A [Bloomberg](http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aNPqW48FI4aw) and [AP story](http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneurs/feeds/ap/2006/09/03/ap2990692.html) on London housing prices exemplifies how fascinated we are with rankings when it comes to housing no matter where we live. CBRE compared upper end London housing prices to my most recently completed [Manhattan Market Overview in the 2Q](https://millersamuel.com/reports) and were found to about 20% more expensive (1,200 pounds vs. 1,000 pounds).

While thats interesting, its not the reason for this post.

[Look at the extent of the coverage [Google]](http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=%22miller+samuel%22+manhattan+london&scoring=d).

As of this morning, the story was picked up by 147 newspapers. Except for markets like [Shanghai](http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=us/6-0&fp=44fd0812269c4e52&ei=XE79RPm9MrLsafT92KYE&url=http%3A//www.shanghaidaily.com/art/2006/09/04/290913/Cost_of_London_luxury_goes_through_the_roof__experts_say.htm&cid=0), [Taiwan](http://www.chinapost.com.tw/business/detail.asp?ID=89607&GRP=E), Canada, Australia and a few major US markets and national publications, the vast majority of the coverage was in mountain, midwestern or southern states. Most of these markets did not see appreciation rates as high as the US coasts did. These markets include locations such as Alabama, North Dakota, Arkansas, Wyoming, Montana, Nebraska and Wisconsin among others.

Apparently big numbers, either real estate prices or appreciation, still sell newspapers.