Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I rent out my old 2 bed flat for a simple reason. I couldn't sell it at the price I wanted, and I could make a profit on renting in the meantime as long as interest rates stay at nowt. I've only had two changes in tenant and the last was swiftly handled by a private ad on this (great) forum and a two hour viewing period in which 3 suitable tenants turned up, all wanted it for ?1200 pcm, all with references etc in hand. I wasn't going to be a C$^%t and start a bidding war so just gave it to the first one that had turned up as that seemed fair.


There is a huge renting demand at the moment locally. Flats renting like hotcakes.

Imagine you had baked some hotcakes Annette. And then you wanted to rent them out...and...and...er.....*scratches head*.


Toss it into the "MrBen talking bollocks" bin. It's filling up fast. Despite recent valiant efforts from dear Mockers to catch me up.


I think you've been generous. Rescored as 1/10.

What yields do you reckon straightforward two bedders generate?


(by "straightforward", I mean central ED location, non basement, reasonable condition, prof tenants etc. I do not mean auction purchase, needs doing up style properties which obviously command a higher yield on the original price.)


Annette, you are very cruel.

new mother Wrote:

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

What yields do you reckon straightforward two bedders generate?


(by "straightforward", I mean central ED location, non basement, reasonable condition, prof tenants etc. I do not mean auction purchase, needs doing up style properties which obviously command a higher yield on the original price.)



> Annette, you are very cruel.



I know I am but only where necessary.


Mr Ben needs it.



* files nails *



Nette:-S

  • 4 weeks later...
Bought this flat in Eastbourne for 15k and was on a graduate starting salary of ?8500 (yes really) so it cost about 2* my income - the price now is ?86k and graduate starting incomes (non finacial) maybe 22- 25 k so nearly 4* income - prices need to drop considerably for fair price (and first time buyers) to return.

ibilly99 Wrote:

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

> Bought this flat in Eastbourne for 15k and was on

> a graduate starting salary of ?8500 (yes really)

> so it cost about 2* my income - the price now is

> ?86k and graduate starting incomes (non finacial)

> maybe 22- 25 k so nearly 4* income - prices need

> to drop considerably for fair price (and first

> time buyers) to return.


You suggest two times salary is a fair price but four times is more appropriate to what people are willing to pay. And as buyers dictate what is a fair price (otherwise they don't have to make an offer) the four times must be a fair price and I'm not sure I see that changing.

Yawns...


...But can't resist contributing...


The average SE22 3 bed terrace is now 600k odds. If you work on four times joint that requires a deposit of say 50k plus a combined household income of ?140,000. How many households have that income in reality? Prices still seem high to me.

MrBen Wrote:

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

> The average SE22 3 bed terrace is now 600k odds.

> If you work on four times joint that requires a

> deposit of say 50k plus a combined household

> income of ?140,000. How many households have that

> income in reality? Prices still seem high to me.

But most people don't start with a 3 bed house (Do they?) They begin with a one/two bed flat and work their way up the ladder, so by the time they're on to a 3 bed house they're more likely to have ?200K equity/deposit and a combined household income of ?100K. And there are a heck of a lot of those in London.

Dave, a large house converted into various flats perhaps? Lots of different transactions?


Peter storm, agreed but many of those joint incomes will be hit by nanny costs or halved if one partner stays at home.... I can see how the 600k prices are "achieved" as the agents say, but not really how 900 plus Prices are arrived at for bigger houses. There are plenty of those in eg the village - where does the cash come from? Is everyone getting bonuses? I find it extraordinary....

Residential property looks increasingly safe compared to the volatility in the financial markets.


What makes you think that?


If the economy stagnates or declines further, and unemployment soars, who do you think will be able to pay the current prices being asked?


There is every chance that house prices may well decline in the future. Perhaps massively. Don't be so complacent, tommy.

Have to agree TG. The stage has been set and there must surely be more chance of prices going down than up now...? Only human inertia holding prices where they are as far as I can see and inflation is eroding real values.


Not sure there is anything that is a good safe bet right now. If you want to invest in something that will make a killing then I reckon you'd have to choose something like Libyan coastal property but it'd be quite a ballsy call.

For a ten year bet, either property or equities should work as they'll hopefully survive through inflationary times.


property is tough call as we're back to 2007 highs (or higher)

but the rental yield justifies current prices alone so you can forget about income multiples


the reason why london's property prices have maintained value is classic supply and demand. it's small example of what's going to happen worldwide over the next 50 yrs and why the states property market hasn't recovered. they dont have the same supply issues as we do.


ultimately London has a job market right now - the recession is mostly outside the M25 - this exacerbates the property supply and demand issue and will continue to do so over next 5 yrs or so.


the only reason why property feels like a 'safe bet' is cos it's returned in the past - this has no bearing to what it will return in the future


my personal bet is equities - the volatility makes it slightly scary - but investments like property and equities shouldn't be seen as 'short term'. ultimately if the sh1t hits the fan they'll just print more and more money. bodes well for real assets like property/equities/gold


interest rates aren't going up anytime soon


my money's on listed small uk companies (w/out currency risk) with investment overseas (emerging markets) but not property at these levels, despite all the positives, equities feel much better value and similar yields

For most of us who can only afford one house, surely the issue isn't solely about how reliable the return is from buying a house, but whether we enjoy owning our home.


I bought earlier this year. I know in the short term I might lose money, but I intend to stay here for many years, and whilst I know it might be cheaper renting, I wanted the freedom to decorate how I wanted and the comfort of knowing that when things go wrong I can get them fixed promptly rather than having to beg and plead with a miserly landlady to do work that should have been done years ago.


Putting money in the stock market just doesn't give me the same thrill as having my own home even if I might make more money.

peterstorm1985 Wrote:

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

> MrBen Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > The average SE22 3 bed terrace is now 600k

> odds.

> > If you work on four times joint that requires a

> > deposit of say 50k plus a combined household

> > income of ?140,000. How many households have

> that

> > income in reality? Prices still seem high to

> me.

> But most people don't start with a 3 bed house (Do

> they?) They begin with a one/two bed flat and work

> their way up the ladder, so by the time they're on

> to a 3 bed house they're more likely to have ?200K

> equity/deposit and a combined household income of

> ?100K. And there are a heck of a lot of those in

> London.


That's the textbook theory... but the reality is that anyone with 100-200k equity on an ED flat would have had to be holding it since 2001 odds and would have wanted a house by now (if starting a family). If moving from say, a Clapham flat to an ED house then it's more likely. You're also assuming that man with equity in flat can (a) sell it and (b) get a decent price to realise that equity. And flats are not selling well if at all, without significant price cuts.


"We're still at 2007 prices".


Not across the board. Some are less (e.g. flats) and some streets are significantly higher (good road, good houses). Even then, the 2007 argument doesn't hold as a good indicator. This was 5 years ago and we've since had half a decade of stagnation. If you look at compound inflation over that period that's around a 14% reduction on 2007 prices in real terms, and that's before any actual price falls.


Another 3-5 years of high inflation and 2007 prices, whilst showing a peak, will start to look average


"Equities are a better bet now"


Remember those Sunday times graphs in the boom that showed how property "outperformed" stocks in the past 50 years? They all made sense if you included the recent boom years but didn't amount to much if you didn't. In terms of absolute return, equities may at this point, offer better value. But that negates leverage. Property is still the most accessible leveraged investment to the man on the street. A 30k deposit on a 300k flat that then appreciates capital at 10% say, on sale, gives a 100% return on invested capital. And try getting a bank to lend you ?300k to invest in equities at the moment......

Don't invest in equities, unless you really know your stuff. Look at the FSTE/DAX/S&P charts over the last 10 years... there's no real growth there, only cyclical movements.


Although I am by no means suggesting that you should put your money into property either - especially if you are expecting good appreciation.

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

    • Exactly what I said, that Corbyn's group of univeristy politics far-left back benchers would have been a disaster during Covid if they had won the election. Here you go:  BBC News - Ex-union boss McCluskey took private jet flights arranged by building firm, report finds https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3kgg55410o The 2019 result was considered one of the worst in living memory for Labour, not only for big swing of seats away from them but because they lost a large number of the Red-wall seats- generational Labour seats. Why? Because as Alan Johnson put it so succinctly: "Corbyn couldn't lead the working class out of a paper bag"! https://youtu.be/JikhuJjM1VM?si=oHhP6rTq4hqvYyBC
    • Agreed and in the meantime its "joe public" who has to pay through higher prices. We're talking all over the shop from food to insurance and everything in between.  And to add insult to injury they "hurt " their own voters/supporters through the actions they have taken. Sadly it gets to a stage where you start thinking about leaving London and even exiting the UK for good, but where to go????? Sad times now and ahead for at least the next 4yrs, hence why Govt and Local Authorities need to cut spending on all but essential services.  An immediate saving, all managerial and executive salaries cannot exceed and frozen at £50K Do away with the Mayor of London, the GLA and all the hanging on organisations, plus do away with borough mayors and the teams that serve them. All added beauracracy that can be dispensed with and will save £££££'s  
    • The minimum wage hikes on top of the NICs increases have also caused vast swathes of unemployment.
    • Exactly - a snap election will make things even worse. Jazzer - say you get a 'new' administration tomorrow, you're still left with the same treasury, the same civil servants, the same OBR, the same think-tanks and advisors (many labour advisors are cross-party, Gauke for eg). The options are the same, no matter who's in power. Labour hasn't even changed the Tories' fiscal rules - the parties are virtually economically aligned these days.  But Reeves made a mistake in trying too hard, too early to make some seismic changes in her first budget as a big 'we're here and we're going to fix this mess, Labour to the rescue' kind of thing . They shone such a big light on the black hole that their only option was to try to fix it overnight. It was a comms clusterfuck.  They'd perhaps have done better sticking to Sunak's quiet, cautious approach, but they knew the gullible public was expecting an 24-hour turnaround miracle.  The NIC hikes are a disaster, I think they'll be reversed soon and enough and they'll keep trying till they find something that sticks.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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