Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Oxo, as a decent upstanding member of society, you are wasting your time. Somebody/anybody who tells a story that they can't afford to buy a house/home on the one hand and then tries telling you they lost £150k on Afren on the other hand is full of brown stuff. LaLa fantasy world.
"An ounce of action is worth a ton of theory" Ralph Waldo Emerson - speaks volumes.
"An ounce of hypocrisy is worth a pound of ambition" - MK
Education begins at home - so rather than blaming a system maybe some folk need to look closer. Financial and nutritional should be part and parcel of educating the offspring.
Charity begins at home.
Where the heck are these 3 bed semis that were £35k in 1998 and now they are £350K? There is no HPI to support such a claim.
"Forget regret, or life is yours to miss" - Jonathan Larson.
That another has failed to fulfil their potential ... well "Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it" - George Halas.
Oxo, you don't need teaching how to suck eggs ... some others do, but then, you don't need me to tell you that. All from an observational stance, on the basis that another cannot command any respect when they are clearly away with the fairies. Can't afford to buy a house/home ... then we have a farm and how many greenhouses? Using how much oil? Whatever and whatever ...BS from start to finish. Land for the many? BS from start to finish. Corbynista, leftist, marxist/communist remained from start to finish. LaLa land of the highest order.
Pippa_Peaches......AFREN
Osman Shahenshah & Shahid Ullah sentenced to 30 years for Afren fraud & money laundering. Today, Osman Shahenshah and Shahid Ullah received a total of 30 years for fraud and money laundering offences they had committed whilst they were CEO and Chief Operating Officer of Afren Plc.
Two greedy oil barons who used a dodgy £232 million business deal to line their own pockets face jail.
Osman Shahenshah and Shahid Ullah, the former bosses of one-time London stock market darling Afren, have been found guilty of fraud and money laundering after a three-year investigation by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO).
The pair convinced the company's board of directors to press ahead with an oil deal that saw one of its partner firms in Nigeria paid £232 million. They then siphoned off 15 per cent of the funds, or £35 million, and bought luxury properties in the British Virgin Islands and Mustique.
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-6312827/Meet-oil-barons-guilty-fraud-230m-deal.html
Further to that injustice the liquidator spent a million pounds that was left in the coffers at Barclays to prove what was obvious.
That money should have gone back to the people who were defrauded as it was their money held in trust,
again evidence of the old boys club were joe soap pays the bill.
Morning Pippa
Sorry to hear that, I only lost 5k less the £250 the criminal snatch back ,it is a fact that we cannot rely on the watchdogs to protect us .
I agree with you entirely and have the same issue where the policing by government organisations always lets the public down.We were scammed in the crown currency fraud over ten years ago and 13000 people like myself lost monies some up to 150k.
The company was using monies they held on behalf of clients for currency exchange to buy gold and line their own pockets,needless to say it went belly up the gold was never found and the ceo topped himself leaving his wife to fight of the creditors I got half of what the criminal compensation authority awarded because she salted away any assets before the money could be grasped.
This was a then FSA approved company cited on the letterhead but when the FSA was questioned on their policing role they said they were not obliged to do that and we all no what happened to the FSA it became the FCA the very people that perpetrated the loss of our Dividend.I know it is a different circumstance but it shows up the flaws in these people and their policies.
Several of the directors who were convicted and jailed are now back performing similar roles in similar companies .
It seems to me whenever anycrime against joe public occurs these mandarins spend more time finding excuses for not carrying out their tasks than doing them .
Far be it for me not to throw my twopenneth worth into the ring. House price inflation is caused by two things - household income and multiples.
If you want to rant about mysogeny, feel free but this is about the numbers.
For generations there was a loose correlation between household income and house prices. In the past a man with a good job could purchase a property valued at three times the household income (usually just his as wifey was at home with the children). Then, it was decided that once children were at school the wife could go to work and the household income rose. Mortgages then took into account the new income and house prices rose accordingly.
Meanwhile, because of the general increases in prices (remember all price rose to hoover up the increased income) and the want to make a career, many women went to work full time . Again, with the increase in household income, mortgages took this into account and multiples increased. House prices simply increased to hoover up that additional income.
On top of this, house prices would generally increase by three times the rate of inflation. increase.
All of this has placed the single person in a position where they can never purchase a property at the more historical multiple levels and so financial institutions increased the multiples and house prices hoovered up the extra money.
End of rant as I have no answer except to initiate a massive house price crash (house prices, like shares, can go down as well as up).
Pippa
The reason why food or any product in UK is overpriced is because of exorbitant taxes.
The restaurant owners are known to cut corners because there is very little left after paying for:
- Premise rent
- Business rates
- Licensing fees
- Wages
- Ingredients
Let's take another example how can a Laptop costing $999 in USA is priced at £999 in UK when
1 GBP = 1.2669 in dollar terms?
This all again comes back to House price inflation and we can keep talking about this until the cows come home. Increased Housing supply is not going to solve the problem if we do not address the demand aspect combined with the associated housing reforms requirements and tax changes.
The problem we have had is numerous people with academic / bookish knowledge in governance have taken incorrect decisions. There actions have been detrimental to the society with no repercussions on the individuals.
Just to name a few examples:
- Over the course of three years, a chancellor sold 401 tons of gold from the Treasury's total of 716 tons at an average price of $275 an ounce. Today's price is $1688 an ounce and no process followed at the point of making such a decision other than in the name of diversification.
- another Chancellor increased Stamp duty on investment homes stating it will cool the market. If there are no transactions how much more revenue has been collected by the additional 3% surcharge? Yes, I shall give 0.25% for cooling the market.
- In the name of Austerity lot of tax exemptions were removed and welfare benefits were cut.
- A PM called for a referendum without having a plan B and upon defeat decided to run away from the problem for someone else to take care of it. This not only created confusion and chaos but also undermined our character as a nation.
- Another PM whose heart was to remain in EU was asked to negotiate BREXIT. It was like somebody sitting in a Vegetarian only restaurant and ordering a Chicken dish for a meal. However, the person did not want to leave the restaurant because either was hungry or it was against their principles to walk out.
I remember somebody telling me once that a Government is always there to extract maximum out of people with minimum input to the welfare of the people. The Elite rich never pay more taxes as they can afford tax consultants who can legitimately reduce taxes. These very tax consultants are usually the policy advisors to the Government.It is the common man or the salaried person who ends up paying more taxes.
Walker
Kindly accept my apologies for any misunderstanding.
When I stated 'a privileged situation' what I meant was being in an advantageous situation. It was just a general opinion of many people that a person who has a roof over his head is at an advantageous situation.
Evening Nash. When I was in my early 20's, I lived in an apartment on one of Hong Kong's Islands (obv worked overseas in HK at the time). Had mountain view from balcony & rooftop, as well as 3 beaches within 20 minutes walk. Gave it up to pursue a "better" career. Ironically, I wish I could go back in time and I'd happily take my old job and live in my old village apartment.
We learn from our own experiences. Myself? From relatively humble backgrounds, but have made ends meet and made conscious decisions. Aim is to keep things always within budget and prioritise being able to save each month into a growing pot. There're plenty of schemes and plays out there for a savvy saver to (in time) accrue sufficient funds to lead a contented lifestyle. Important thing is patience. Divis of hundreds build into divis of thousands, and depending on how one chooses to live, it can quickly become enough to cover a core part of one's living expenses.
Personally, I view much of this as a failure in today's education system. Two of the most important things in life (a) financial management, and (b) nutrition. Students are taught neither at school. No wonder Britains because an increasingly unhealthy and less equal country.
JTS13
Very nice thought process especially around one's own priorities in search for a better quality of life
Help to Buy? Huge farce to boost stocks of home builders. I did look into Help to Buy a few years back myself, but new homes under such Gov schemes were all around 20% higher than anything else of comparable size within a 1-hour commuting radius. Unfortunately Gov policy for housing since the 90's has consistently seemed designed to help the few rather than the many.
Just prior to the Covid thing some banks were back offering 100% mortgages to first time buyers. Begs belief. Average interest rates historically are 7-8%. We get all these reports in the news that the average Brit has only enough savings to last 3 months blah blah. Imagine what would happen if base interest rate just rose to a mighty 3-4%. Far below historical average, yet 100,000s of people would lose their home.
Understand that there is a big social push encouraging home ownership, and also Gov pressure on stats on home building etc, but there's clearly a lack of responsible governance across the whole thing.
Equally, a lot of things come down to one's own life decision. It's often quite possible to move to a smaller city, take a substantial pay-cut, but have a significantly improved quality of lifestyle. Guess it depends what we're each looking for. Guess younger folks tend to focus too much on career and growth opportunities. I know I used to and regret some of the things that I missed out on by doing that.
Nash, it’s not a privilege it’s a right, owning a home means initially doing without to save a deposit. In my case I always bought cheap added value and sold for a good profit, I continued doing this until I owned a detached five bedroom property outright, it’s not rocket science, it’s achievable with reasonable budgeting.
Walker
'Most here will own their own homes'
It is always good to be in such a privileged situation.
The other side of the coin is that the not too good schemes such as Help to Buy or Shared equity. These schemes were mostly made to support the builders and were marketed as supporting the First time buyers.
Below is an extract of one of the schemes
' With a Help to Buy: Equity Loan the Government lends you up to 20% of the cost of your newly built home, so you’ll only need a 5% cash deposit and a 75% mortgage to make up the rest.'
Are we not putting the first time buyers into a vulnerable situation by allowing them to own a home? How many of these vulnerable buyers would survive a 15% prolonged correction (which is normal in any asset class) in housing ?
Is there a one good reason why people should be allowed to take more debt with so little equity? Should you allow somebody to start running even before they can start to walk?
This is just one example of distorting the asset pricing by siding with the elite class such as Builders. Land developers,etc.
Today we are in such a situation that we cannot allow either the Housing market nor the stock market to come down. The reason for this is all our pensions, ISA, Investments and Govt debts are so much dependent on these markets that just a sneeze puts jitters in our society.
This has led to global institutions busy in reinflating the assets at any cost.
Nash yes maybe i should have stated in terms of what we have seen since 1997. I recall people moving around a few times and the property was like for like and in terms of additional / top mortgage is was minimal at a time of very high interest rates as well...
Dart
'prior to Blair property never moved for 10 - 12yrs'
I slightly disagree as it was moving in relation to the economy.
Regrettably post 1997 we have had terrible Housing decisions made by subsequent chancellors.
The Key person (Teachers, Health and Fire Service) Housing assistance combined with relaxed immigration distorted the housing market. BTW how many of these Key person are still around in the same profession is questionable?
It was a toxic mix of above factor with 100% mortgages led to Housing sector being used as a cash point. This led to also an extensive increase in 2nd homes, Buy to let market with almost no limit lending.
Banks were willing to lend because the house values were being artificially increased by the above policies. Additionally the Banks never kept mortgages on their books by packaging and selling it to global audience under the disguise of derivatives.
Packaged derivatives was the major cause of 2008 crisis which the global Govt and Bankers mis-led people as 'Credit Crunch' and took us on the path of QE. Even today the packaged derivative mess is still lingering in the background as nobody exactly knows how much is in circulation. This mess has been kept under the blankets by huge amounts of QE which has stopped the bleeding but has not healed the wound.
Another well known example is the introduction of REITS which is another form of derivative. Even in the latest COVID 19 crisis the chancellor had to suspend the housing market transactions to stop REITS redemptions. The reason is simple if you can't value the underpinned instrument(Housing) of REITS you cannot arrive at a NAV or an exit price.
The above are just a tip of the iceberg and I can go on and on with numerous examples. The problem we have is that the Govt needs to take some tough decisions on Housing which will not be people friendly especially the elite class. However, I don't think anybody in governance will ever have the appetite to take tough decisions.
In my opinion our housing problem cannot be solved by:
- By building more housing ( we don't make land anymore so it is in limited supply)
- Converting Green belt ( will not assist unless businesses relocate)
- Converting houses into block of flats ( Vicious cycle as quality of life decreases and more pressure on essential and basic services)
- Leasehold reforms by capping management or Ground rent fees are required ( Cash generating machine with minimal investment)
- Immigration cap is essential to lower the demand for housing ( COVID 19 lock down has shown us that businesses can sustain even from a distance.
- Tax loopholes need to be plugged
- Interest only Mortgages should be banned
- Long dated Mortgage terms (5/10/20 years) are required to stabilize the price escalation
Increased Housing supply is not going to solve the problem if we do not address the demand aspect and the associated housing reforms requirements.
Pippa Peaches, I would say you are the odd one out on this site, most here will own their own homes, probably outright, what do you think they did that you can’t do? I find your mentality very strange. Why bump your gums on a site frequented by people who invest in shares and obviously have funds to spare?
Pippa, prior to Blair property never moved for 10 - 12yrs... but i do agree that Blair and his kind put things out of reach for the average working family and as you say made it so that even professionals struggle...
Victor
Only one word for all this is 'Shambles'.
I thought Brexit was enough but now a big laundry list:
- Payment holiday scam
- Buy to let scam
- BREXIT negotiations
- COVID19
- Furlong
- Bailout
- Unlimited QE
Wondering why is FTSE at 6484 unless there is an anticipation of a sterling devaluation?
The German chemicals giant BASF has emerged as the largest recipient of the Bank of England’s Covid-19 emergency funding scheme despite only employing 834 people in Britain.
The company, which is valued at €50 billion, has borrowed £1 billion from the Bank, equivalent to nearly £1.2 million for each of its UK workers.
The Bank revealed yesterday that 53 large businesses have taken a combined £16.2 billion from the Covid Corporate Financing Facility (CCFF), which was created to tide large companies through the pandemic.
Many of the groups that have seized a lifeline from the Bank are controlled by billionaire families and overseas multinationals, including the digger maker JCB, Tottenham Hotspur Football Club and Chanel, the luxury goods giant.
The disclosures have raised questions over why the overseas corporations and wealthy individuals have been given what is effectively state aid. Other critics said the government had missed a rich opportunity to impose strict environmental targets on the airlines and oil companies that have tapped the facility.
Borrowers had to show the Bank that they had a “significant” workforce in the UK and made a “material” contribution to the economy. Users issue commercial paper with a maturity of less than a year to the Bank of England, which deposits newly created cash in their accounts. The interest rate paid on the paper, the maturity of which can range from one week to a maximum of one year, is about 0.5 per cent, ranging from 20 basis points to 60 basis points above the standard overnight index swap rate.
The CCFF is one of a number of lending programmes supported by taxpayers to inject cash into companies and prevent an unemployment crisis. However, critics said that the Bank had been “taken for a ride” by some of the borrowers.
Dame Margaret Hodge, the Labour MP and former chairwoman of the public accounts committee, said: “Protecting jobs must be a priority. But this data leaves huge question marks over whether the CCFF has been a smart use of public finance.”
Dame Margaret, 75, questioned the “vast bailouts for foreign chemical giants fossil fuel firms and defence companies” and said that the government had “missed a trick” by not demanding stakes in companies that tap support schemes or force them to reduce the carbon emissions by imposing strict targets.
JCB has tapped the scheme for £600 million. The company is controlled by the Tory peer Lord Bamford, 74, who has a personal fortune of £4.7 billion, according to the Sunday Times Rich list. In 2018 the company paid the Bamford clan a dividend of £75 million after posting record profits.
CNH Industrial, the agricultural equipment and truck maker, and Chanel, the perfume maker, have also borrowed £600 million and are controlled by billionaires. Italy’s billionaire Agnelli family is behind CNH while brothers Alain and Gerard Wertheimer control Chanel. Bayer, the German drug company, has borrowed £600 million and only has 774 employees in the UK acco