gaining" rather than "losing".

So dog shite is more wrong because there is more of it about?? As an individual act though, is a cat owner who lets their cat shit outside equally selfish? Dog shite and cat shite is pretty similar on the rancid stakes. I don't obsess about it either and I find myself talking about it on an internet forum too!! (Is this literally what talking shite is??:) As I keep saying I don't like the mentality either, and I don't condone it at all.

As an aside what is the attraction of coffee shops amongst people with kids? Do these coffee shop goers have a similar level of desire to go to coffee shops before having their kids, and they just go because they now can, or does the kids in some way increase their coffee shop "lounging" desire? There must be some degree study on this important discussion...

Well it does make it less of a threat. If no one knows anyone that has actually done this, then it isn't much of a threat by definition. I know of lots of kids. I once was one. As I said I personally don't know of anyone ever getting ill because they touched dog poo. I know the owner must clear it up. I understand that a dog can't. I said above that it is really selfish when owners don't. I'm just interested in knowing why dog owners have to pick it up, while cat owners, horse owners etc don't.

Lighten up Francis :) Nobody knows the ins and outs of what went on here, so talking about brutalised foreigners may be a little at a tangent. For the record, I agree that teenagers aren't really as scary as they like to make out, and talking to someone is generally the best form of action. In reality the chances of getting attacked when you just talk calmly to someone you don't know is pretty small. Certainly more chance of getting knocked down etc. I can certainly see why some people are not keen on "getting their hands dirty" though too. Especially when they didn't ask for the slime, don't act slimy themselves just go about their life in a moral way, and don't believe the slime should be there in the first place.

James Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Whenever the "I hate dogs/I love dogs" debate > comes up, why do the anti brigade always tar all > of us dog owners with the same brush? Most > dog-owners I know abhor the irresponsible people > who allow their dogs to foul public spaces and > bite children. The suggestion seems to be that > because of an anti-social minority we should > impose blanket bans. > > Imagine applying the same principle to football > matches or rock concerts? There'd be outrage. > > We all pay our taxes so the park should be for all > of us, dog owners and non dog owners alike. Same principle IS applied to football matches in relation to drinking at the match, being kept behind after games etc. I would say your average football supporter has been tarnished as a hooligan for 20 years. Drinking is allowed at a rugby match one day, then not at a football match in the same stadium the day later. Some other thoughts re: dog shit... Why do dogs get bad press when other animals such as cats, horses get to crap wherever whenever they like with nobody responsible for picking their poo up. Does anyone know anyone that has actually got ill from dog poo? Like, ever? Dog bags weren't as popular in the older days so we all grew up with dog poo around us - I personally have never heard of anyone getting ill and I must have met thousands of people. Obviously I am just me, but I would guess the risk of catching an illness is smaller than catching an illness in many other ways which are currently "allowed" I'm not condoning leaving dog poo, just interested why it is seen more terrible than other similar acts of selfishness.. People seem obsessed with it, when in reality it is just one of those things. People will always do it, cos they are selfish, so you will at some stage step on it.

Cassius Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I like them - I think they are strange and > beautiful like man made triffids.......... Yeah you say that but what happens when they start walking. Run for the hills.