Anyone watch prime time last night about house prices?

Imposter

Originally posted by seamus
As has been pointed out by many, many departments recently, Irish birth rates are dropping. About time probably. But in 30-40 years time, there's going to be an oversupply of housing, especially in Dublin, as people retire/move on/die, and there's no-one there to take their house.

You forget the effects of immigration here! The way to deal with this problem is controlled immigration (somewhat like switzerlands current plan) where most immigrants get a job and as a result obviously need somewhere to live.

Earthhorse

You do realise that Japan has a population of well over a hundred million people and that large areas of the island are mountainous and unsuitable for buidling housing? The Japanese economy is also based on fundamentally different structures from Ireland's so there's little point in comparing the two.

In America it's also, generally speaking and from a cultural point of view, the case that unpaid debts have less stigma attached to them. They are a more risk averse society than ourselves. I'm not saying mortgages based on credit are an economically sound idea, just that they suit the American culture better than ours.

The truth is that both McWilliams and Hughes are right. McWilliams is right when he says there is no value for money and Hughes is right when he says there won't be a crash. There's no value for money because people believe there isn't. Value is a subjective thing and if people are saying they're not getting value for money then they're not. Most people are buying because they have to - newlyweds can't exactly live on the couch.

There won't be a crash because for that to happen either interest rates would have to rise sharply or supply would have to quickly outstrip demand. Interest rates will rise but it will be predictable and incremental. Supply may outstrip demand but if it's going to take thirty to forty years to happen the market won't exactly be shocked when it does.

Never trust an economist folks; they predicted 10 of the last 5 recessions.

star gazer

You do realise that Japan has a population of well over a hundred million people and that large areas of the island are mountainous and unsuitable for buidling housing? The Japanese economy is also based on fundamentally different structures from Ireland's so there's little point in comparing the two.
Earthhorse

The culture that is similar is the desire for land and the belief that you can never lose with land. Our planning and development laws mean that something zoned for agricultural purposes may as well be mountains for the supply and demand scale. There are reports that a small number of large landowners have sufficient land to control the release of zoned residential land. The smell from the mahon tribunal isn't plesant and the past planning and development culture may not have been condusive to an effective supply and demand marketplace.

Value is subjective but the economic effect of crippling the younger generations with debt isn't going to help irelands entrepreneurial drive. The price of rents has already started to level out and fall in some places, investors will be less and less likely to invest as rents fall. They start to shift investments back into booming stockmarkets, interest rates raise to level off inflation in an expanding EU economy and there could be a slight adjustment.

Earthhorse

Ah, I'm a bit clearer on what you're trying to say now, though I still think Japan isn't maybe the best example given that they have one of the highest population densities in the world.

On your other point I did mean to say that I think a dip or stagnation in house prices will occur but this is not the same thing as a crash.

star gazer

yeah japan is different it's just the concept of human behaviour and the consequences of that. Clearly Japan is thousands of miles away geographically and culturally but we do share certain things too.
I would fear that the people that thought that houses were totally safe and any dip would get them panicking, it might have been better to have seen a levelling off of prices this year to keep things real while not hurting investors. It isn't good to keep the future leaders of the country in debt for so long, because it will stiffle our economic creativity IMO.

sceptre

Originally posted by Muck
The great thing about búbbles is that every bubble bursts. You should consider that to be as immutable as the laws of physics whether you 'own 'a home or not.

Indeed. What most of these burst bubbles have in common is the idea of buying something, usually with little inherent or guaranteed value, and paying a price for it based more on the resale value (the investor assumes prices will continue to climb) than the actual inherent value of the item.

Bubbles are like pyramid schemes (specifically Ponzi schemes). When you have a situation (as eventually we've had with every single bubble) where there are less buyers than sellers the price takes a dip. When sellers realise this there's a rush of selling as everyone realises that their investment is at risk. Bubbles fall foul of one of two things: the realisation of people that they're buying something that is worth a lot less than the price they paid for it (which in a purely functional world would mean the inherent value of the item but for practical purposes means the price that people are prepared to pay) OR if the item's price rises to an extent that not everyone who wishes to buy can afford to take a small piece of the pie, sometimes the market simply runs out of buyers or possible buyers. Sometimes both happen at around the same time - when that happens there's always a very dramatic crash.

Houses have an inherent value of course. From an economist's point of view there's a substantial utility value in a dwelling and hence a house will always have some value. However... Every property market is based on the idea that the dwelling will retain its value. Every heated-up property market is based on the idea that the dwelling will retain its value and will in fact rise substantially in value, effectively providing a substantial bonus to the property holder whenever the property is sold (whether that's before or after death) (and effectively paying for the premium paid for the property as a result of borrowing (the interest) AND the premium paid for the property as a result of buying an item in high demand in an overheated market). Because of the expectation that the property will rise in value, any overheated property market has quite a bit in common with any other overheated market we've had in economic history. We've never had a dramatically overheated market where people have had high expectations of the price moving upwards that didn't eventually end in some kind of failure, often in a rather dramatic way.

Of course if you're just buying a house to live in, in which you're happy, and you're not particularly interested in playing the property game it doesn't matter all that much when you buy your house as long as you're happy with it. Satisfaction is still the wild variable in economic theory and will probably always remain so.

There's a possibility that the property market will either just settle down or will cool down gradually. Based on the amount of investment property in this country though and the high level of borrowing both to pay for long-term loans (like houses) and short term borrowing (notably credit cards in Ireland), any move towards a downturn will result in at least a sudden drop at some stage in my opinion. Not necessarily a crash (though I suspect this will happen in the next few years) but at least a reasonable price drop as a result of negative equity in the market (the banks are already taking a semi-active role in propping up the market artificially by taking ownership of the houses of loan defaulters and renting them to the occupants). When? Ah if I could guess that I'd be a property developer:D


(edit)Aaaagh. Damn blockage of the word "Bu88les"!

mollser

Originally posted by Earthhorse
There won't be a crash because for that to happen either interest rates would have to rise sharply or supply would have to quickly outstrip demand.

Correct, interest rates may not rise dramatically, but there is a more than strong possiblity that TAX rates will rise, perhaps sharply, which will affect peoples affordability. Potential negative effect.

Supply outstripping demand, as long as people continue to lose their jobs, this could come about quicker than expected. Funny, currently reading 'Fast Food Nation', and the scant regard that American corporations show for areas where they are based is frightening. They can and do up and move overnight, seeking out cheaper labour continuously. IMO, there is a substantial risk of Ireland just becoming another pawn in the movements of the big corporates. A doomsday scenario I admit, but a more than likely one, unfortunately.

Most likely is, as Sceptre says, a cooling off period will come, rather than a crash. However, with the benchmarking... :mad:

sceptre

Originally posted by pod
I think it was 1637, but don't quote me on it...

Well, we could:D - you're right.

Prices actually reached a peak in 1636 before taking a downturn but the total crash came in 1637.

Two things of note from the tulip affair. It's the perfect example to throw at anyone who makes a comment along the lines of "the market may crash but prices /always/ eventually recover" (as we've heard countless times since 1987). Tulip bulb prices /still/ haven't returned to the 1636 levels (and 367 years is rather a long time to be waiting for an investment to make a profit or even break even). Tulpewoerde also gave birth to the futures market, the bane of most Business Studies students' college lives. Blame the Dutch.

Originally posted by pod
It sounds strange now that people paid absolute fortunes for tulips, but I suppose is it really any stranger than when people paid fortunes for an internet site/name?

No stranger at all. It's the exact same thing really. The names and countries change, the items for sale are different but the story is pretty much the same in every one of these markets. There are always a few making a lot of money, a lot that seem to be making some money (when greed gives birth to the expectation gap, most people cash out when the market is on its way down (if not out)) and hence (because the money has to actually come from somewhere (assuming no-one's actually manufacturing anything) there are a lot of people losing some money. Always based on the expectation that an item will rise dramatically in value just as a result of you holding it and others wanting it rather than any inherent utility value.

It's the way it's always been (well, at least since the 1630s), it's the way it always will be unfortunately. If you (edit: not you as in "pod" but you as in "any of us") think that greed is good, you'd better be one of the guys leading the market or cashing out early. When you've got a market where people who don't know what they're doing are borrowing far beyond their means to get a piece of the action, that market has a very close best before end date. That's the key to any approaching crash in my opinion. At least in a property downturn people are left with a house, even if it's worth a lot less in cashin value than they thought. I'd rather be left with a house and debt than a tulip (or piece of worthless paper (look back at the South Sea bubble, John Law's Mississippi Company, the UK bank crash in the early 70s, 1980s junk bonds or shares in boo.com) and debt:)

Preferably I'd be left with a house and no debt though:D
I'm an optimistic pessimist. The glass may be half full or half empty depending on who owns the glass and how big it is.

Figment

Ok, so if the bubble bursts and house prices crash how can i ( a potential home owner) benifit from staying put? Would i be better saving what money i have and getting a mortgage out when prices come down?

Instead of talking about the negatives, how can you take advantage of a burst bubble?

sceptre

Originally posted by Figment
Instead of talking about the negatives, how can you take advantage of a burst bubble?

Well, if you've a pile of cash lying around you pump it into property right at the bottom of the market and you're on an almost certain winner. Basic principle of buy low & sell high.

Assuming you're an ordinary Joe like the rest of us, you're facing the same problem as the rest of us (well not me - as a current (CS) student, it'll be a few years before I even start thinking about crying about the property prices). No-one can predict with any certainty what will happen. Most people can't even make a semi-educated guess about it. You're asking us to move from largely theoretical macroeconomic analysis to practical microeconomic advice and I'm rather uneasy about handing out anything approaching financial advice to anyone who isn't me if you're going to take it as serious advice in any way. I'm not a professional financial adviser and I half doubt that anyone who posts here is.

Just be aware that, regardless of the qualifications of the person answering your question, any answers you get (and I'm assuming you will get a number of "I'm waiting because..." or "I'm buying now because..." answers) will be speculation. Perhaps educated speculation, perhaps intuition, perhaps completely idle speculation. Nothing more. Death and taxes are the only certainties as they say.

Let's put it this way though. Say you buy a house tomorrow and a (massive) crash comes in six months. Suddenly what you owe the bank is far more than the value of your house. Do you walk away or pay off the loan? Obviously you'd feel a bit sheepish about jumping early but if you've played by the basic rules (buy a property that suits your needs and wants AND that you can afford to pay off the loan on) you've got the house you wanted. So (keeping in mind that I know nothing about actually buying property as an individual), buy the house you want (or as close as you can get) when you can afford to get that house. That way you'll have something more (the enjoyment you get from that house) than the mere resale value of the house. If you're just buying to get on the property ladder and a crash comes, at least you'll be on that ladder when you buy something you can afford when you can afford it. At worst, you'll just have to stay in your less-than-perfect-for-you house for a little longer than planned.

It's almost impossible to take advantage of something that's as difficult to predict as a crash (unless you're George Soros and you caused the crash in the first place). You can lose either way - prices could continue climbing for some time and reach a period of equilibrium. If you're buying something it's far easier to think microeconomics than macroeconomics (the latter will just drive you nuts - you'll be playing a game that you can probably only win by luck) and consider your own needs, ignoring the greater market as much as you can. If you're buying to invest by paying the mortgage from rantal income rather than to live in, this advice is certainly not applicable.

Apologies if the above just comes across as dumb practical advice or view. I'm not a house-owner, as I said I won't be even thinking about it for some time so getting the views of actual house purchasers might be advisable. You can't predict what's going to happen though. It's akin to going out with someone while checking over your shoulder to see if something better comes along (though minus the possibility of getting slapped). The personal (as opposed to financial) benefit to you is greatest if you decide that the time is perfect when you feel the time is perfect. If you're not buying a house purely as an investment, that personal benefit to you is more important than many regard it so keep it strongly in mind.

Originally posted by Earthhorse
Never trust an economist folks; they predicted 10 of the last 5 recessions.

Funny because it's true. Tragic for the same reason. I'd rather go drinking with a doomsayer economist who predicts crashes every Tuesday than one who reckons the big wonderful boom will last forever (in the short run) though.

yankinlk

Originally posted by jd
!!!
downpayments uing CRedit Card debt..
sorry-/me goes off shaking head...

Oh sorry! You think i should follow the Irish banks unfairly biased in their own favour rules and watch my dream home be bought up by someone else???

I used a credit card for a down payment to secure a house that I otherwise would have lost out on. When my FIRST house sold 6 weeks later I used the profit to pay that off - not an issue. You can't do that here because the joke of a credit card you get is only 500 euro limit.

My point is their are really no choices here yet compared to england or probably the rest of europe. I ignored the strict rules and did some creative financing and now own my dream home.

spongebob

I know somebody who got €2000 on the plastic, whacked it into a Credit Union as a deposit and walked out of the Credit Union a week later with €8000 which was their deposit. They had figured out where they were going to clear the Plastic in 2 months and the Credit Union in 2 years. Respect!

Creative Financing is a good thing if you make a carefully calculated bet that works. Overstrectching yourself for a small semi in a crummy area or a one bed shoebox is a bad thing, they are always first up against the wall in a soggy market, never mind a slump or crash.

Location counts at all times. Be aware of that when dreaming of a home !

M

BigEejit

Originally posted by Muck
Location counts at all times. Be aware of that when dreaming of a home !

I have relations in London that bought a 2 bed apt near Notting Hill, just before the crash in the early 90's ... they were disgusted that the value dropped ~20% ... at the time Notting Hill was not all that great an area, things were looking bleak if they had to sell .... but they held on and now the apartment is worth approx 400 - 600% of what they paid for it .... moral of the story, get into an up and coming area ... or like in the case of my relations, be poxy.

Victor

Originally posted by sceptre
Houses have an inherent value of course.

Usually have an inherent value. Usually a factor based on affordability. In extreme circumstances (war, Chernobyl, erosion, severe economic depression) houses are the last thing (most people) people want to buy.

About 2 years ago, in the North East of England, one council was selling off whole streets of it's housing stock for 50 pence each (on the condition you buy two!), simply because **no one** wanted to live there.

The are similar areas along "peacelines" in Belfast, where a certain house might be worth £50,000 and the one around the corner unsaleable.

Originally posted by Muck
Overstrectching yourself for a small semi in a crummy area or a one bed shoebox is a bad thing, they are always first up against the wall in a soggy market, never mind a slump or crash.

This is snobbery through and through. The weakest part of the market recently has been the "luxury" properties, because people don't have dot.com paper profits anymore. Most people will still pay €300 each/month to live in even the worst parts of Dublin, simply because they need somewhere to live. Few are going to fork out €8-20m (including "renovations", one builder spent €17m "doing up" his house), which some people have.

spongebob

Originally posted by Victor
Most people will still pay €300 each/month to live in even the worst parts of Dublin, simply because they need somewhere to live.

A crummy area is a crummy area Victor, I won't waste money living across the road from Anto and Deco ....watching me watching them watching my house when I go to work in the morning. Every morning for years.! I'll pay the extra .

We are not on about the €5m sector of the market in this thread, we are on about the €300k entry level in Irish cities.


M

Victor

Originally posted by Muck
A crummy area is a crummy area Victor, I won't waste money living across the road from Anto and Deco

Many Antos and Decos have jobs these days.

spongebob

Being able to safely walk home from a local pub that is OK to drink in is another criterium of mine Victor , I would hope not to see Anto and Deco scratching their arses against me car when i get home

M

BigEejit

Originally posted by Muck
Being able to safely walk home from a local pub that is OK to drink in is another criterium of mine Victor , I would hope not to see Anto and Deco scratching their arses against me car when i get home
M

The problem there is you would not see Anto and Deco scratching, you might see them Zooming ...... past you in your car ...... with your TV in the back seat.

As Muck says, you could find a house is shít areas, but would you live there? would you like your kids growing up there? ... I'm pretty sure parts of Dublin, Limerick and Cork have houses for less than €200k, but you would be mental to buy them because they would be in (e.g.) shítty parts of Finglas/Clondalkin/Knocknaheeny etc etc...

Stop labelling as snobbery something thats is (in all likelyhood) someone trying to do the best they can for their family.

spongebob

Originally posted by BigEejit
As Muck says, you could find a house is shít areas, but would you live there?

You can add Galway and Waterford to that list as well.

In "Auctioneer Speak" they emphasise "up and coming areas" or mention that normal human services are "near" ... "near" sometimes means that the local shop is a bunker with no windows and the local chipshop takes the money first aand throws an indeterminate carbohydrate gloop at you through a hatch some time later.

My advice to ALL housebuyers is to tool out to where they are thinking of living on a friday night and to stroll around, have afew pints and stroll around some more, if they find that it ain't great (or worse) then they should consider the amount of friday nights they are committing themselves to by virtue of their acquiring a mortgage.

Spending 300k to be trapped in your own house every friday night is daft, life is too short.

M

Earthhorse

originally posted by mollser
Supply outstripping demand, as long as people continue to lose their jobs, this could come about quicker than expected.

Unemployment in Ireland hasn’t risen all that much and is largely rising due to the introduction of new labourers to the market, that is school leavers and college graduates. There are still nearly as many people with jobs and the demand is most definitely there.

I note that when you’re talking about tax rates you use the terms “strong possibility” and “perhaps sharply”; in other words you’re speculating. I accept the possibility of what you’re saying but not the inevitability.

I could be wrong, as I haven’t read Fast Food Nation, but I imagine most of the American corporations you are talking about were operating in America, where workers rights are minimal, or in developing nations where they are virtually non existent. I don’t think what they’ve done there would happen in Ireland on the same scale.

I largely agree with Sceptre’s analysis of overheated markets but I think what he’s leaving it out is that the majority of investment property bought in Ireland is done in order to leverage the purchase of another property. People are using these houses as collateral, or to supplement their income, so they can get a mortgage on the house they actually want. These people are unlikely to sell even if there’s a dip in the market so the repercussions of a dip are more limited.

One thing he is definitely correct about is that nobody should take this thread as investment advice. We’re debating the likelihood (or not) of something that’s contingent on too many factors to be easily predictable. Personally I’d benefit greatly if there was a crash as I’m living at home but earning a steady wage, but I don’t think it will happen. I guess I’m a pessimist, just on a micro, rather than macro, stage!

gurramok

Originally posted by BigEejit
As Muck says, you could find a house is shít areas, but would you live there? would you like your kids growing up there? ... I'm pretty sure parts of Dublin, Limerick and Cork have houses for less than €200k, but you would be mental to buy them because they would be in (e.g.) shítty parts of Finglas/Clondalkin/Knocknaheeny etc etc...

I happen to live in one of those areas(in dublin) you label as 'shít'

The value of the house(not a council one) is more value for money than a similar house in lets say within the canal ring, half the size with 3 times the price tag !
For outsiders not to live here is partially based on perception, one thing i don't like living here is lack of garda and a real shítty pub nearby. The value of the house is determined by postcode\address and not its physical value.
However, location is good as the city centre is only about 3 or 4 miles away.
People who say they have to move up to 80 miles outside dublin to afford a house are in fact wrong. There are plenty of albeit ott affordable houses around here and its safe to raise a family.
Its people's snobbery of the area and misconceptions that contribute to the market price.
Funnily though, new houses/appartments are being built across the river (100 metres away). They are in different postcode and valued up to 70k more than the one i'm in yet they are smaller(according to brochure) and only 100 metres nearer the city centre

Slightly off-topic:
Shall I tell those new inhabitants in a part of the development that their 'dream' homes are being built on a flood plain ?
I used to walk my dog in those fields avoiding the giant sized mini-lakes and streams especially in the winters
My attitude would be tough 'shít' if they are flooded as they buy for the postcode(through perception) and havent a clue about the area beforehand

BigEejit

Originally posted by gurramok
I happen to live in one of those areas(in dublin) you label as 'shít'

I didnt mean to knock any particular area, thats why I said:

Originally posted by BigEejit
they would be in (e.g.) shítty parts of Finglas/Clondalkin/Knocknaheeny etc etc...

Everyone knows that there are parts of Finglas that you wouldnt walk around in after dark ....even if you lived there all your life

Victor

[Article] Dublin house price fall is first in two years
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=122194

RainyDay

Originally posted by Figment
Ok, so if the bubble bursts and house prices crash how can i ( a potential home owner) benifit from staying put? Would i be better saving what money i have and getting a mortgage out when prices come down?

Instead of talking about the negatives, how can you take advantage of a burst bubble?

You can't time the market. Large banks with teams of economists & analysts try to time the market and they get it wrong half the time. You can't time the market. Those who claim to have made their fortunes from timing the market are liars or just lucky.

If you can afford the house you want, buy it. You are not buying an investment, you are buying a home. Your mortgage repayment won't change regardless of whether house prices increase or decrease. You still repay the same amount each month. [Interest rate changes will affect your repayments, but that is a different matter].

The negative equity scenario is not the nightmare the media makes it out to be. You may have to stay in that house for a few years longer than you have planned - but you still have your house.

secret_squirrel

Originally posted by RainyDay
The negative equity scenario is not the nightmare the media makes it out to be.

Hmm ... it is if its accompanied by interest rate rises, its possible to have the worse case scenario of repossession and still owe money on house that you no longer own.

Remember what we are dealing with here. The banks are currently happily turning a blind eye to fraudulent morgage applications where people are using all kind of other credit to supply a deposit. I'm willing to bet if the economic situation got tighter, then there would be all sorts of reviews of this, with some foreclosures as a result.

De Rebel

Originally posted by secret_squirrel
Hmm ... it is if its accompanied by interest rate rises, its possible to have the worse case scenario of repossession and still owe money on house that you no longer own.

Remember what we are dealing with here. The banks are currently happily turning a blind eye to fraudulent morgage applications where people are using all kind of other credit to supply a deposit. I'm willing to bet if the economic situation got tighter, then there would be all sorts of reviews of this, with some foreclosures as a result.

There is a difference between negative equity and being totally and unmanageably over extended.

The former is ok for people who can continue to afford their repayments, whether or not these change, and who do not need to sell their principal and only residence. Negative equity is no more a problem for this person than having huge equity appreciation in their main residence is a benefit - you can't eat it.

Negative equity is a problem for:
People who need to relocate - They "lock-in" their losses
Small time residential investors who's needs change (and there are a lot of these sheep who are going to feel pain)

Being over extended before the onset of interest rate increases is a different problem altogether and has nothing to do with negative equity. This is the situation where people simply have no way to increase their repayments in line with interest rate increases. This is the problem that the Banks & Building Societies have been working hard to create.

RainyDay

Originally posted by secret_squirrel
Hmm ... it is if its accompanied by interest rate rises, its possible to have the worse case scenario of repossession and still owe money on house that you no longer own.

Remember what we are dealing with here. The banks are currently happily turning a blind eye to fraudulent morgage applications where people are using all kind of other credit to supply a deposit. I'm willing to bet if the economic situation got tighter, then there would be all sorts of reviews of this, with some foreclosures as a result.

Don't forget the banks are obliged to 'stress test' all applications to ensure that borrowers can cope with interest rate rises. I think they test for 2% greater than the current rates. Banks are not generally in the business of giving bad loans. They want reasonable certainty that the borrower will be able to repay, without having to get into messy repossessions.

Also, borrowers have to bear personal responsibility for making sensible decisions. Anyone who borrows on a credit card to get a house deposit needs to think twice about how they will repay their borrowings if rates rise by a couple of points.

secret_squirrel

I mostly agree with you De Rebel, negative equity is not a problem per se, but it can exacerbate the problems of people who become over extended and get reposessed.

And in reply to RainyDay - who here believes the banks and Building Soc's are doing enough to vet morgage applications?
You have to remember that they are in competition with each other and once one institution looks the other way they all have to in order to retain market share.

Lets face it they must hold some accountabilty for the ridiculous housing market.

RainyDay

Originally posted by secret_squirrel
And in reply to RainyDay - who here believes the banks and Building Soc's are doing enough to vet morgage applications?
You have to remember that they are in competition with each other and once one institution looks the other way they all have to in order to retain market share.

Just look at their consistently high profits. Banks exist to make money, and love em or hate em, they are pretty damn good at doing it. They do NOT give out loans where there is a significant risk that they are not going to be repaid. They do not prioritise loan quality over market share.

Of course, they are very happy if the borrower chooses to extend the period of the mortgage (i.e. more interest for the bank over the long run).

GillyS

RainyDay,

I don't think there is a risk of people not repaying the loans as I think that people will do whatever it takes to hold on to their house , that said I think the lending policies of banks have had a huge impact on house prices, does anyone think we would have house prices at their current level if the banks kept (and rigidly adhered to) their origiinal lending limits of three times salary??? I don't think so.

I think of biggest concern is the size of mortgage that people are taking out, in my own circle of friends - late twenties/early thirties - I'd say the average is around the 250K mark over 30 years. This is a figure that even in ten years time (assuming inflation stays low) is still going to be a big number. Some have bought apartments and I wonder how they are going to make the next jump to that 3/4 bedroom house in a nice suburb which is generally what they aspire to

Gilly