What if you lowered prices further?
That’s ultimately the answer and how the game is supposed to work. Lower the prices enough and someone will buy.
But people don’t want to then sell their property for £50k+ less than they paid for it, and I can understand their reluctance. So rather than just accept a lower price, they take the property off the market and just wait things out. Only those desperate enough will lower their price significantly, but I’d imagine those people would be a rarity.
So now you end up with house prices that don’t really fall in any meaningful way and social mobility is hurt, which has wider implications.
How many properties are financed by banks? At some point, people are forced to sell.
I guess it depends on why they’re selling. For some, it won’t be worth the financial penalty and will just stay put.
That’s not really how markets work.
Reducing your price helps you sell in a market with many buyers and sellers.
However, if there are very few buyers, then you have to reduce your price unreasonably.
Is it also unreasonable when the prices go up because of scarcity, or is it only not fair if the seller loses?
There there pet.
But that would hurt the market!
People are realising how much of a scam leaseholds are?
I think many will be waiting for the planned change to leasehold coming this government.
I still don’t get how leaseholds could ever be a thing. Isn’t it just “buying isn’t owning”?
My grandparents had a lease hold on their flat and the least hold was for 99 years. I doubt the building will still exist in 99 years so the entire thing is just a stupid concept.
I often wondered how that works. Makes more sense to rent them than buy them, because you always have to pay some rent amount anyway.
Oh, I dont know… Maybe the broken economy, the rise in ethno nationalism, right wing populism, overpricing because avarice, stupid investments and purile denial?
But that may change if Count Binface wins in Clackston. He’ll build at least 1 affordable house, which is more than these property developers ever have done.
Affordable houses are a scam as well. Most people think it means, a house, that is affordable.
Instead it’s usually a shared ownership thing so it’s still stupidly priced but you can buy 25% of it.
New development near us the affordable houses were 25% of a 2 bed semi for £100k.
Then you get to pay £800/month rent on the other 75% while being 100% responsible for all the costs and maintenance.
He’s not gonna win though right?
I mean he’s already achieved the intended effect, but he’s not going to get enough votes to win the election.
You’re unironically in favor of voting for a bit, but still confident that having a state us the right thing to do.
I dont think the people whod vote for him are angry at the system, they’re angry at their choices.
We dont hate the bus, we hate the fact that The Joker is about to get behind the wheel. We want a real bus driver, who knows the route and has passed the relevant exams, but that doesnt seem to be an option for some reason.
Bin it is.
Why does the joker have the keys? Why was the last guy driving the riddler? And Mr. Freeze and so on and so on back into the fucking pendragon dynasty.
Housing shouldn’t be a market. Tax wealth, not work, and ban landlords.
That sounds like the sort of thing straight out of Colonel Gaddafi’s Green Book. No landlords. No moneylenders. Full equality for men and women. And look what happened to Libya (and him).
Without googling what you’re vaguely gesturing to I don’t know what you’re trying to say.
Worth a Google.
Well if it’s anything like the tower block in my small town it’s because it’s got bloody flammable cladding on it no one seems to want to do anything about taking it off.
Well, at least fixing it should still be cheaper than grenfell–ahem, “green field”–development.
I have a crowbar, reckon we could get a lot of it off in an afternoon. Pass it round and reach out your window to get off what you can. A few tiles left out of reach shouldn’t be too bad.
I don’t think it’s really the cladding itself that’s the problem. The various cladding pieces aren’t actually connected so they couldn’t really transmit a fire around fire breaks.
The problem is that insurance companies and banks will flat out refuse loans if there’s so much as a square centimetre of that material on the building. I actually wanted to buy one of the flats, but I couldn’t because I couldn’t get a mortgage. Every bank I went to point blank refused to even give me a number.
So I suspect a lot of people are stuck, they can’t sell because they would have to sell to somebody who could pay in cash, and people with who could afford to pay in cash aren’t buying flats. I think the flat I wanted to buy has now been rented out on airbnb, which normally I would have a problem with as it prevents locals from being able to buy properties, but since this property can’t be purchased anyway I guess it’s okay.
What needs to happen is the government need to force building management companies to remove the cladding.
Do people want to live in England?
Yes, it’s a lovely green island with lush vegetation.
Looks outside at brown dead grass everywhere… Oh!
It’s not that bad. Remember 1976. I went out today and only my jeans caught fire - so I call that moderate weather.
why is the upper classes so daft and why are journalists supporting it
peanut gallery here from the states but over here I notice that people buy housing if they can afford it. I know its counter intuitive but its true.
When house prices fall all those people who think they are rich suddenly get absolutely terrified. The illusion of wealth for small people gets shattered.
Give me a reasonable rent that is fair to both landlord and tenant. I don’t want to buy a flat and be partially responsible for maintenance costs of a complete high-rise building.
