Queue to buy houses

ted1

moxin wrote: »

Think you maybe wrong on this, look at the links again.

http://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/house-hunters-queuing-for-five-days-before-new-homes-go-on-sale-30559705.html http://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/firsttime-buyers-queue-for-five-days-in-bid-for-homes-30560868.html


Does a sales assistant earn alot more money than a retail manager at age 23?

You don't know people's situation. There could be inheritance, lotto winnings, they could have bought bank shares at 9c and sold at 16c,

Just hearing about the developer involved now - Gerry Gannon, member of the Golden Circle, owed NAMA over a billion and transferred 12m in assets to his wife in 2009.

I wonder who paid for this development, wouldn't be the taxpayer by any chance?

EunanMac

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Just hearing about the developer involved now - Gerry Gannon, member of the Golden Circle, owed NAMA transferred 12m in assets to his wife[/URL] in 2009.

I wonder who paid for this development, wouldn't be the taxpayer by any chance?

Yep, the development is actually being funded for Gannon by NAMA, and advertised for him by RTE.
You couldn't make it up.
Watch out for the no doubt upcoming feature of Gannon in the Sunday Independent
And a special on the estate in the property supplements

EunanMac

EunanMac wrote: »

Yep, the development is actually being funded for Gannon by NAMA

THIS, should be the fcuking news story :mad:

Peter File

TV3 had a big report on this on their 5:30pm news this evening. I find it very suspicious all the free PR that this development is getting. There are 60 houses in the development being released on Saturday and you have only 6 people queuing up, that is hardly newsworthy.

Santa Cruz

I don't see what the fuss is about. People are making the biggest financial commitment of their lives. The price is the price and wont decrease. If by queing they are ableto get their choice of house e.g house with a corner site, house with bigger back garden or not overlooked, house with potential to put on extension then fair play to them. Most of the begrudgery seems to be from people who expect the State to provide them with housing or to have a controlled price of housing. Well they can't have that unless they want to live in North Korea. Its the free market and the laws of supply and demand apply.

EunanMac

So the alternative is to live in North Korea ? You've set the bar high there.

Affordable, secure, quality homes are a fundamental principle of any civilised democracy.

Thoie

Santa Cruz wrote: »

I don't see what the fuss is about. People are making the biggest financial commitment of their lives. The price is the price and wont decrease. If by queing they are ableto get their choice of house e.g house with a corner site, house with bigger back garden or not overlooked, house with potential to put on extension then fair play to them. Most of the begrudgery seems to be from people who expect the State to provide them with housing or to have a controlled price of housing. Well they can't have that unless they want to live in North Korea. Its the free market and the laws of supply and demand apply.

I have a house, so I'm not in competition with these people and there's no begrudgery. I just find the entire thing very suspicious, given the people/agencies involved. The whole thing stinks of a PR stunt, and I'd like to know who's pulling the strings, and why none of our broadcasters (national or private) seem to be calling shenanigans.

Santa Cruz

EunanMac wrote: »

So the alternative is to live in North Korea ? You've set the bar high there.

Affordable, secure, quality homes are a fundamental principle of any civilised democracy.

Of course they are but where do people live until we achieve that housing Utopia

EunanMac

Thoie wrote: »

I have a house, so I'm not in competition with these people and there's no begrudgery. I just find the entire thing very suspicious, given the people/agencies involved. The whole thing stinks of a PR stunt, and I'd like to know who's pulling the strings, and why none of our broadcasters (national or private) seem to be calling shenanigans.

Think of all the property supplements and cheap to make property TV shows

Generation 2 of the housing pyramid scheme.

We're going to get Ireland back on its feet, if only everyone would start buying and selling houses to one another.

mr_seer

mariaalice wrote: »

There are no 100% mortgages available today.

No but very soon there are going to be taxpayer sponsored First Time Buyer guarantees

Last_Minute

I would love to own my own house/flat one day but i know with the prices it will be impossible.

I'm strongly thinking of going on welfare and trying to get some sort of council house if at all possible.

mr_seer

Santa Cruz wrote: »

I don't see what the fuss is about. People are making the biggest financial commitment of their lives. The price is the price and wont decrease. If by queing they are ableto get their choice of house e.g house with a corner site, house with bigger back garden or not overlooked, house with potential to put on extension then fair play to them. Most of the begrudgery seems to be from people who expect the State to provide them with housing or to have a controlled price of housing. Well they can't have that unless they want to live in North Korea. Its the free market and the laws of supply and demand apply.

Free market? It is the most rigged market on the planet with massive government intervention stoking demand and choking supply. Hundreds of thousands of mortgage defaulters who haven't paid a bean in 6 years sitting pretty in a bank's house. People don't want state provided housing but they want the state to stop manipulating house prices out of their reach

athtrasna

Last_Minute wrote: »

I would love to own my own house/flat one day but i know with the prices it will be impossible.

I'm strongly thinking of going on welfare and trying to get some sort of council house if at all possible.

Not advisable

mariaalice

Last_Minute wrote: »

I would love to own my own house/flat one day but i know with the prices it will be impossible.

I'm strongly thinking of going on welfare and trying to get some sort of council house if at all possible.

You can buy a one bedroom apartment in Dublin for under 80k, yet you want to give up work and go on welfare in the belief that the council will house you.

mariaalice

EunanMac wrote: »

So the alternative is to live in North Korea ? You've set the bar high there.

Affordable, secure, quality homes are a fundamental principle of any civilised democracy.

That's true, however define affordable and does the quality secure home have to be where you want it or where you can afforded it.

Last_Minute

mariaalice wrote: »

You can buy a one bedroom apartment in Dublin for under 80k, yet you want to give up work and go on welfare in the belief that the council will house you.

I need a much larger home than a one bedroom, and yes.

mariaalice

Last_Minute wrote: »

I need a much larger home than a one bedroom, and yes.

If you are serious you would be better off changing to a job that puts you under the income limit for social housing and going on the housing list, you wont be housed any quicker just because you are unemployed, social housing is based on your income and need for housing not on whether you are on welfare or not.

Ginny

It's very suspicious, I live near the houses and tbf I wouldn't touch them with a barge pole. They look very cramped and crowded in together. Gannon seemingly has pp for 1,500 units, with little or no infrastructure in place. From what I remember him getting the pp for such a large development was very surprising locally. I think the first 60 houses are phase one and set priced, the following phases would go up, so people queuing up would really help sales.

Last_Minute

mariaalice wrote: »

If you are serious you would be better off changing to a job that puts you under the income limit for social housing and going on the housing list, you wont be housed any quicker just because you are unemployed, social housing is based on your income and need for housing not on whether you are on welfare or not.

Thank you for the advice. I will look into it - check the income limits etc.

Rgb.ie

Ginny wrote: »

It's very suspicious, I live near the houses and tbf I wouldn't touch them with a barge pole. They look very cramped and crowded in together. Gannon seemingly has pp for 1,500 units, with little or no infrastructure in place. From what I remember him getting the pp for such a large development was very surprising locally. I think the first 60 houses are phase one and set priced, the following phases would go up, so people queuing up would really help sales.

Any idea on the size of land available?

Ginny

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=66956001 this is an old thread on it. Dunno how much info is there though.

HeidiHeidi

EunanMac wrote: »

Yep, the development is actually being funded for Gannon by NAMA, and advertised for him by RTE.
You couldn't make it up.
Watch out for the no doubt upcoming feature of Gannon in the Sunday Independent
And a special on the estate in the property supplements

I'm quite sure NAMA are taking their cut out of the sales seeing as they're funding the finishing of the estate.

The alternative would be that the estate lie half- or quarter-finished, become a danger and a health hazard, and eventually cost someone (us) money to tear down.

Leaving ghost estates unfinished just because the developers are in disgrace would be cutting your nose off to spite your face.

I'd be interested to see details of where the money from the sales of these houses is going to go - THAT in my opinion should be the story.

washman3

EunanMac wrote: »

Yep, the development is actually being funded for Gannon by NAMA, and advertised for him by RTE.
You couldn't make it up.
Watch out for the no doubt upcoming feature of Gannon in the Sunday Independent
And a special on the estate in the property supplements

And all safe in the knowledge that if (when) the whole thing goes belly-up that the taxpayer will foot the bill.:mad:

davo10

washman3 wrote: »

And all safe in the knowledge that if (when) the whole thing goes belly-up that the taxpayer will foot the bill.:mad:

Would NAMA not be finishing this estate and selling it on behalf of the taxpayer? Aren't the profits from NAMA being used to pay off the billions owed as a result of the last crash?

I don't see the down side of this to be honest, a ghost estate is completed, it is being sold in an area where there obviously is a housing shortage, the houses by all accounts are priced reasonably for the area, one economist I heard said that they are still 30% below what similar houses sold for at the peak of the boom so he said the price was what would be expected in a well functioning market, the taxpayer gets back the money owed by the developer on the site and homeowners get new houses, what's the problem?

Thoie

davo10 wrote: »

Would NAMA not be finishing this estate and selling it on behalf of the taxpayer? Aren't the profits from NAMA being used to pay off the billions owed as a result of the last crash?

I don't see the down side of this to be honest, a ghost estate is completed, it is being sold in an area where there obviously is a housing shortage, the houses by all accounts are priced reasonably for the area, one economist I heard said that they are still 30% below what similar houses sold for at the peak of the boom so he said the price was what would be expected in a well functioning market, the taxpayer gets back the money owed by the developer on the site and homeowners get new houses, what's the problem?

See, the bolded pieces are where I'd like to see some proof. If NAMA had taken ownership/control of the estate, why is Gannon's name being used so much in the present tense?

I don't understand the relationship - is Gannon being employed by NAMA as some kind of foreman/project manager for a market-rate wage, and NAMA will get all the profits? Or is Gannon running the show, calling the shots, and sharing in the profit? Is the tax payer getting a financial benefit from the arrangement?

Cuddlesworth

davo10 wrote: »

one economist I heard said that they are still 30% below what similar houses sold for at the peak of the boom

Houses at the peak of the boom were un-affordable. 300k houses at the edge of swords are un-affordable. Even if those sit in are real, 300k is far too much of a mortgage at those wages. One of those two couldn't cover the mortgage on their own. Not only that but the female is primary earner.

Sunny Dayz

How are people so young getting mortgages so high?! We could only get €150k on €60k joint gross - both in long term employment, late 20/early 30 with the child and the wedding parts of our lives already done!


Granted we didn't need anymore anyway for the house we wanted but even still, I find it difficult for me to understand how they could do it!

Villa05

Sunny Dayz wrote: »

How are people so young getting mortgages so high?! We could only get €150k on €60k joint gross - both in long term employment, late 20/early 30 with the child and the wedding parts of our lives already done!!

Bank assumes current income and outgoings only. the assumption being that paying as much of your income to a bank is more important than having children

Mr.McLovin

Villa05 wrote: »

Bank assumes current income and outgoings only. the assumption being that paying as much of your income to a bank is more important than having children

so the likelihood is the female in this case had a hysterectomy in order to appease the bank for a 300k mortgage