ext_170333 ([identity profile] cybermuppet.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] denny 2007-04-30 07:16 pm (UTC)

Agreed

It's city bonuses and buy-to-let that is to blame.

Buy to let is really only attractive with large capital gains: The rental yield is pretty rubbish and is probably only just enough to cover the mortgage repayments, but when combined with 10-15% growth a year in the housing market every year, it is a spectacular investment - especially if you have the minimum amount of capital possible actually tied up in the property. If you meet the mortgage interest from the rent, you then trouser 15% growth on about 80% of the value of the property you've borrowed.

Doesn't work nearly so well without house-price inflation though. Not unless you sit it out for the long term.

Needless to say, I suspect that a lot of city bonuses go into buy-to-let property.

Post a comment in response:

If you don't have an account you can create one now.
No Subject Icon Selected
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org