Jump to content

Recommended Posts

"It is when they're second hand"


It's not entirely though is it as the price the vendor paid for it is a very real sum with a very real value.


What IS weird about second hand houses is that unlike say art and booze, where notoriety and rarity can increase value over time, houses should match the deterioration == depreciation model of most other stuff, yet we have this weird expectation that houses should just magically increase in price because they do, irrespective of whether we've actually invested in/improved the property.


Can i write a longer sentence?

but people have to live somewhere. Either rent/ buy. If they rent then someone is getting an income stream on an asset at maybe 4-5% gross.( cf a cash isa at 2.5%- or less if not isa) There is the added risk of capital growth/ loss, but in the long term we all think property will increase. a key determinant is interest rates and the ease of a mortgage. If you cant afford to buy you will have to rent-and rents will go up if there is higher demand than supply.

Can I remind the Honourable Member for Felbrigg that this thread is entitled the 2007 property crash not the 2017 property crash.


Its about what was supposed to have happended, not what will happen in the future.


The chosen Eynella Road is an example of a road where the houses have risen in value from 2007 to date (i think !).


I'm not sure your analysis for the future will necessarily result in falling prices, the fact is that there are a shortage of family homes in ED and people are willing to pay more to live here than they used to.


Flats, especially new builds always outperform in a rising market - but in 2006/2007 Paragon and other mortgage companies stopped lending on new builds - on the basis that they were overvalued.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------



> 1.75m under offer.

____________________________________________


Really....


Well I'd go to 1.65 m


( 5 feet and 4.96 inches imperial )


Also I'd say that front door is "Light Blue 22 by Farrow & Ball " in an oil based exterior Eco eggshell



W**F

Stop making my posts disappear Woof !


Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Can I remind the Honourable Member for Felbrigg

> that this thread is entitled the 2007 property

> crash not the 2017 property crash.

>

> Its about what was supposed to have happended, not

> what will happen in the future.

>

> The chosen Eynella Road is an example of a road

> where the houses have risen in value from 2007 to

> date (i think !).

>

> I'm not sure your analysis for the future will

> necessarily result in falling prices, the fact is

> that there are a shortage of family homes in ED

> and people are willing to pay more to live here

> than they used to.

>

> Flats, especially new builds always outperform in

> a rising market - but in 2006/2007 Paragon and

> other mortgage companies stopped lending on new

> builds - on the basis that they were overvalued.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mick started this thread specifically to welcome

> quids back to Thursday

>

> FACT

>

> I suspect some properties (flats at the lower end)

> may have dropped quite a lot in price



The b*gger.....he was right

Mick's right. Save for a brief window post Lehman's to around summer 2009 a 3 bedder round here is only 5-10% down from peak prices. To get one you'll need a min 60K deposit + transactional costs + a combined household income of 180K = really bad value to live in a middling part of London. I keep wondering how many people in ED actually have this level of income? And I'm guessing many of those without the big cash deposit need to shift their flat first to get the equity (and flats are frozen at the moment). With the FTB market drying up as quids says then it's got to stick.....or fall gently (assuming stable low base rates).


Yet still, in 2010, these Victorian 3 beds off the lane are being sold quickly with loft conversions in full flow. Who are these people? And where are they coming from because Clapham flats aren't shifting either....and I've yet to spot the deck shoes and chino's brigade.

Spot the frustated words of a man who has spent the morning being dragged around to look at a series subsiding hen huts in Forest Hill for 500k....


On the plus side we found the best value lunch in SE22 - two courses for ?4.95 each at the excellent Si Mangia which was busy = value. :)-D

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
    • My view is that any party that welcomes a self-declared Marxist would merit a negative point. 
    • Isabelle Capitain on 7 Upland Road will be able to do that for you
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...