Unfortunately house prices in London are not especially expensive when compared to other leading global cities (eg. New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco/Silicon Valley, Hong Kong, Paris, Tokyo, Singapore, Sydney etc.), and even when compared to some leading emerging market cities (eg. Moscow, Sao Paolo etc.).
I travel a lot in the USA and will regularly take a look at Zillow (US equivalent of Rightmove) to see what I could buy for the equivalent of my house near London, and in and around the three US cities listed above the answer ranges between 'not very much more' and 'probably less'.
Of course one could buy substantially more property in say Dallas, Atlanta or Charlotte but you wouldn't be living in a leading global city so it's not a fair comparison in my view. To the extent this matters is obviously a matter of personal choice.
Whilst there may be a minor correction (which is likely underway), unless one thinks London is going to cease being compared to the above cities (perhaps if Brexit is a real economic catastrophe) or there is a significant global recession then I don't foresee a significant change in the status quo.
I note that you only mention one European capital in your round-up. And I am surprised that Paris is in your list. It is also notoriously difficult to compare like for like. After all even in Thamesmead you wouldn't need the level of security to protect your property that the average middle class resident of Sao Paulo needs. The size of the average housing unit is also bigger than an equivalent London one too.
Furthermore in these European capitals other living costs are often lower too. Admittedly apart from Paris none of them are anywhere near as big but nearly all have a public transport system which transports them from home to work and back again for far less than in London and usually with less stress too.
Finally the list you mention is dominated by cities Anglo - Saxon (influenced) nations who share an obsession with house ownership. That obsession is one reason why housing costs in most European cities are modest by comparison; ask any residents of those cities who have also spent time in London, where their quality of life was better, they tend to answer something like " London's a great city, I loved it. But..."
Fair points but as you imply only Paris comes close (in Europe) to London's global status - this is not to say there aren't loads of gorgeous smaller cities of course.
Unfortunately if you want to truly 'make it' and be recognised as excelling in diversified fields (finance, academia, law, media, medicine, design, food, fashion, art.....) then London is the first place you look to go in Europe.
Whether the quality of life is any good isn't the point - the earnings and wealth generation of these industries drive property prices just as they do in the other non-European global cities I mentioned. It remains to be seen if Brexit reverses this trend or even potentially accelerates it.
Moreover quality of life means different things to different people - it tends to be considered in terms of personal space, free time, greenery etc but for many in London it's about culture, buzz, nightlife etc.
Sure. I understand that those are the considerations of a certain type of business person, but we will see how at least some of the business categories you mention view London in the near future. In certain of those categories both Berlin and Amsterdam (which of course technically isn't a capital) are presenting an increasing challenge, for example in the area of digital media. Frankfurt will challenge in finance, although I understand the scepticism about the extent of its potential.
It might not be a bad thing for most people on CL if London faced increasing competition. ( I don't remotely suggest whole business sectors will desert London en masse). The thing about the culture buzz nightlife thing is that in Amsterdam or Berlin it's much more possible for ordinary people to access it all, and for reasonable prices, than it is in London. It seems to me that my family and friends in London live most of their lives in the suburbs where their housing is. In Eltham the culture buzz and nightlife is, er, a bit low key...
What might not be a bad thing for most people on CL would be if they didn't have to listen to you telling them how they should think/vote/live/work/ watch football in a country where you no longer reside: It's patronising.
Are you and Chippy setting up a little band of xenophobic Brexiteers dedicated to trolling any Lifer who doesn't reside in the U.K. off the forum like he did with CharltonMadrid?
Temper of the times, I guess. Lots of angry people looking for what they consider as soft targets for their anger. Well, they've considered wrongly.
Unfortunately house prices in London are not especially expensive when compared to other leading global cities (eg. New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco/Silicon Valley, Hong Kong, Paris, Tokyo, Singapore, Sydney etc.), and even when compared to some leading emerging market cities (eg. Moscow, Sao Paolo etc.).
I travel a lot in the USA and will regularly take a look at Zillow (US equivalent of Rightmove) to see what I could buy for the equivalent of my house near London, and in and around the three US cities listed above the answer ranges between 'not very much more' and 'probably less'.
Of course one could buy substantially more property in say Dallas, Atlanta or Charlotte but you wouldn't be living in a leading global city so it's not a fair comparison in my view. To the extent this matters is obviously a matter of personal choice.
Whilst there may be a minor correction (which is likely underway), unless one thinks London is going to cease being compared to the above cities (perhaps if Brexit is a real economic catastrophe) or there is a significant global recession then I don't foresee a significant change in the status quo.
I note that you only mention one European capital in your round-up. And I am surprised that Paris is in your list. It is also notoriously difficult to compare like for like. After all even in Thamesmead you wouldn't need the level of security to protect your property that the average middle class resident of Sao Paulo needs. The size of the average housing unit is also bigger than an equivalent London one too.
Furthermore in these European capitals other living costs are often lower too. Admittedly apart from Paris none of them are anywhere near as big but nearly all have a public transport system which transports them from home to work and back again for far less than in London and usually with less stress too.
Finally the list you mention is dominated by cities Anglo - Saxon (influenced) nations who share an obsession with house ownership. That obsession is one reason why housing costs in most European cities are modest by comparison; ask any residents of those cities who have also spent time in London, where their quality of life was better, they tend to answer something like " London's a great city, I loved it. But..."
Fair points but as you imply only Paris comes close (in Europe) to London's global status - this is not to say there aren't loads of gorgeous smaller cities of course.
Unfortunately if you want to truly 'make it' and be recognised as excelling in diversified fields (finance, academia, law, media, medicine, design, food, fashion, art.....) then London is the first place you look to go in Europe.
Whether the quality of life is any good isn't the point - the earnings and wealth generation of these industries drive property prices just as they do in the other non-European global cities I mentioned. It remains to be seen if Brexit reverses this trend or even potentially accelerates it.
Moreover quality of life means different things to different people - it tends to be considered in terms of personal space, free time, greenery etc but for many in London it's about culture, buzz, nightlife etc.
Sure. I understand that those are the considerations of a certain type of business person, but we will see how at least some of the business categories you mention view London in the near future. In certain of those categories both Berlin and Amsterdam (which of course technically isn't a capital) are presenting an increasing challenge, for example in the area of digital media. Frankfurt will challenge in finance, although I understand the scepticism about the extent of its potential.
It might not be a bad thing for most people on CL if London faced increasing competition. ( I don't remotely suggest whole business sectors will desert London en masse). The thing about the culture buzz nightlife thing is that in Amsterdam or Berlin it's much more possible for ordinary people to access it all, and for reasonable prices, than it is in London. It seems to me that my family and friends in London live most of their lives in the suburbs where their housing is. In Eltham the culture buzz and nightlife is, er, a bit low key...
What might not be a bad thing for most people on CL would be if they didn't have to listen to you telling them how they should think/vote/live/work/ watch football in a country where you no longer reside: It's patronising.
Are you and Chippy setting up a little band of xenophobic Brexiteers dedicated to trolling any Lifer who doesn't reside in the U.K. off the forum like he did with CharltonMadrid?
Unfortunately house prices in London are not especially expensive when compared to other leading global cities (eg. New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco/Silicon Valley, Hong Kong, Paris, Tokyo, Singapore, Sydney etc.), and even when compared to some leading emerging market cities (eg. Moscow, Sao Paolo etc.).
I travel a lot in the USA and will regularly take a look at Zillow (US equivalent of Rightmove) to see what I could buy for the equivalent of my house near London, and in and around the three US cities listed above the answer ranges between 'not very much more' and 'probably less'.
Of course one could buy substantially more property in say Dallas, Atlanta or Charlotte but you wouldn't be living in a leading global city so it's not a fair comparison in my view. To the extent this matters is obviously a matter of personal choice.
Whilst there may be a minor correction (which is likely underway), unless one thinks London is going to cease being compared to the above cities (perhaps if Brexit is a real economic catastrophe) or there is a significant global recession then I don't foresee a significant change in the status quo.
I note that you only mention one European capital in your round-up. And I am surprised that Paris is in your list. It is also notoriously difficult to compare like for like. After all even in Thamesmead you wouldn't need the level of security to protect your property that the average middle class resident of Sao Paulo needs. The size of the average housing unit is also bigger than an equivalent London one too.
Furthermore in these European capitals other living costs are often lower too. Admittedly apart from Paris none of them are anywhere near as big but nearly all have a public transport system which transports them from home to work and back again for far less than in London and usually with less stress too.
Finally the list you mention is dominated by cities Anglo - Saxon (influenced) nations who share an obsession with house ownership. That obsession is one reason why housing costs in most European cities are modest by comparison; ask any residents of those cities who have also spent time in London, where their quality of life was better, they tend to answer something like " London's a great city, I loved it. But..."
Fair points but as you imply only Paris comes close (in Europe) to London's global status - this is not to say there aren't loads of gorgeous smaller cities of course.
Unfortunately if you want to truly 'make it' and be recognised as excelling in diversified fields (finance, academia, law, media, medicine, design, food, fashion, art.....) then London is the first place you look to go in Europe.
Whether the quality of life is any good isn't the point - the earnings and wealth generation of these industries drive property prices just as they do in the other non-European global cities I mentioned. It remains to be seen if Brexit reverses this trend or even potentially accelerates it.
Moreover quality of life means different things to different people - it tends to be considered in terms of personal space, free time, greenery etc but for many in London it's about culture, buzz, nightlife etc.
Sure. I understand that those are the considerations of a certain type of business person, but we will see how at least some of the business categories you mention view London in the near future. In certain of those categories both Berlin and Amsterdam (which of course technically isn't a capital) are presenting an increasing challenge, for example in the area of digital media. Frankfurt will challenge in finance, although I understand the scepticism about the extent of its potential.
It might not be a bad thing for most people on CL if London faced increasing competition. ( I don't remotely suggest whole business sectors will desert London en masse). The thing about the culture buzz nightlife thing is that in Amsterdam or Berlin it's much more possible for ordinary people to access it all, and for reasonable prices, than it is in London. It seems to me that my family and friends in London live most of their lives in the suburbs where their housing is. In Eltham the culture buzz and nightlife is, er, a bit low key...
What might not be a bad thing for most people on CL would be if they didn't have to listen to you telling them how they should think/vote/live/work/ watch football in a country where you no longer reside: It's patronising.
Are you and Chippy setting up a little band of xenophobic Brexiteers dedicated to trolling any Lifer who doesn't reside in the U.K. off the forum like he did with CharltonMadrid?
Looks like a small drop in asking prices. Construction wise most of the new work coming in is still mainly residential. I don't think they drop is as soon as some are thinking.
Unfortunately house prices in London are not especially expensive when compared to other leading global cities (eg. New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco/Silicon Valley, Hong Kong, Paris, Tokyo, Singapore, Sydney etc.), and even when compared to some leading emerging market cities (eg. Moscow, Sao Paolo etc.).
I travel a lot in the USA and will regularly take a look at Zillow (US equivalent of Rightmove) to see what I could buy for the equivalent of my house near London, and in and around the three US cities listed above the answer ranges between 'not very much more' and 'probably less'.
Of course one could buy substantially more property in say Dallas, Atlanta or Charlotte but you wouldn't be living in a leading global city so it's not a fair comparison in my view. To the extent this matters is obviously a matter of personal choice.
Whilst there may be a minor correction (which is likely underway), unless one thinks London is going to cease being compared to the above cities (perhaps if Brexit is a real economic catastrophe) or there is a significant global recession then I don't foresee a significant change in the status quo.
I note that you only mention one European capital in your round-up. And I am surprised that Paris is in your list. It is also notoriously difficult to compare like for like. After all even in Thamesmead you wouldn't need the level of security to protect your property that the average middle class resident of Sao Paulo needs. The size of the average housing unit is also bigger than an equivalent London one too.
Furthermore in these European capitals other living costs are often lower too. Admittedly apart from Paris none of them are anywhere near as big but nearly all have a public transport system which transports them from home to work and back again for far less than in London and usually with less stress too.
Finally the list you mention is dominated by cities Anglo - Saxon (influenced) nations who share an obsession with house ownership. That obsession is one reason why housing costs in most European cities are modest by comparison; ask any residents of those cities who have also spent time in London, where their quality of life was better, they tend to answer something like " London's a great city, I loved it. But..."
Fair points but as you imply only Paris comes close (in Europe) to London's global status - this is not to say there aren't loads of gorgeous smaller cities of course.
Unfortunately if you want to truly 'make it' and be recognised as excelling in diversified fields (finance, academia, law, media, medicine, design, food, fashion, art.....) then London is the first place you look to go in Europe.
Whether the quality of life is any good isn't the point - the earnings and wealth generation of these industries drive property prices just as they do in the other non-European global cities I mentioned. It remains to be seen if Brexit reverses this trend or even potentially accelerates it.
Moreover quality of life means different things to different people - it tends to be considered in terms of personal space, free time, greenery etc but for many in London it's about culture, buzz, nightlife etc.
Sure. I understand that those are the considerations of a certain type of business person, but we will see how at least some of the business categories you mention view London in the near future. In certain of those categories both Berlin and Amsterdam (which of course technically isn't a capital) are presenting an increasing challenge, for example in the area of digital media. Frankfurt will challenge in finance, although I understand the scepticism about the extent of its potential.
It might not be a bad thing for most people on CL if London faced increasing competition. ( I don't remotely suggest whole business sectors will desert London en masse). The thing about the culture buzz nightlife thing is that in Amsterdam or Berlin it's much more possible for ordinary people to access it all, and for reasonable prices, than it is in London. It seems to me that my family and friends in London live most of their lives in the suburbs where their housing is. In Eltham the culture buzz and nightlife is, er, a bit low key...
What might not be a bad thing for most people on CL would be if they didn't have to listen to you telling them how they should think/vote/live/work/ watch football in a country where you no longer reside: It's patronising.
Are you and Chippy setting up a little band of xenophobic Brexiteers dedicated to trolling any Lifer who doesn't reside in the U.K. off the forum like he did with CharltonMadrid?
Unfortunately house prices in London are not especially expensive when compared to other leading global cities (eg. New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco/Silicon Valley, Hong Kong, Paris, Tokyo, Singapore, Sydney etc.), and even when compared to some leading emerging market cities (eg. Moscow, Sao Paolo etc.).
I travel a lot in the USA and will regularly take a look at Zillow (US equivalent of Rightmove) to see what I could buy for the equivalent of my house near London, and in and around the three US cities listed above the answer ranges between 'not very much more' and 'probably less'.
Of course one could buy substantially more property in say Dallas, Atlanta or Charlotte but you wouldn't be living in a leading global city so it's not a fair comparison in my view. To the extent this matters is obviously a matter of personal choice.
Whilst there may be a minor correction (which is likely underway), unless one thinks London is going to cease being compared to the above cities (perhaps if Brexit is a real economic catastrophe) or there is a significant global recession then I don't foresee a significant change in the status quo.
I note that you only mention one European capital in your round-up. And I am surprised that Paris is in your list. It is also notoriously difficult to compare like for like. After all even in Thamesmead you wouldn't need the level of security to protect your property that the average middle class resident of Sao Paulo needs. The size of the average housing unit is also bigger than an equivalent London one too.
Furthermore in these European capitals other living costs are often lower too. Admittedly apart from Paris none of them are anywhere near as big but nearly all have a public transport system which transports them from home to work and back again for far less than in London and usually with less stress too.
Finally the list you mention is dominated by cities Anglo - Saxon (influenced) nations who share an obsession with house ownership. That obsession is one reason why housing costs in most European cities are modest by comparison; ask any residents of those cities who have also spent time in London, where their quality of life was better, they tend to answer something like " London's a great city, I loved it. But..."
Fair points but as you imply only Paris comes close (in Europe) to London's global status - this is not to say there aren't loads of gorgeous smaller cities of course.
Unfortunately if you want to truly 'make it' and be recognised as excelling in diversified fields (finance, academia, law, media, medicine, design, food, fashion, art.....) then London is the first place you look to go in Europe.
Whether the quality of life is any good isn't the point - the earnings and wealth generation of these industries drive property prices just as they do in the other non-European global cities I mentioned. It remains to be seen if Brexit reverses this trend or even potentially accelerates it.
Moreover quality of life means different things to different people - it tends to be considered in terms of personal space, free time, greenery etc but for many in London it's about culture, buzz, nightlife etc.
Sure. I understand that those are the considerations of a certain type of business person, but we will see how at least some of the business categories you mention view London in the near future. In certain of those categories both Berlin and Amsterdam (which of course technically isn't a capital) are presenting an increasing challenge, for example in the area of digital media. Frankfurt will challenge in finance, although I understand the scepticism about the extent of its potential.
It might not be a bad thing for most people on CL if London faced increasing competition. ( I don't remotely suggest whole business sectors will desert London en masse). The thing about the culture buzz nightlife thing is that in Amsterdam or Berlin it's much more possible for ordinary people to access it all, and for reasonable prices, than it is in London. It seems to me that my family and friends in London live most of their lives in the suburbs where their housing is. In Eltham the culture buzz and nightlife is, er, a bit low key...
What might not be a bad thing for most people on CL would be if they didn't have to listen to you telling them how they should think/vote/live/work/ watch football in a country where you no longer reside: It's patronising.
Are you and Chippy setting up a little band of xenophobic Brexiteers dedicated to trolling any Lifer who doesn't reside in the U.K. off the forum like he did with CharltonMadrid?
With the Brexit effect will raising rates have much effect on the pound etc after all that is the reason for devaluation and it's not going away soon..
Unfortunately house prices in London are not especially expensive when compared to other leading global cities (eg. New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco/Silicon Valley, Hong Kong, Paris, Tokyo, Singapore, Sydney etc.), and even when compared to some leading emerging market cities (eg. Moscow, Sao Paolo etc.).
I travel a lot in the USA and will regularly take a look at Zillow (US equivalent of Rightmove) to see what I could buy for the equivalent of my house near London, and in and around the three US cities listed above the answer ranges between 'not very much more' and 'probably less'.
Of course one could buy substantially more property in say Dallas, Atlanta or Charlotte but you wouldn't be living in a leading global city so it's not a fair comparison in my view. To the extent this matters is obviously a matter of personal choice.
Whilst there may be a minor correction (which is likely underway), unless one thinks London is going to cease being compared to the above cities (perhaps if Brexit is a real economic catastrophe) or there is a significant global recession then I don't foresee a significant change in the status quo.
I note that you only mention one European capital in your round-up. And I am surprised that Paris is in your list. It is also notoriously difficult to compare like for like. After all even in Thamesmead you wouldn't need the level of security to protect your property that the average middle class resident of Sao Paulo needs. The size of the average housing unit is also bigger than an equivalent London one too.
Furthermore in these European capitals other living costs are often lower too. Admittedly apart from Paris none of them are anywhere near as big but nearly all have a public transport system which transports them from home to work and back again for far less than in London and usually with less stress too.
Finally the list you mention is dominated by cities Anglo - Saxon (influenced) nations who share an obsession with house ownership. That obsession is one reason why housing costs in most European cities are modest by comparison; ask any residents of those cities who have also spent time in London, where their quality of life was better, they tend to answer something like " London's a great city, I loved it. But..."
Fair points but as you imply only Paris comes close (in Europe) to London's global status - this is not to say there aren't loads of gorgeous smaller cities of course.
Unfortunately if you want to truly 'make it' and be recognised as excelling in diversified fields (finance, academia, law, media, medicine, design, food, fashion, art.....) then London is the first place you look to go in Europe.
Whether the quality of life is any good isn't the point - the earnings and wealth generation of these industries drive property prices just as they do in the other non-European global cities I mentioned. It remains to be seen if Brexit reverses this trend or even potentially accelerates it.
Moreover quality of life means different things to different people - it tends to be considered in terms of personal space, free time, greenery etc but for many in London it's about culture, buzz, nightlife etc.
Sure. I understand that those are the considerations of a certain type of business person, but we will see how at least some of the business categories you mention view London in the near future. In certain of those categories both Berlin and Amsterdam (which of course technically isn't a capital) are presenting an increasing challenge, for example in the area of digital media. Frankfurt will challenge in finance, although I understand the scepticism about the extent of its potential.
It might not be a bad thing for most people on CL if London faced increasing competition. ( I don't remotely suggest whole business sectors will desert London en masse). The thing about the culture buzz nightlife thing is that in Amsterdam or Berlin it's much more possible for ordinary people to access it all, and for reasonable prices, than it is in London. It seems to me that my family and friends in London live most of their lives in the suburbs where their housing is. In Eltham the culture buzz and nightlife is, er, a bit low key...
What might not be a bad thing for most people on CL would be if they didn't have to listen to you telling them how they should think/vote/live/work/ watch football in a country where you no longer reside: It's patronising.
Are you and Chippy setting up a little band of xenophobic Brexiteers dedicated to trolling any Lifer who doesn't reside in the U.K. off the forum like he did with CharltonMadrid?
Unfortunately house prices in London are not especially expensive when compared to other leading global cities (eg. New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco/Silicon Valley, Hong Kong, Paris, Tokyo, Singapore, Sydney etc.), and even when compared to some leading emerging market cities (eg. Moscow, Sao Paolo etc.).
I travel a lot in the USA and will regularly take a look at Zillow (US equivalent of Rightmove) to see what I could buy for the equivalent of my house near London, and in and around the three US cities listed above the answer ranges between 'not very much more' and 'probably less'.
Of course one could buy substantially more property in say Dallas, Atlanta or Charlotte but you wouldn't be living in a leading global city so it's not a fair comparison in my view. To the extent this matters is obviously a matter of personal choice.
Whilst there may be a minor correction (which is likely underway), unless one thinks London is going to cease being compared to the above cities (perhaps if Brexit is a real economic catastrophe) or there is a significant global recession then I don't foresee a significant change in the status quo.
I note that you only mention one European capital in your round-up. And I am surprised that Paris is in your list. It is also notoriously difficult to compare like for like. After all even in Thamesmead you wouldn't need the level of security to protect your property that the average middle class resident of Sao Paulo needs. The size of the average housing unit is also bigger than an equivalent London one too.
Furthermore in these European capitals other living costs are often lower too. Admittedly apart from Paris none of them are anywhere near as big but nearly all have a public transport system which transports them from home to work and back again for far less than in London and usually with less stress too.
Finally the list you mention is dominated by cities Anglo - Saxon (influenced) nations who share an obsession with house ownership. That obsession is one reason why housing costs in most European cities are modest by comparison; ask any residents of those cities who have also spent time in London, where their quality of life was better, they tend to answer something like " London's a great city, I loved it. But..."
Fair points but as you imply only Paris comes close (in Europe) to London's global status - this is not to say there aren't loads of gorgeous smaller cities of course.
Unfortunately if you want to truly 'make it' and be recognised as excelling in diversified fields (finance, academia, law, media, medicine, design, food, fashion, art.....) then London is the first place you look to go in Europe.
Whether the quality of life is any good isn't the point - the earnings and wealth generation of these industries drive property prices just as they do in the other non-European global cities I mentioned. It remains to be seen if Brexit reverses this trend or even potentially accelerates it.
Moreover quality of life means different things to different people - it tends to be considered in terms of personal space, free time, greenery etc but for many in London it's about culture, buzz, nightlife etc.
Sure. I understand that those are the considerations of a certain type of business person, but we will see how at least some of the business categories you mention view London in the near future. In certain of those categories both Berlin and Amsterdam (which of course technically isn't a capital) are presenting an increasing challenge, for example in the area of digital media. Frankfurt will challenge in finance, although I understand the scepticism about the extent of its potential.
It might not be a bad thing for most people on CL if London faced increasing competition. ( I don't remotely suggest whole business sectors will desert London en masse). The thing about the culture buzz nightlife thing is that in Amsterdam or Berlin it's much more possible for ordinary people to access it all, and for reasonable prices, than it is in London. It seems to me that my family and friends in London live most of their lives in the suburbs where their housing is. In Eltham the culture buzz and nightlife is, er, a bit low key...
Agree with this but the irony is that the quality of life (again in a traditionally understood sense) is poor in most of those other leading cities I referenced too (measured in terms of traffic, commuting times, pollution, infrastructure etc.).
Yeah I second that question. They've significantly increased stamp duty for second homes and it's helped to push prices down (or at least halt the London price surge).
Would create a massive injection of new supply (beginning at the higher end then filtering down) as people effectively stuck in inappropriate homes for their needs can afford to move up the ladder again.
To use round numbers, a family living in a £750k property that wants to move to a £1m property has to find over £40k in stamp duty - a huge sum given it is literally money down the drain.
As a result homeowners extend, convert lofts etc. for the same £40k rather than put their home on the market thus creating a mad scramble for the limited number of good properties that do come to market.
Would create a massive injection of new supply (beginning at the higher end then filtering down) as people effectively stuck in inappropriate homes for their needs can afford to move up the ladder again.
To use round numbers, a family living in a £750k property that wants to move to a £1m property has to find over £40k in stamp duty - a huge sum given it is literally money down the drain.
As a result homeowners extend, convert lofts etc. for the same £40k rather than put their home on the market thus creating a mad scramble for the limited number of good properties that do come to market.
I think you've got things back to front, if you remove stamp duty it may well enable more people to move, greater demand, and with no stamp duty payable prices would rise.
Would create a massive injection of new supply (beginning at the higher end then filtering down) as people effectively stuck in inappropriate homes for their needs can afford to move up the ladder again.
To use round numbers, a family living in a £750k property that wants to move to a £1m property has to find over £40k in stamp duty - a huge sum given it is literally money down the drain.
As a result homeowners extend, convert lofts etc. for the same £40k rather than put their home on the market thus creating a mad scramble for the limited number of good properties that do come to market.
I think you've got things back to front, if you remove stamp duty it may well enable more people to move, greater demand, and with no stamp duty payable prices would rise.
In my view it's a broken market evidenced by low transaction volumes - if it were a true speculative bubble like the one seen in say Florida in the 2000s, it would be characterised by high volume ('flipping').
An increase in near-term supply via a removal of stamp duty would grease the wheels of the market and encourage more efficient price discovery (and I suspect people would discover real values are lower).
The problem with the latest figures is a lot of London property in particular has been bought through single asset offshore companies (Panama, BVI, Seychelles etc) and when the property changes hands it doesn't get recorded because it's the offshore company that is bought and sold, not the property. The truth is, nobody knows what the real picture is for property prices but given that London is still a safe haven and Sterling is cheap I suspect that those offshore co properties are not being sold for less than they were bought for.
As for the predictions of interest rates going up, I just can't see it happening.
Wait till interest rates go up then you will see an almighty crash.
The first 0.25% rise is expected in November and the next 0.25% rise in May 2018.
I don't think it will be that soon. First 0.25% rise in Q1 2018 & then another in late 2018 or early 2019.
with that in mind a can't see how a rate rise is going to bring down houses prices. A rise of those amounts will add about £20pm - £30pm on an average mortgage payment. Hardly earth shattering
Wait till interest rates go up then you will see an almighty crash.
The first 0.25% rise is expected in November and the next 0.25% rise in May 2018.
I don't think it will be that soon. First 0.25% rise in Q1 2018 & then another in late 2018 or early 2019.
with that in mind a can't see how a rate rise is going to bring down houses prices. A rise of those amounts will add about £20pm - £30pm on an average mortgage payment. Hardly earth shattering
Hmm.
I was a couple of months out - so what. Rates are going up by 0.25% and not the 0.5% and 1% that we saw in the late 80's through to early 2000's. Base rate will be at 1% by late 2019 early 2020. None of this will harm the property market - its Brexit & the general overpricing that is seeing the stagnation & minor falls that we are seeing in London & the S/east.
The problem with the latest figures is a lot of London property in particular has been bought through single asset offshore companies (Panama, BVI, Seychelles etc) and when the property changes hands it doesn't get recorded because it's the offshore company that is bought and sold, not the property. The truth is, nobody knows what the real picture is for property prices but given that London is still a safe haven and Sterling is cheap I suspect that those offshore co properties are not being sold for less than they were bought for.
As for the predictions of interest rates going up, I just can't see it happening.
Sorry, but I remembered what you said.
So do I. I’ve also said that they won’t go up this decade. The BoE has jumped the gun in my view. Let’s hope they are correct and that 0.25% isn’t the straw that broke the camels back
Wait till interest rates go up then you will see an almighty crash.
The first 0.25% rise is expected in November and the next 0.25% rise in May 2018.
Called it.
With all due respect it's been hard to turn the TV on for at least a month without seeing someone predict this and I heard people that claim they were told directly by Carney himself that there would be a rise in November of 0.25%. You didn't even predict it you just said that it was expected, in that you'd heard someone else say it!
Next you'll be saying that the sun is going to set this evening and rise again in the morning.
The only reason rates were increased yesterday is because of inflation and the only reason inflation is higher is because of Sterling being weaker and that has fed through to prices. That impact will work itself out because real incomes haven’t risen and the only way people have continued to spend money is because they’ve been increasing their personal borrowing on credit cards, overdrafts, car leases and short term loans. Raising rates was pointless because people are going to rein in spending anyway and if they want anything they will shop around and only buy it where it’s cheaper or not buy it at all.
Comments
Interestingly however in the US (and I believe to a lesser extent in the UK too), companies that located their HQ away from big cities or in the suburbs are increasingly being forced to move them back to city centres as young people don't want to live/work out there (https://www.economist.com/news/business/21706285-lots-prominent-american-companies-are-moving-downtown-leaving-city).
To use round numbers, a family living in a £750k property that wants to move to a £1m property has to find over £40k in stamp duty - a huge sum given it is literally money down the drain.
As a result homeowners extend, convert lofts etc. for the same £40k rather than put their home on the market thus creating a mad scramble for the limited number of good properties that do come to market.
An increase in near-term supply via a removal of stamp duty would grease the wheels of the market and encourage more efficient price discovery (and I suspect people would discover real values are lower).
This article this week is somewhat related:
http://www.propertywire.com/news/uk/call-uk-stamp-duty-switched-buyers-sellers/
Next you'll be saying that the sun is going to set this evening and rise again in the morning.
;-)