Where's Best To Invest? Okay, there's no doubt that the programme took the Kirstie and Phil identities on a bigger adventure than we've seen before. Phil was beer-swilling, student-nostalgic, tit-aware and driving around in a colossal Range Rover. Kirstie was conservative, student-loathing, motherly and walking around in a colossal hat. It was a little like thinking you know Lennon and McCartney, and then watching the cartoon versions in Yellow Submarine. And the tone of the show - the only way is up, and up is the only good way - is sure to have had the HousePriceCrash gang choking. For me, what stood out were the figures. Who exactly were these independent sources who were constantly being evoked? It was like the producers had been handed house price forecasts on a giant tablet while they stood at the top of Mount Sinai. Independent sources estimate.... prices might rise... And all these five-year estimates of gains of 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%? I'd be more concerned about the neighbourhoods that would have to take the massive hit in order to restore national figures to something most agree is reasonable. Anyway - if you didn't watch it, the top three (national) hotspots were (in reverse order) Edinburgh, Cambridge and Oxford. London - treated as a separate case - gave up Camden, where independent sources forecast prices could rise 63% in five years. Hey, did anybody else stick around long enough for King Of Chavs?