According to free market economics there never really was BMV, except where an uninformed seller only dealt with one buyer (also known as a mug getting fleeced). What was really happening was flexible buyers were accomdating inflexible sellers. So the deal was infact AMV for those particular circumstances (theoretically).

Moving on to its revelance today. The point about what is market value in a illiquid market is obviously a valid one and assumes that houses are mainly valued by what other similar houses have recently sold for. Although you know this is not the only way to value...yields being another. Cheap today might not seem cheap tomorrow in a falling market. For instance not so long back i was paying £25 for 1 hour a month mobile phone contract. Which was in fact cheaper than some competitor's so it could be argued BMV.

Moving on again i think QoD was always a better description although it does not appeal to the ego in the same way. As you probably know by now i'm fairly bearish at the moment and so take with a pinch of salt all these BMV %'s. For me a FAR more interesting % figure is the fact that 10,000 Corus employees have just agreed to a 10% pay cut....falling wages being just one cog in the deflationary machine.

Dave Davis