True
Eh? The owner could hold out for twice the expected profit if they wanted - they wouldn't get it but there isn't a limit!
It's his land to sell or not for whatever price he wants.
Everyone seems to be under the misapprehension that land (and houses) have an intrinsic value. As things stand, in this country, it is as close to a free market as you can get (although not perfect as Dr D will point out). The value of land is entirely extrinsic and is "whatever someone is willing to pay"!
snip
You know what I meant. :-)
Taking your argument to its logical extreme only money has an intrinsic value. Everything else is worth what someone else is prepared to pay for it.
With run-of-the-mill houses as with second hand cars there is a general consensus as to their approximate worth. With vanity items such as Old Master paintings the value is largely determined by the amount of surplus cash available for disposal and the reputation of the object on offer.
In between there may be some items that are a 'must have' to an individual who will pay through the nose to purchase but are of little or no interest to the rest of use but as I see it the case in question revolves around the interests of just 2 parties, the owners of the properties involved. Neither actually needs the deal but in this case the seller is the one with the whip hand which is why the deal has more chance of being concluded if the buyer accepts that the seller deserves a fair share of the potential profit.
Well, with paintings you can ask questions like: would 1,000,000 people pay =A31 each to look at this painting? that lets you get a handle on a reasonable value. Victorian painters used to make money from their paintings exactly in thsi way, by taking them on tour and charging people a small amount to look at them.
Robert
Absolutely. in fact the usual situation with a ransom strip is that is has almost no size but blocks all access to the plot. .
Robert
Well, money and things where the market is controlled (if one avoids going too far down the philosophical route!).
In Soviet Russia for example, many things had a known "value" as their price was controlled (a control economy rather than a free/mixed economy). In Britain most of the economy is free-ish so yes, only money has an intrinsic "value" (while the economy is within certain stability limits).
I put "value" in inverted commas because I deplore a society where everyone knows "the price of everything and the value of nothing". In this discussion we really mean "price" when we say "value".
No, it entirely depends on where in the country you are, as people are prepared to pay more or less in different areas so price/value is "whatever someone will pay"!
is "whatever someone will pay"
No argument with that
Thanks a lot for all the really helpful info!
Update on the above... it turns out that the area of land at issue is somewhat larger than I'd thought. My parents have had a tame builder take a look at it, and he says that it's definitely potential large enough to be a building plot, and in a better economic climate could be worth a pretty eye-watering sum if planning permission was forthcoming. My parents certainly wouldn't want to build on it as long as they are living in their current home, but it certainly means that the neighbour is going to be told 'thanks but no thanks'!
David
It will and you are in cloud-cuckoo land the housing market is rigged. Read Who Own Britain by Kevin Cahill. he goes into it.
But when an artificial shortage is created then there is a shortage of building land AGAIN, only 7.5% of the UK is settled and 5% of that is parks and gardens FACT!!!! I have given facts in a previous post. What didn't you understand? Most homes in the UK are built by about 20 companies. In no other western country is there such a monopoly. I am not giving a half-baked opinion. I am telling you how it is. Stop telling yourself lies. You have nothing to gain by doing so.
Well let's just fill up all the gardens and parks with houses. Wouldn't matter to you in the little council flat you have in that tower block.
I never argued with any of your figures, just said that the "value" of a house was "whatever anyone was willing to pay for it".
Eff off as you are plantpot.
That's already happening. It's often known as "garden grabbing".
Money has no intrinsic value. It only works because people believe in it (or not as the case in Zimbabwe).
Good!
Seems you're the one with plantpots on your little balcony if you don't realise the importance of parks and gardens, etc. But them I'd guess you never go out given how much you quote from the internet.
You wrote: "As things stand, in this country, it is as close to a free market as you can get" I pointed out this country is not a free market in land and homes at all, which it clearly is not and I gave some basic facts. The planning system is Stalinist based on centralised quotas. Only a few companies build, and have built in the past 60 years, the vast majority of the ticky-tacky homes in the UK. Most have cardboard walls - literally - and that is what Paramount boards are, cardboard egg-shell with plaster on the outside. The so-called free market is so wonderful the UK has the oldest energy inefficient homes in the EU.
Extracts from Unaffordable Housing Fables and Myths by the Policy Exchange:
"Britain has amongst the oldest and pokiest houses in Europe - not the fault of architects but the result of the remorseless and misguided logic of planning policy."
"Our housing compares poorly by international standards too. Britain has some of the smallest and oldest housing in Europe, and what is being built now is even smaller than the existing stock. Yet despite this, house prices in the UK have risen much more strongly than other developed countries, meaning that despite real growth in our incomes we are not able to afford more and better housing, in the way that we can afford better cars and food as we get wealthier."
"The conclusion that we can draw from these statistical comparisons is that British housing tends to be older than elsewhere in Western Europe. Because they are older their efficiency, in terms of heating for example, tends to be less. The houses tend to be smaller, with more, but smaller, rooms. New houses tend to be even smaller on average than existing houses. In addition, house prices rise faster in the UK so that, year on year, housing in Britain has been getting more expensive relative to that in the rest of Western Europe. It used to be a widely-held British view that 'our' housing was better than that in continental Europe, that no Frenchman would invite you back to his house because it was so small and poky - 'that was why they all eat out in restaurants'.Whatever may have been the truth of this folk myth fifty or sixty years ago, the statistical evidence shows that it has no factual basis now. If fifty years of planning has achieved one thing, it has demolished that myth; it is now Britain that has the oldest, pokiest, housing in Europe."
"Compared with other countries, the standard of living in terms of housing has fallen over the years, both relatively and sometimes absolutely "
Well Boris is persuaded ...
"Boris Johnson calls for London homes to be 10 per cent larger
The housing industry and architects have welcomed the London Housing Design Guide, published last week by London mayor Boris Johnson?s office, despite some feeling that new proposals on space standards do not go far enough.
The guidelines, unveiled on 8 July, mean that all publicly funded homes built in the capital from 2011 will be 10 per cent larger than the famed
1961 Parker Morris standard. ..."Balcony view:
Think right occupancy is the key. But with social housing you may not have that choice.
But I'd guess - given the chance - most parents with young children would prefer to have a garden for them to play in.
For adults it comes down to their choice.
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Lobster saying something like:
About fifteen years ago a friend bought a strip of field adjoining her cottage so she could make a driveway into her back garden and put up a garage. The strip was approx 3m x 20m and cost her 10K; I expect it would be double that now. They're not called Ransom Strips for nothing.
Eff off as you are plantpot.
Because they will not allow people to build on land.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.