RTE Current Affairs show looking for people in negative equity

Riskymove

Firetrap wrote: »

I wouldn't agree with that really. If I was a home-owner, I'd be pretty peeved if I was paying off a mortgage of 250k, say and the person next door has bought an identical house for €175k. That's a lot of lost disposable income.

and you'd probably be delighted if the next door had to buy at €350k...human nature

it doesn't change the fact that house prices change over time and its basically a lot to do with timing and luck

SkepticOne

Kipperhell wrote: »

The only people being smart managed to sell their property for a high price before the crash and now have money to buy at lower prices. Not that many people did this as it involves not having a home and being quite flexible .

At the other end of the scale would be those who used leverage in one house to purchase more houses at the top of the bubble. Most would fall somewhere in between.

Kipperhell

SkepticOne wrote: »

At the other end of the scale would be those who used leverage in one house to purchase more houses at the top of the bubble. Most would fall somewhere in between.

I think you will be hard pressed to find many people did that at the hight of the market. There were definitely people trying to sell at the peak and then wait. I know a few people who tried this but only two people actually did it.

They are delighted and are waiting for further drops and will be mortgage free if all goes to plan. I personally wouldn't want the upheaval and hassle but looking at it now the rewards look good. Then again gambling is always fun when you win

SkepticOne

Kipperhell wrote: »

I think you will be hard pressed to find many people did that at the hight of the market. There were definitely people trying to sell at the peak and then wait. I know a few people who tried this but only two people actually did it.

They are delighted and are waiting for further drops and will be mortgage free if all goes to plan. I personally wouldn't want the upheaval and hassle but looking at it now the rewards look good. Then again gambling is always fun when you win

I will have a look for the figures at some point but a lot of amateur investors got sucked in in the latter stages of the bubble. I think something like 40% of houses were sold to investors in that period.

Whatever about the numbers selling at the peak, there's certainly a huge amount trying to sell now.

Firetrap

RTÉ didn't cover itself in glory during the bubble years. Every other news bulletin had the likes of Dan McLoughlin (Bank of Ireland) and Austin Hughes (KCB) on the radio telling us things were going to grow grow grow. They broadcast numerous property related TV programs. Interestingly, I seem to recall the presenter of I'm an Adult Get Me Out of Here getting quite narky because RTÉ broadcast Richard Curran's Future Shock (one of the few programs to have a differing view) and caused someone to get cold feet.

They should look into the social effects of negative equity. You've got people who paid too much for houses/apartments stuck having to pay back massive mortgages. This in a time where taxes are increasing, jobs are being lost and pay freezes/pay cuts. Does this mean that people won't be able to afford to have kids? Buy schoolbooks? Clothe/feed them properly? Or not be able to send them to third level? People bought property believing that even though things might be hard for a year or two, wages would be increasing and they'd be able to sell up anyway.

A lot of people bought houses/apartments during the bubble years just to get their foot "on the ladder." The intention was to sell in a year or two and buy what they really wanted closer to work/family. Try raising a family in a two-bedroomed shoebox apartment in Rochfortbridge when you're working in Dublin.

Another thing that negative equity does is to limit mobility. Say your job in Dublin goes but you can get another one in Cork. What do you do then with your house in Longford?

gogglebok

amdublin wrote: »

Wow I really really wish I worked as a "researcher" for The Frontline, it looks like a nice easy job - pick a topic, on to Boards.ie and sit back. Well done you. Go Aoife.

Come on, now, that's not fair. You have no reason to assume that coming on Boards is the only research that someone is doing. I'm pretty sure the other seven hours and fifty-nine minutes of the research day weren't spent blowing smoke rings out the office window. On the contrary, I imagine Frontline is one of the highest-pressure gigs in Irish broadcasting at the moment. Every single commentator in the country will be scrutinising it closely.

Anyway, insulting people who come to Boards for opinions will only discourage them for doing it.

That being said, I do think that looking only for "angry" people would be short-sighted. I hope it was a slip of the keyboard, rather than a statement of policy. I doubt Ms Stokes expected to have her post so closely parsed, and I hope she doesn't feel too stung by some of the reactions.

gogglebok

Firetrap wrote: »

They should look into the social effects of negative equity. You've got people who paid too much for houses/apartments stuck having to pay back massive mortgages. This in a time where taxes are increasing, jobs are being lost and pay freezes/pay cuts. Does this mean that people won't be able to afford to have kids? Buy schoolbooks? Clothe/feed them properly? Or not be able to send them to third level? People bought property believing that even though things might be hard for a year or two, wages would be increasing and they'd be able to sell up anyway.

A lot of people bought houses/apartments during the bubble years just to get their foot "on the ladder." The intention was to sell in a year or two and buy what they really wanted closer to work/family. Try raising a family in a two-bedroomed shoebox apartment in Rochfortbridge when you're working in Dublin.

Another thing that negative equity does is to limit mobility. Say your job in Dublin goes but you can get another one in Cork. What do you do then with your house in Longford?

What do think the long-term social effects of this will be? Obviously an increase in depression, and so forth, but will there be wider effects too? And is there anything that can be done to alleviate things?

Sorry for nominating you as my Guru du Jour, but I think your analysis is really convincing.

The_Conductor

Some very good points there Firetrap.
Totally aside from the financial aspects of negative equity- the lack of mobility, living in wholly inappropriate accommodation bought on the understanding they would trade up when they needed to- and the total lack of a social structure in the majority of these new developments (not to mention amenities, and the lack thereof) are problems that are going to haunt this country for years to come.

I noted over 4 years ago- the manner in which the EU Commission was bringing delegations from prospective member states over here to view what happens when there isn't an integrated planning structure in place.

The nail that lost the horseshoe, that lost the horse, that lost the regiment, that lost the battle- for us- is parochial politics. Every little village is against the next village, and against their local towns, and then every county is against every other county, and then the rest of the country is against the cities and Cork and Dublin in particular.

We cannot have every amenity on everyone's doorsteps- and its crazy to suggest we can. Likewise- a 200 house development in Leixlip Co. Kildare- is a whole different proposition from one 3 miles outside Virginia Co. Cavan (and don't even get me started about apartment developments in Leitrim and holiday villages built for tax purposes in rural Donegal.........)

Negative equity is only one of the more visible aspects of our current mess- the other more lasting effects of our 15 year binge (and it was a 15 year binge- we were already in a bubble in 1999-2000), are in all probability going to take far longer to correct.

There are estates out there that will either be used as be demolished at some stage in the future- or if this is politically untenable (aka if NAMA overpay for them- and there is never going to be a future market for them) used as social housing and they will become the new Tallaghts, Neilstowns, O'Malley Parks etc.

What is even more worrying is that the perilous state of the country's finances- has yet to hit the public psychie- Mary Hannafin may have sowed the first seeds in this battle during the week when she indicated that social welfare payments are going to have to be cut. This must be done in tandem with a cut in the minimum wage and wage cuts- across the board (but particularly at higher levels).

We now have a system where its only of very marginal benefit to someone to work at the average industrial wage- and the average industrial wage is significantly higher than in 11 of the old 15 EU member states. Something has to give.

By rights we would be dissolving every single institution, company, and concept- and redesigning the country from the bottom up.

There has to be a reward associated with working. At the moment there frankly is not. The government has to be seen to represent the people- at the moment you have the likes of small numbers of independent TDs (such as Jackie Healy Rae) and the junior coalition partners acting the tail that wags the dog. Outside of this- its every little constituency having 'its man or woman' in the Houses of the Oireachtas to represent their interests. The interests of Tubercurry, Co. Sligo are represented by our politicians, but the interests of Ireland as a whole- are not.

Yes- negative equity is the pits- and if you bought an apartment in the past 10 years- its a valid assumption that you are in negative equity (houses and freehold properties have not fallen as badly, and will not). However bad negative equity is- there is a whole lot more pain coming down the line for everyone, over the next few years.........

Riskymove

smccarrick wrote: »

Yes- negative equity is the pits- and if you bought an apartment in the past 10 years- its a valid assumption that you are in negative equity (houses and freehold properties have not fallen as badly, and will not). However bad negative equity is- there is a whole lot more pain coming down the line for everyone, over the next few years.........

I agreed with most of your points, but this? 10 years and in negative equity? very unlikely...if for no other reason than you have 10 years paid off the mortgage

gogglebok

gogglebok wrote: »

I imagine Frontline is one of the highest-pressure gigs in Irish broadcasting at the moment. Every single commentator in the country will be scrutinising it closely.

Anyway, insulting people who come to Boards for opinions will only discourage them for doing it.

What commentators?? Seriously I want names. All I hear on radio or see on tv are shills!!! Lets NEVER forget the property shows our TV licenses paid for.
I never once saw a bad review of a property in the newspapers property supplements yet thet claimed they were "reviews".

As for looking for angry people they got them it just doesnt fit with the picture they want to paint and Im sick of it Im sick to death of the rubbish on radio, tv and in our newspapers. I hope it opened their eyes. They need a wake up call :mad:

gogglebok

Deleted User wrote: »

What commentators?? Seriously I want names. All I hear on radio or see on tv are shills!!! Lets NEVER forget the property shows our TV licenses paid for.
I never once saw a bad review of a property in the newspapers property supplements yet thet claimed they were "reviews".

No, blindjustice, you're completely right. I agree with you about the shills. The way people have pushed the "property ladder" is disgraceful. I'm particularly angry/disappointed with the Irish Times. The combination of (a) investment in property sales and (b) horrendously wrong advice to buy property, should be one of the greatest Irish media scandals ever.

BUT - however righteous the anger, you have to feel sorry for some poor TV researcher who stumbled into the firing line. I don't know her, or anyone on the programme, but I think some of the responses might have been hurtful. A young woman in an office doing a job is NOT the editorial voice of RTE, and shouldn't have to carry that can.

(When I said commentators, I should have been clearer. I meant TV critics rather than property heads.)

Diarmuid

Riskymove wrote: »

it doesn't change the fact that house prices change over time and its basically a lot to do with timing and luck

Timing - yes
Luck - not really

I think a 10 year old could pick out the bubbles here

Also note the time it took from the peak of the first bubble to return to that value.

Kipperhell

Deleted User wrote: »

What commentators?? Seriously I want names. All I hear on radio or see on tv are shills!!! Lets NEVER forget the property shows our TV licenses paid for.

Actually I seem to have forgotten because I can only think of two which were actually created using TV licence money. "I'm an Adult" and "House Hunters". There were other property related shows about design but they weren't property shows as such the same way a DIY show is not about property. I think there were many media reports on the dangers of property and market worries. There was a lot of discussion about how economists were getting it wrong year on year. It sounds like selective memory of actual events. Didn't "Future Shock" also get created by RTE and actually be pretty accurate on property? Not sure how accurate the other topics were.

ronbyrne2005

RTE still has the shills of KBC and PTSB on regularly with reports. That PTSB index is the biggest pile of poo and should be ditched by all media outlets, suprised ESRI let their name still be attached to it.;

irlrobins

Kipperhell wrote: »

I can only think of two which were actually created using TV licence money. "I'm an Adult" and "House Hunters".

Would love to see a "I'm an adult revisited" prog. I remember watching that series and seeing people with low incomes and zilch savings getting massive mortgages. Be interesting to see how they're coping now, and indeed if they're all still in their homes...

mathie

Diarmuid wrote: »

Timing - yes
Luck - not really

I think a 10 year old could pick out the bubbles here

Tell that to Alan Greenspan.

"We recognized that despite our suspicions, it was very difficult to definitively identify a bubble until after the fact -- that is, when its bursting confirmed its existence"

Hindsight is 20 20.
Before the bubble popped the vast, vast majority thought it wasn't a bubble. Now after it's popped it's the other way round.

Herd behaviuour.
Moo!

faceman

mathie wrote: »

Tell that to Alan Greenspan.

"We recognized that despite our suspicions, it was very difficult to definitively identify a bubble until after the fact -- that is, when its bursting confirmed its existence"

Hindsight is 20 20.
Before the bubble popped the vast, vast majority thought it wasn't a bubble. Now after it's popped it's the other way round.

Herd behaviuour.
Moo!

To be fair though, house price deflation kicked off before the recession hit. If the recession hadnt hit and we hadnt seen mass unemployment i doubt the bubble would have burst so hard so quick. Although it would probably have ended up a longer drawn out process, which is worse.

bangersandmash

irlrobins wrote: »

Would love to see a "I'm an adult revisited" prog. I remember watching that series and seeing people with low incomes and zilch savings getting massive mortgages. Be interesting to see how they're coping now, and indeed if they're all still in their homes...

I'd imagine some of those people are in difficult circumstances now, given that even in 2007 they were over-stretching themselves financially. This was at a time when the higher end of the market was already visibly faltering.

AARRRGH

mathie wrote: »

Before the bubble popped the vast, vast majority thought it wasn't a bubble. Now after it's popped it's the other way round.

The vast majority of people are very dumb though; that's why we are supposed to hire clever people to run the banking system/regulatory bodies.

Unfortunately it seems we forget the 'clever' bit and instead put a couple of dumb people into positions of great power.

Even I could see we were in the middle of a horrendous bubble, and I don't know anything about economics.

SkepticOne

Cleverness is probably the wrong word. Cleverness can be used to persuade others of your position. Unfortunately you also end up deluding yourself and insulating yourself against contrary evidence. Wisdom is the only word I can think of for what was lacking.

AARRRGH

SkepticOne wrote: »

Cleverness is probably the wrong word. Cleverness can be used to persuade others of your position. Unfortunately you also end up deluding yourself and insulating yourself against contrary evidence. Wisdom is the only word I can think of for what was lacking.

Yeah, you're right, clever can mean canny, whereas wise is just wise.