European Tribune

Display:
But half of the market comprises people who don't have to sell, but are actually still trading up. So they wan't the best price they can  get, usually based on an impression of what they should have got, which in a market which is falling means they won't sell.

Also, a lot of mortgage lenders have returned to the "safe" lending schemes they operated in the mid-90s of requiring 20 - 25% deposits and low multiples of wages. The riskier 95 - 110% schemes which were commonplace this time last year have disappeared. This does menas that, until prices have finished falling, (and imo they have a long way to go and will take time doing it) is going to make it hard for people to enter at the bottom.

The big falls are in the buy-to-let market, a legal scam which has inflated prices ridiculously in the last 15 years. The wheels have come off and now people are selling for whatever they can get, which is pulling all the property in those areas down.

I don't wish ill on people but I'm glad buy-to-let has fallen apart as it was a disgraceful practice that should have been, if not outlawed, taxed into unprofitability.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Sun Apr 6th, 2008 at 05:02:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Actually, buy-to-let started the bubble, but all bubbles are essentially about "trading up" or "buy to sell" or buy to flip". Buy-to-let doesn't result in empty dwellings (quite the opposite: it turns empty dwellings into rental property): "trading up" does.

Buy-to-let is an arbitrage between the rent a property commands and the mortgage payments required to buy it. If the mortgage payments are low relative to rents, buy-to-let will lead to rising demand for building purchases and higher demand for credit. It is quite easy to nip such a bubble in the bud by slightly increasing interest rates so that the property prices don't increase too much and the demand for credit is curtailed.

If, instead, interest rates are kept low or are even lowered further, then property prices start appreciating at double-digit rates and within a couple of years, when the trend has established itself, it becomes more profitable to buy property to resell it rather than to live in it or rent it.

I have no sympathy for buy-to-letters but they were not responsible for the bubble lasting 10 years, only for seeding it.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Apr 6th, 2008 at 05:12:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No I disagree : Buy to let, being essentially free property, placed normal buyers, the poor saps who actually wanted to live in their property, at extreme disadvantage. Because of the vast differential in cost, in the competitive market of the last 15 years, they were regularly outbid, leading to an inflationary spiral as they were forced to bid higher to get into the market.

What helped this was that multiple buyers became preferred bidders via estate agents. When I sold my flat it never went on the open market as it was bought by a buy-to-let-er who was on their contact list.

Now they are making losses cos the rents aren't equalling the mortgage costs, and are having to sell at a loss. Good, I hope they all lose a lot of money. But I would have preferred such a distortion had been prevented in the first place.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Sun Apr 6th, 2008 at 05:49:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Right, the inflationary spiral could have been prevented by raising interest rates  as soon as the trend established himself. But there were too many people making money out of that.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Apr 6th, 2008 at 06:02:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Also, buy-to-let has been the vehicle of a large number of tax avoidance schemes, due to a failure to close various loopholes, which kept buy-to-let going far beyond simple arbitrage of rents vs mortgages.
by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Sun Apr 6th, 2008 at 09:05:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
ABN Amro have an interesting report

 Home Truths

which I have yet to digest fully....

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Sun Apr 6th, 2008 at 09:30:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Recommended Diaries
The Purpose of Education
by rdf - Nov 20
27 comments

In Defense of the Electoral College
by danps - Nov 22
10 comments

LQD: NATO as 'convenient threat' for Russia
by marco - Nov 21
30 comments

Computational simulations in science
by tiagoantao - Nov 20
20 comments

jitter noise rumble
by emilmoller - Nov 19
18 comments

LQD: The real orgasmic Puritans
by Ted Welch - Nov 20
36 comments

The Puritan Edge
by rg - Nov 20
122 comments

Early Friday Photography Blog No. 62
by LEP - Nov 20
58 comments

Debates
Campaigns
Occasional Series