Sanity checking on house prices

jmayo

pawnacide wrote: »

Ye are all F*@^*>@ nuts.

If that house was reduced to the 220k figure ye seem to be bouncing around it'd be sold in the morning. 3000 sq feet at about 100/sq ft = 300k. This notional 75-85 euro per sq foot rebuild cost never includes internal finishing, landscaping etc. Nor does it include council charges incurred when building a one off.

If you get it for less than 250k I'd be amazed.

Even now with site values where they are (if you can find someone willing to sell you for so little) you couldn't build and finish that house for 250k. Well maybe if you did absolutely all the work yourself.

Ahh ffs.
It doesn't matter how much it cost to build if there is no market then it will not sell.

You do know that you can often buy things cheaper than what it cost to produce them.
It is usually when there is over supply and little demand.
Ditto with houses in Ireland at the moment.

BTW do you have any idea where that house is ?
It is outside Charlestown or more correctly Bellahy beside the N17 on way to Sligo.

Now there is shag all going on in that area since the construction bubble burst and you are not going to find people queing up to buy houses.
Rather they would be queing up to get on a flight at Knock airport a few miles up the road.

Although if you coudl afford to buy your local would be O'Haras which wasn't a bad ould pub moons ago.

johndaman66 wrote: »

But fair to say that for the most part property prices bore very little correlation with rebuild costs in the "good times". Why would that change now? No valid reason as far as I can see.

There seems to be a hardcore of people out there who would argue that property prices cannot drop below rebuild costs...this is very much not the case...

Agree 100%.

Outkast_IRE

Joe10000 wrote: »

I live in a house that is on an acre site that is mostly grass and it's a ****ing nightmare, what I'd give for a window box.

Is your field fenced, get a few goats :-) i always thought long run keeping a few small goats would be cheaper or equivialnt to grass cutting.

jmayo

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

Is your field fenced, get a few goats :-) i always thought long run keeping a few small goats would be cheaper or equivialnt to grass cutting.

I don't know. Goats are a pain in the ar** and can end up eating everything.
But you could always use them for milk I guess.

gigino

pawnacide wrote: »

If he bought a site and built a new house to a similar spec, while he would get exactly what he wanted, he wouldn't have a lot of change from 300k .. so 250k price seems reasonable.

You can buy a new apartment in the bm ( border midlands ) region for 40k, which is well less than the cost of building. That makes 250 for a house like that seem laughably high.

johndaman66

pawnacide wrote: »

I'm not one of them, it happens all the time but the OP is looking a valid means of valuing the property. The value of any property is after all the price it sells for at any given time but thats of no use when your trying to evaluate a property you want to buy.

If he bought a site and built a new house to a similar spec, while he would get exactly what he wanted, he wouldn't have a lot of change from 300k .. so 250k price seems reasonable.

Rebuild cost is indeed a method of evaluating the worth of a property. But I would suggest that to be the case in a healthy market with a good equilibrium between supply and demand and where all the other fundamentals are pretty sound. Even at that it would hardly seem to be the most reliable method, certainly not the best method I would suggest.

We are hardly operating in a healthy market at present. Too much uncertainty and unknowns and a considerable gap between supply and demand.

I think the only scenario in which rebuild cost would hold any relevance to the OP is if he was strongly considering embarking on his own self build of a broadly similar house in the immediate vicinity and there were no other comparable houses for sale in the area that "ticked the boxes". Hardly a scenario thats very likely.

pawnacide wrote: »

If he bought a site and built a new house to a similar spec, while he would get exactly what he wanted, he wouldn't have a lot of change from 300k .. so 250k price seems reasonable.

You are of course correct. I would think you would be lucky to have much change from 300k if you were to build a similar house, despite what some people will say....people who have not built. Certainly not when you throw legal fees, planning, architect fees etc. into the mix. I haven't built myself but as a potential buyer I have considered a self build.

I am in a position where I could acquire a site for nominal value or in reality for free if I decided to build. Even at that though I would still buy before I would build. After speaking to many friends and relations who have gone down the self build road and carrying out considerable research it is clear that you would buy for considerably less than a self build in the same area.

Tigger

i like this thread(i stareted for opinionss) please continue

zac8

Tigger wrote: »

i like this thread(i stareted for opinionss) please continue

Thats one ugly overpriced house.

amdublin

Tigger wrote: »

i like this thread(i stareted for opinionss) please continue

I don't care how much that house cost to build it's ugly and tacky. (and outdated)