Property Market 2015

jay0109

gaius c wrote: »

Allsops
149 lots. Over 70 unsold or withdrawn.

Wow, even after the 10 minute free advertising slot Pat Kenny gave them on his show yesterday morning which talked about the increase in sterling investors at their sales, some of the fantastic yields available, and how you can bid/buy with confidence from a legalities/title perspective as the paperwork is all there for your solicitor to review:D

helimachoptor

frustrated at the minute, the vendor (executor) wont even entertain our bid (30K below asking on 500+K property) House needs work and not minor!


:mad:

The_Conductor

helimachoptor wrote: »

frustrated at the minute, the vendor (executor) wont even entertain our bid (30K below asking on 500+K property) House needs work and not minor!


:mad:

While I can understand your frustration- it is the vendor's prerogative. In a situation like that- I could only suggest you walk. Its not worth the head wreck the vendor is putting you through.

johnp001

helimachoptor wrote: »

frustrated at the minute, the vendor (executor) wont even entertain our bid (30K below asking on 500+K property) House needs work and not minor!


:mad:

In a market where supply is increasing strongly and demand appears.to be weakening the vendor may end up regretting this if you have bought somewhere else by the time they have undergone a reality check on what may be a an unrealistic asking price considering the market trajectory.
Expect a call from that agent in a couple of weeks to a couple of months. But walk away for now (as the conductor says) to let vendor see that when an offer is rejected it does not set a safe "floor" for the price attainable, it leaves the vendor potentially with no buyer and only the prospect of a price drop as a possible means of attracting one.

Barely Hedged

johnp001 wrote: »

In a market where supply is increasing strongly and demand appears.to be weakening the vendor may end up regretting this if you have bought somewhere else by the time they have undergone a reality check on what may be a an unrealistic asking price considering the market trajectory.
Expect a call from that agent in a couple of weeks to a couple of months. But walk away for now (as the conductor says) to let vendor see that when an offer is rejected it does not set a safe "floor" for the price attainable, it leaves the vendor potentially with no buyer and only the prospect of a price drop as a possible means of attracting one.

The poster "offered" 6% below the asking price. That doesnt sound like the asking price is unrealistic. Its just sounds like a negotiation tactic.

What is the supply now versus supply at this same time in 2014?

johnp001

Barely Hedged wrote: »

The poster "offered" 6% below the asking price. That doesnt sound like the asking price is unrealistic. Its just sounds like a negotiation tactic.

What is the supply now versus supply at this same time in 2014?

+54% on 1 March 2015 vs 1 March 2014

Barely Hedged

johnp001 wrote: »

+54% on 1 March 2015 vs 1 March 2014

Is that nationwide or Dublin only? Whats the numbers for Dublin in that case?

Have you got the absolute numbers?

johnp001

Barely Hedged wrote: »

Is that nationwide or Dublin only? Whats the numbers for Dublin in that case?

Have you got the absolute numbers?

That was the figure for dublin.
Figures are in Daft Q1 2015 report

Barely Hedged

Barely Hedged wrote: »

Is that nationwide or Dublin only? Whats the numbers for Dublin in that case?

Have you got the absolute numbers?

Thanks.

To go back to the original point, if the poster is willing to offer 6% below asking i dont think its worth walking away because of what might or might not happen in the market.

The common sense approach would be to go back and say we can offer some more and then leave it at that. Its ultimately a negotiation. You give some and you get some after an initial offer. If they still dont budge, then its worth walking away

Villa05

Barely Hedged wrote:

The common sense approach would be to go back and say we can offer some more and then leave it at that. Its ultimately a negotiation. You give some and you get some after an initial offer. If they still dont budge, then its worth walking away

Let the estate agent/vendor make that move. Offer is very good. If it's not being "entertained", it is the vendor that seems unwilling to negotiate. Time will sort that out.

Barely Hedged

Villa05 wrote: »

Let the estate agent/vendor make that move. Offer is very good. If it's not being "entertained", it is the vendor that seems unwilling to negotiate. Time will sort that out.

They have made their move. Poster offered, estate agent replied. If they wernt interested in negotiating and the offer was that bad, would they have replied at all?

They have told them it is not being entertained. Its ultimately a negotiation tactic. Its up to the poster to now bid again or not bid at all. The next move is firmly with the poster.

Is the poster willing to go the extra 10/15/20k thats required to tempt the seller? If they do and theyre definitely not interested then, the common sense approach is then to leave the negotiation at that. Just because your outcome isnt satisfied in a negotiation process with an initial offer doesnt mean you blame the counter party and walk away.

johnp001

Barely Hedged wrote: »

They have made their move. Poster offered, estate agent replied. If they wernt interested in negotiating and the offer was that bad, would they have replied at all?

They have told them it is not being entertained. Its ultimately a negotiation tactic. Its up to the poster to now bid again or not bid at all. The next move is firmly with the poster.

Is the poster willing to go the extra 10/15/20k thats required to tempt the seller? If they do and theyre definitely not interested then, the common sense approach is then to leave the negotiation at that. Just because your outcome isnt satisfied in a negotiation process with an initial offer doesnt mean you blame the counter party and walk away.

For most of the recent past, when we have had a rising market with easy credit, buyers have been very inclined to just throw in an extra 10-20k and get their deal done before prices rise further.
Now those conditions have changed. A lot of buyers are unable to get the extra from the bank, other buyers are unwilling to. 10-20k is several years hard saving for most people.

Barely Hedged

johnp001 wrote: »

For most of the recent past, when we have had a rising market with easy credit, buyers have been very inclined to just throw in an extra 10-20k and get their deal done before prices rise further.
Now those conditions have changed. A lot of buyers are unable to get the extra from the bank, other buyers are unwilling to. 10-20k is several years hard saving for most people.

Easy credit in the recent past?

Can we stay relevant to the example given instead of inserting broad statements that cant be proven i.e.

A lot of buyers are unable to get the extra from the bank

and

other buyers are unwilling to

The poster is in the market of 500k+. Im assuming to get to that level of deposit and approval for LTI, 10k to 20k would not take "several years hard saving".

Just say he declines to offer more on this property. Whats the cost to him of his search continuing for 3/6/9/12 months. Maybe the poster can answer that.

fret_wimp2

Barely Hedged wrote: »

They have made their move. Poster offered, estate agent replied. If they wernt interested in negotiating and the offer was that bad, would they have replied at all?

They have told them it is not being entertained. Its ultimately a negotiation tactic. Its up to the poster to now bid again or not bid at all. The next move is firmly with the poster.

Is the poster willing to go the extra 10/15/20k thats required to tempt the seller? If they do and theyre definitely not interested then, the common sense approach is then to leave the negotiation at that. Just because your outcome isnt satisfied in a negotiation process with an initial offer doesnt mean you blame the counter party and walk away.

There is a fine line between negotiating, and simply throwing piles of money at the problem, like people have done for years to cause unrealistic prices and value expectations.

The reason this and other sellers can just hold out is because we as a people dont see money as a real thing anymore, its just a number on a screen or on a piece of paper that has no relation to us on a day to day basis.

We have forgotten that these are not just numbers, its money, we have to save, to earn, to do without other things in order to accumulate, often taking a long time.

We see, with frightening regularity on these forums "my offer wasnt accepted so i just threw 20k on top" or something similar to that effect. We need to remember that each of these "k's" is 1000 euros, not a trivial amount of money and simply touting "if its the right house" or "i really want it" does not warrant us to make stupid decisions and bury ourselves in debt up to the neck.

NinjaTruncs

BH you are making some pretty big assumptions.

On your last post, it would take several hard years of save to save 20K for someone looking to buy in the 500K+ bracket if they already have rent/mortgage or a young family. I know as I'm in that bracket. Particularly for anyone who bought there first property during the boom years.

Also your posts are assuming that the asking price is a reasonable one, the asking price may possible be far too high and 6% lower is exactly what the house it worth. The fact that the other bidder dropped out suggests the current offer is reaching market value. In my own situation I placed an offer 15% below asking price (which is in line with other recent sales) it was rejected and they have now lowered the price so my offer is within 6% of asking, does that mean I should offer more money, even though by doing so I would be offering 6% more than what the last house sold for in a falling market.

As someone else said your rationale may have been right in the boom days when prices were shooting up but we're in a different climate now and people aren't rushing to increase their bids without need.

Barely Hedged

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

There is a fine line between negotiating, and simply throwing piles of money at the problem, like people have done for years to cause unrealistic prices and value expectations.

The reason this and other sellers can just hold out is because we as a people dont see money as a real thing anymore, its just a number on a screen or on a piece of paper that has no relation to us on a day to day basis.

We have forgotten that these are not just numbers, its money, we have to save, to earn, to do without other things in order to accumulate, often taking a long time.

We see, with frightening regularity on these forums "my offer wasnt accepted so i just threw 20k on top" or something similar to that effect. We need to remember that each of these "k's" is 1000 euros, not a trivial amount of money and simply touting "if its the right house" or "i really want it" does not warrant us to make stupid decisions and bury ourselves in debt up to the neck.

This is becoming tiresome. Youve just gone off on some tangent here.

I was making the point in the very specific example the poster had illustrated. Their initial offer was 6% below asking - this does not imply "unrealistic prices and value expectations". It was an initial offer in a negotiation.

If the poster is renting, youve also forgot that theres a cost to him of remaining in rented accommodation when his expectation is to buy.

20k is less than 4% of the asking. Your comment " does not warrant us to make stupid decisions and bury ourselves in debt up to the neck." is just emotive crap when taking this example

fret_wimp2

Barely Hedged wrote: »

This is becoming tiresome. Youve just gone off on some tangent here.

I was making the point in the very specific example the poster had illustrated. Their initial offer was 6% below asking - this does not imply "unrealistic prices and value expectations". It was an initial offer in a negotiation.

If the poster is renting, youve also forgot that theres a cost to him of remaining in rented accommodation when his expectation is to buy.

20k is less than 4% of the asking. Your comment " does not warrant us to make stupid decisions and bury ourselves in debt up to the neck." is just emotive crap when taking this example

20k is 20,000 euros, regardless of how large or small a percentage of the asking it is. saying 4% is just using a smaller number to fool yourself into bidding higher because they really want the house. "4 is smaller than 20000, i can afford 4". Thats effectively your logic on this. Take the units into consideration, percentage vs actual hard euros.

If that 20k is negligible to the bidder, have at it. for the majority of the population there's quite a bit of time and energy taken to gather 20k.

Barely Hedged

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

20k is 20,000 euros, regardless of how large or small a percentage of the asking it is. Thats not an emotive reaction, thats fact.

Im sorry, but thats deluded logic.

Its relative to an individual and in this case, i was taking an individual example

fret_wimp2

Barely Hedged wrote: »

Im sorry, but thats deluded logic.

so 20k is not 20'000 euros?
can you show your work please?

Bob24

Barely Hedged wrote: »

20k is less than 4% of the asking. Your comment " does not warrant us to make stupid decisions and bury ourselves in debt up to the neck." is just emotive crap when taking this example

Then you could also say what difference does it make to the seller, they are stupid not to accept an offer 20k below asking as it is just 4%.

But when you are talking about something that potentially is the largest financial transaction people will make in their life, 4% extra is not the same as 4% extra on the cost of a pint at the pub tonight.

Plus (especially with the new CBI rules) someone who is buying a 500k house hopefully has a decent enough deposit. 4% extra on the total price could be 10% extra on their mortgage - adding quite a few years to it.

Barely Hedged

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

BH you are making some pretty big assumptions.

On your last post, it would take several hard years of save to save 20K for someone looking to buy in the 500K+ bracket if they already have rent/mortgage or a young family. I know as I'm in that bracket. Particularly for anyone who bought there first property during the boom years.

Also your posts are assuming that the asking price is a reasonable one, the asking price may possible be far too high and 6% lower is exactly what the house it worth. The fact that the other bidder dropped out suggests the current offer is reaching market value. In my own situation I placed an offer 15% below asking price (which is in line with other recent sales) it was rejected and they have now lowered the price so my offer is within 6% of asking, does that mean I should offer more money, even though by doing so I would be offering 6% more than what the last house sold for in a falling market.

As someone else said your rationale may have been right in the boom days when prices were shooting up but we're in a different climate now and people aren't rushing to increase their bids without need.

Im making some big assumptions?

they already have rent
they already have mortgage
they already have a young family

They all seem pretty standard enough.

Then you qualify your statement with the whopper "Particularly for anyone who bought there first property during the boom years".

Theres a load of people out there house hunting that arent burdened by a house they bought in the boom years. Thats 8 years ago at a minimum. Life has moved on since then.

The fact that he didnt initially offer 15% below asking shows that the house is more correctly valued than the house you offered on which has been justified by the drop in price for yours.

By the same token, prices arent "shooting" down. Theyre moderating.

Barely Hedged

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

so 20k is not 20'000 euros?
can you show your work please?

Youve taken it completely out of context like the tangent you went off on in your first post.

fret_wimp2

Barely Hedged wrote: »

Youve taken it completely out of context like the tangent you went off on in your first post.

Not at all, my point was to show that an extra few percent just to secure what you(in a general sense) really want is the not some blaze decision and writing 4% or 20k on a piece of paper on an internet forum is easy. paying it back over many years is difficult, and this attitude is a big contributor to the current situation.

What you want is only relevant up to the point when you start throwing money at the problem.

Barely Hedged

Bob24 wrote: »

Then you could also say what difference does it make to the seller, they are stupid not to accept an offer 20k below asking as it is just 4%.

But when you are talking about something that potentially is the largest financial transaction people will make in their life, 4% extra is not the same as 4% extra on the cost of a pint at the pub tonight.

Plus (especially with the new CBI rules) someone who is buying a 500k house hopefully has a decent enough deposit. 4% extra on the total price could be 10% extra on their mortgage - adding quite a few years to it.

It was an initial offer. In any type of negotiation youve entered into in the past, whether it be for a ceramic pot off a market stand on holidays, nobody accepts the initial offer. Thats negotiation.

The example you have given about a pint equates an absolute example to a relative example.

4% extra is roughly 20k. How do you get that 20k will add 10% to the mortgage?

Barely Hedged

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

Not at all, my point was to show that an extra few percent just to secure what you(in a general sense) really want is the not some blaze decision and writing 4% or 20k on a piece of paper on an internet forum is easy. paying it back over many years is difficult, and this attitude is a big contributor to the current situation.

What you want is only relevant up to the point when you start throwing money at the problem.

Youre assuming that all people attach the same weight to 20k.

Are you sure about that?

fret_wimp2

Barely Hedged wrote: »

Youre assuming that all people attach the same weight to 20k.

Are you sure about that?

That would be a silly assumption, i know a huge amount of irish people attach no weight to 20k, or even 40 or 50k, hence the amount of people who cant afford their mortgage repayments. Im discussing common sense in that people should attribute a realistic value and effort in repayment on 20k.

And in this specific case, im assuming that if the OP is not happy with the seller asking for more, then the OP is getting close to a fiscal limit, and 20k is worth a lot to them.

helimachoptor

Barely Hedged wrote: »

The poster is in the market of 500k+. Im assuming to get to that level of deposit and approval for LTI, 10k to 20k would not take "several years hard saving".

Just say he declines to offer more on this property. Whats the cost to him of his search continuing for 3/6/9/12 months. Maybe the poster can answer that.

guys thanks for the comments. plenty of interesting points

We have gone an additional 5K up this morning. At our present rate of saving this is about 1.5 months.

at the moment we are in a lease until December, the house is an executor sale so probate is likely to take some time and the house needs a couple of months of renovations anyway.


I expect a quick reply from the EA, if its a no, we'll wave goodbye and keep on looking.

We are in no rush to buy, this house suits us and suits our plans for the future but having bought a house in 2007 we learnt our lessons :eek:

seamus

helimachoptor wrote: »

frustrated at the minute, the vendor (executor) wont even entertain our bid (30K below asking on 500+K property) House needs work and not minor!

There are a lot of unrealistic vendors out there at the moment still in the mindset of "asking price == minimum value", and acting with arrogance about who and what is out in the market looking to buy.

We were sale agreed on a executor sale and when we insisted on vacant possession (shed full of crap, 30 year old kitchen appliances), the vendors threw a strop and said they wouldn't accept any additions to the contracts, we could take it or leave it. So we left it. It's not the entire reason we pulled out, but their attitude didn't help. For the sake of half a day's work on their part they've had to relist the property €5k below our offer, whereas if they'd been a little more amenable and reasonable we would have been more likely to hang on.

Likewise another property was up @ €390k, then building started right behind it, so they dropped asking to €360k, and after a couple of weeks put the property on hold while the building was completed. They took it off hold two weeks ago, got in two bids @ €370k, two buyers ready to go - i.e. they had their pick, but instead decided to pull it completely.
I expect to see it relisted in a few weeks with a different EA @ €390k.

A lot of vendors going to tearing their hair out by the end of the summer wondering why everyone is coming in with lowball bids and not willing to offer them €400k for their 3-bed semi.

Bob24

Barely Hedged wrote: »

It was an initial offer. In any type of negotiation youve entered into in the past, whether it be for a ceramic pot off a market stand on holidays, nobody accepts the initial offer. Thats negotiation.

So the buyer is a bad negotiator according to your standards and should have offered significantly less than the amount they really want to pay. Fair enough but it doesn't mean 20k euros is peanuts to them (which is the discussion here).

Barely Hedged wrote: »

4% extra is roughly 20k. How do you get that 20k will add 10% to the mortgage?

If someone has a deposit of 300k and is buying a 500k house. An extra 20k will add 10% to their mortgage.
Even if the deposit is lower the extra 4% on the total price will always mean more than 4% extra on the mortgage.

And to put things in perspective, 20k at 4% interest rate on a 30 years mortgage are likely costing costing the buyer 20k+ extra in interests (exact cost depending on the total mortgage value and whether they prefer to extend the duration or pay more each month). So the extra 20k on their offer are actually costing them over 40k if you take the interests into account.

As a previous poster has mentioned - saying 20k is nothing when buying a 500k property is just a sign of people who have lost track of the value of money and the financial commitment they are getting into (unless the person is a fairly wealthy cash buyer in which case I would agree with your point).

Barely Hedged

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

That would be a silly assumption, i know a huge amount of irish people attach no weight to 20k, or even 40 or 50k, hence the amount of people who cant afford their mortgage repayments. Im discussing common sense in that people should attribute a realistic value and effort in repayment on 20k.

And in this specific case, im assuming that if the OP is not happy with the seller asking for more, then the OP is getting close to a fiscal limit, and 20k is worth a lot to them.

Just to be clear, were talking about 20k not 40k or 50k.

So its because people are Irish they attach a siginificant weight to 20k?

Common sense is realising that weighting is attached to earning power, investments and wealth not because of nationality.

Who is ever happy with the seller asking for more? Its a negotiation! 20k, relatively speaking is 4%. Im saying, relative to his earning power, 4% is not a lot.