Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Now is not the time to buy

Options
  • 04-07-2007 5:43pm
    #1
    gbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 429 ✭✭


    I know there are probably speculators who visit this site and are trying to sell something. But to first time buyers struggling to get on the ladder, I think now is a bad time to buy. Would be better if all first time buyers boycotted the market until the speculators feel the heat and then come back in again.

    Lets say you rented a double room in Dublin, average 700 per month. If house prices came down 20,000 in a year then you would have saved yourself well over 10,000 by not buying this year.

    If all first time buyers and other owner-occupier buyers refused to buy, then the demand for houses would plummet, speculators would get the picture and stop buying up houses which first time buyers should be buying.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Pa ElGrande
    Registered Users Posts: 3,594 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    You might like to read this

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054933074

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Options
    #3
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,399 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    I'm really tempted to send this to the Recycle Bin.


  • Options
    #4
    ctc_celtic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 234 ✭✭ctc_celtic


    Victor wrote:
    I'm really tempted to send this to the Recycle Bin.

    so what, the OP is expressing the same view that many FTB's have at the moment. I'm not saying that he's right about house prices falling by 20k, but you dont know any better, nobody does.
    Would be better if all first time buyers boycotted the market until the speculators feel the heat and then come back in again

    he's hardly going to start a boycott, just expressing a view.


  • Options
    #5
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    ctc_celtic wrote:

    so what, the OP is expressing the same view that many FTB's have at the moment. I

    I think what Victor meant is that there is already a massive thread on this and there is no need for a new one.

    But the boss man can let us know either way.

    gbh wrote:



    If all first time buyers and other owner-occupier buyers refused to buy, then the demand for houses would plummet, speculators would get the picture and stop buying up houses which first time buyers should be buying.

    So your saying every one except investors should stop buying? Sounds like you have really thought this out!


  • Options
    #6
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    I think Victor's point is that it's yet another thread on the state of the housing market - there are other threads to post in, instead of starting a new one.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    gbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 429 ✭✭gbh


    Feel free to bin it...i will add to the previous thread...

    But i will say that the reason there is now a slow down in the market is that houses are outside the range of the ordinary worker and supply is not matching demand for this sector of society. The speculator buys houses to sell at a fast profit to the worker and middle class buyer who have now being squeezed out of the market. In reality house prices can't go any higher and it would be madness for people to pander to the whims of speculators by buying more and more expensive houses when tomorrow house prices come down and they spend the rest of their lives paying off their mortgages.

    That and interest rates.


  • Options
    #8
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    gbh wrote:

    they spend the rest of their lives paying off their mortgages.


    Alot of people spend their lives paying of their mortgages.


  • Options
    #9
    gbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 429 ✭✭gbh


    kearnsr wrote:
    Alot of people spend their lives paying of their mortgages.


    Just giving some advice, take it or leave it.


  • Options
    #10
    Calina
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    kearnsr wrote:
    Alot of people spend their lives paying of their mortgages.

    A lot of people started off with 20 or 25 year mortgages. Now it's 30 to 40 years.

    There is a key difference. Ask any 15 year old whether 15 years is a short time or not.


  • Options
    #11
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    Calina wrote:
    A lot of people started off with 20 or 25 year mortgages. Now it's 30 to 40 years.

    There is a key difference. Ask any 15 year old whether 15 years is a short time or not.


    People start of with long mortgages but can reduce the term as they go.

    A lot of people have 25/40 year mortgages and pay them off 10/15 years early.

    As people progress in their jobs the ratio of repayments to earnings often remain the same i.e they earn more and repay more (not just interest related higher payments) and the term of their mortgage reduces.

    gbh wrote:

    Just giving some advice, take it or leave it.

    If thats adive again I would say its not very well thought out


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    mathie
    Registered Users Posts: 5,102 ✭✭✭mathie


    And this thread needs to exist because ....


  • Options
    #13
    gbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 429 ✭✭gbh


    And you added that comment because...


  • Options
    #14
    mathie
    Registered Users Posts: 5,102 ✭✭✭mathie


    gbh wrote:
    And you added that comment because...

    Of the fact that there's already a thread on this subject floating around.

    Is the OPs comments worthy of a new thread or a comment on that other thread?


  • Options
    #15
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    mathie wrote:

    Is the OPs comments worthy of a new thread or a comment on that other thread?

    gbh is the op


  • Options
    #16
    Calina
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    kearnsr wrote:
    People start of with long mortgages but can reduce the term as they go.

    A lot of people have 25/40 year mortgages and pay them off 10/15 years early.

    As people progress in their jobs the ratio of repayments to earnings often remain the same i.e they earn more and repay more (not just interest related higher payments) and the term of their mortgage reduces.

    Yes but that doesn't change the fact that there is a significant difference in the starting points, and additionally, you cannot be certain that someone on a 40Y mortgage will be in that position to pay off since 1) property prices are static/slowing and 2) we've only had them for two or three years. There is a long way to go.

    The point is that they *could* wind up paying their mortgage for up to 40 years which was not necessarily the case if you started with a 25 year mortgage.

    The OP's mode of issuing advice may not be desirable but he is right in one respect. Property prices were pushed up by people actually being willing to pay them. If they did not pay them, they would not be where they are now.

    However, the point is moot and there is no need for a strike on the part of purchasers any more. Interest rates are carrying out the deed.


  • Options
    #17
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,399 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    My point is that it is rather naive to expect everyone to stop buying.


  • Options
    #18
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,339 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    Perhaps we should start a thread advising sellers now is not the time to sell.


  • Options
    #19
    nickyjellybaby
    Registered Users Posts: 96 ✭✭nickyjellybaby


    Speculators haven't been in the market for over a year now... I think the last flurry of panic buying and flipping contracts over were fizzled out 2 years ago

    House prices are estimated to come down this year by approx 3% which is about the same percent they went up last year so we should have an equilibrium then. However, it's the owners who are reluctant to reduce their prices when selling because they have their blinkers on and are under an illusion that the current down turn in the market doesn't apply to them

    End of the year, we'll all see a clearer picture of where the property market is going. In the meantime people still need to sell and still need to buy


  • Options
    #20
    BendiBus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,074 ✭✭✭BendiBus


    nickyjellybaby wrote:
    In the meantime people still need to sell and still need to buy

    Yes, but due to interest rates, people can't buy at current asking prices, yet people won't (yet) sell at lower.


  • Options
    #21
    patrickolee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 890 ✭✭✭patrickolee


    BendiBus wrote:
    Yes, but due to interest rates, people can't buy at current asking prices, yet people won't (yet) sell at lower.

    Did you see

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6266268.stm

    quoted on the bubble thread. Maybe people who are streched will never sell, just become tenants of the banks? Who'll be the winners then?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    SkepticOne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,718 ✭✭✭SkepticOne


    patrickolee wrote:
    Did you see

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6266268.stm

    quoted on the bubble thread. Maybe people who are streched will never sell, just become tenants of the banks? Who'll be the winners then?
    I think once the current downward trend becomes entrenched, there won't be much renting by banks to the dispossessed. The banks will dump repossessed properties onto the market as quickly as possible for whatever price they can get in order to avoid further losses.


  • Options
    #23
    BendiBus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,074 ✭✭✭BendiBus


    patrickolee wrote:
    Maybe people who are streched will never sell

    Leading to a loss of liquidity, making house prices nothing more than an academic calculation, since there won't be any real world transactions!

    Your house will be priceless or valueless - same difference, no sale!


  • Options
    #24
    patrickolee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 890 ✭✭✭patrickolee


    In the limit yes, but of course we know there will always be people who want to sell and always people who want to buy. If the banks decide to start taking on tenants instead of dumping properties onto the market, surely it will tend to balance things. Like stabilisers on a bicycle! It's not in the banks interest for the market to plummet into freefall. They will tend to prop it up, even if it means the will begrudginly become landlords, which is the last thing you would imagine they want to be.


  • Options
    #25
    Afuera
    Closed Accounts Posts: 619 ✭✭✭Afuera


    patrickolee wrote:
    If the banks decide to start taking on tenants instead of dumping properties onto the market, surely it will tend to balance things. Like stabilisers on a bicycle! It's not in the banks interest for the market to plummet into freefall. They will tend to prop it up, even if it means the will begrudginly become landlords, which is the last thing you would imagine they want to be.
    I don't think that banks have the power to prop up the market in the way you suggest. The amount of people likely to default on their mortgage is only a small percentage of the current inventory that is available in the market.

    While the banks might have been happy to hold on to an appreciating asset in the past, once it starts to depreciate it makes no sense for them to continue this practise.


Advertisement