Jump to content

Halifax -3.6% MOM - largest monthly fall ever?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Great !

 

3-7 months worth of "crash cruise speed" all at once.

 

A sort of "birthday present" to some, perhaps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am amazed that this months report didnt try to blame the fall on the weather?

LOL.

 

There's a delicious irony in this somehow...

 

Check out the Halifax drop for September, and compare it with this...

 

ARE WE THERE YET???

 

Nationwide : House prices rose in September

 

Dr Bubb, when are you finally going to admit your bullcrap about having some special super secret techincal system to determine future house prices by posting loads of random charts copied and pasted from Yahoo Finance was just a load of balls? Still waiting.

 

Has Little Professor been banned from HPC yet?

It seems that such a ban should be contemplated after his very misleading posts ruining my threads.

 

And he is Oh-so-wrong on the direction and intensity of price falls.

Surely he deserves a few "friendly antibodies" of his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Halifax Hpi September 2010 -3.6%!?

cyberbear.jpg : see a HPC page

 

My comment there would be:

 

This report looks like a game changer.

It is going to be tough to restore the Bullish consensus after such a large fall.

 

Buyer are going to want discounts to buy, and that should help keep the falls coming month-by-month,

the psychology which is needed for Crash Cruise Speed to be maintained over months, even years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hardly shocking. compare it with USA where there's a massacre going on, & our indices been reporting a steady rise???

 

In reality prices been falling for some time

 

though now they just can't put gloss over the bad figures so they had to admit.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QEII, Neil.

 

I wouldn't put it past them, although Osborne said no more bank bailouts. Which tells me there's another on the way.

 

That was coming anyway.

 

Whether it helps housing this time,have to wait and see, but wasn't it more because of rates being slashed to 0.5% at the same time as QE1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was coming anyway.

 

Whether it helps housing this time,have to wait and see, but wasn't it more because of rates being slashed to 0.5% at the same time as QE1.

 

That and the myriad of 'schemes' and welfare to bolster a false market. They should just let it go, but will they?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That and the myriad of 'schemes' and welfare to bolster a false market. They should just let it go, but will they?

I don't think the government can do much about it if they want to preach austerity. There are a number of first time buyer schemes in Australia that they could try, which is supporting their bubble.

 

Problem is, when (if) the property market over corrects and the banks have to mark to market, then we may be bailing out banks again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the government can do much about it if they want to preach austerity. There are a number of first time buyer schemes in Australia that they could try, which is supporting their bubble.

 

Problem is, when (if) the property market over corrects and the banks have to mark to market, then we may be bailing out banks again.

 

I've watched, like we all have, the UK backing itself into this corner since around 2000, 2001.

 

They did have a reversing warning alert though. [in a dour Scottish accent] 'Warning! This country is reversing . . . beep . . . beep . . . Warning! This country is . . .'

 

Remember, safety first!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That and the myriad of 'schemes' and welfare to bolster a false market. They should just let it go, but will they?

As someone said on a podcast that I was listening to today:

"They need to let property prices fall down to meet (lower) wages."

 

I wonder how much longer foreign buyers are going to keep buying overpriced properties in dodgy parts of London.

Right now they are trying to sell Hammersmith at Kensington prices, and Collingham at Fulham prices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Housing gradually reverting to being seen as a living cost, not as an investment.

YoY will go negative with another bad month or two, and then panic round #2 will begin.

Bottom in 3 years.

 

That's the big hope really. Seen as a basic human need for people, rather than by a few greedy people with cheap credit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone said on a podcast that I was listening to today:

"They need to let property prices fall down to meet (lower) wages."

 

I wonder how much longer foreign buyers are going to keep buying overpriced properties in dodgy parts of London.

Right now they are trying to sell Hammersmith at Kensington prices, and Collingham at Fulham prices.

 

It has to go bang. But I do wonder if folks are being too optimistic on price : income. 3 : 1 was when the UK was a real power house of industry, creating real wealth rather than just a casino under a gray sky.

 

See with incomes falling even faster, the problem has actually got worse.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

qe2_500.jpg

 

Ill see your QE2 with a bit of naval history!

 

QE1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Queen_Elizabeth

COST NOT SHOWN

Laid down: 4 December 1936

Launched: 27 September 1938

Christened: 27 September 1938

Tonnage: 83,673 gross tons

Displacement: 83,000+ tonnes

Length: 1,031 ft (314 m)

Beam: 118 ft (36 m)

Height: 233 ft (71 m)

Draft: 38 ft (12 m)

Installed power: 160,000 horsepower driving four propellers

 

 

QE2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Queen_Elizabeth_2

Cost: £29,091,000 (£419 million as of 2010)

Launched: 20 September 1967

Christened: 20 September 1967

by Queen Elizabeth II

Completed: 26 November 1968 (Sea trials commenced)

Tonnage: 70,327 GT (gross tonnage)

Displacement: 48,923 (loaded)

Length: 963 ft (293.5 m)

Beam: 105 ft (32.0 m)

Height: 171 ft (52.1 m)

Draft: 32 ft (9.8 m)

Decks: 12

Installed power: 9 x 10,625 kW at 400 rpm

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/(5346)_1981_QE3

QE3 is a Main Belt minor planet

- by comparison Gold Bugs would not be surprised!

 

- apparently re the new one - 90,000-tons !

Although she will be the third Queen Elizabeth liner she won't actually be called

the QE3 because the company wants to keep alive the memory of the original.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ill see your QE2 with a bit of naval history!

 

QE1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Queen_Elizabeth

COST NOT SHOWN

Laid down: 4 December 1936

Launched: 27 September 1938

Christened: 27 September 1938

Tonnage: 83,673 gross tons

Displacement: 83,000+ tonnes

Length: 1,031 ft (314 m)

Beam: 118 ft (36 m)

Height: 233 ft (71 m)

Draft: 38 ft (12 m)

Installed power: 160,000 horsepower driving four propellers

 

 

QE2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Queen_Elizabeth_2

Cost: £29,091,000 (£419 million as of 2010)

Launched: 20 September 1967

Christened: 20 September 1967

by Queen Elizabeth II

Completed: 26 November 1968 (Sea trials commenced)

Tonnage: 70,327 GT (gross tonnage)

Displacement: 48,923 (loaded)

Length: 963 ft (293.5 m)

Beam: 105 ft (32.0 m)

Height: 171 ft (52.1 m)

Draft: 32 ft (9.8 m)

Decks: 12

Installed power: 9 x 10,625 kW at 400 rpm

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/(5346)_1981_QE3

QE3 is a Main Belt minor planet

- by comparison Gold Bugs would not be surprised!

 

- apparently re the new one - 90,000-tons !

Although she will be the third Queen Elizabeth liner she won't actually be called

the QE3 because the company wants to keep alive the memory of the original.

 

 

Is that right? I thought it'd be bad luck.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...