Header Ad Module

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Report on House Prices - March 2008 - DPMC

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Ummm, it looks like the area under the graph is bigger to me.

    But the important thing I reckon is the correlation with immigration. Nothing else seems to correlate with house prices as closely as immigration from what I've seen.

    David
    Squadly dinky do!

    Comment


    • #17
      Interesting isn't it. This would seem to refute all the other reasons blamed for driving house prices up.

      Seems if we want a good price correction we should vote young Winston in.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by SuperDad View Post
        Of course the immigration data needs to be there - the graph is showing the correlation between immigration and real house values.

        Paul.
        Slaps forehead and gives up. I thought it was Migration!

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Davo36 View Post
          Ummm, it looks like the area under the graph is bigger to me.
          I thought that too, till I looked at the scale on the other side - 0 isn't the same line on both sides.

          Eli

          Comment


          • #20
            Because I was waiting for something and had nothing better to do.... I integrated the annual average change graph (roughly) and came up with :

            sum of the % bars = 461% (nett)
            number of bars = 166
            461% / 166 = 2.78%

            but there is one bar per quarter, and they are annual changes - did again counting only every 4th bar (which I assume is nett annual change over last 4 quarters)

            sum of every 4th % bar = 109 (nett)
            number of bars counted = 41
            109% / 41 = 2.66%

            Just for fun....
            Cheers,
            Andrew

            Comment


            • #21
              .... and then realized I wasn't thinking about the compounding effect, so tried again.

              Start with 100k, multiply by each yearly % increase/drop (eg, 5% = 1.05), and get a total of 268.1k over the 41 years

              Then the 41st root of 2.681 = 1.0243, ie, 2.43% annual compounding increase.

              Is my sense of fun weird?
              Cheers,
              Andrew

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by ream View Post
                I thought that too, till I looked at the scale on the other side - 0 isn't the same line on both sides.

                Eli
                Is this the world's most confusing graph?
                Squadly dinky do!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by ream View Post
                  I thought that too, till I looked at the scale on the other side - 0 isn't the same line on both sides.

                  Eli
                  Given the direction of the blue bars, I suspect that the 0s should be aligned.
                  DFTBA

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by cube View Post
                    Given the direction of the blue bars, I suspect that the 0s should be aligned.
                    Now it's DEFINITELY the world's most confusing graph

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X