Property Market 2015

audi12

stevedublin wrote: »

more people are buying now because the economy is improving, more people have jobs or better paid jobs, not some organised conspiracy to drive up prices!

What are you talking about a conspiracy I never mentioned that word that would imply some of these people are intelligent. They are not when it comes to investing or money anyway they will be the same ones crying in years to come begging us to bail them out.

So they got a job last week or last month and now they are suddenly buying a house rubbish they had the money all along but feel think that the right time to buy a house is when everyone else is you could not make it up unreal.

audi12

stevedublin wrote: »

more people are buying now because the economy is improving, more people have jobs or better paid jobs, not some organised conspiracy to drive up prices!

So please I have no problem debating you but at least read my posts before replying

johnp001

stevedublin wrote: »

more people are buying now because the economy is improving, more people have jobs or better paid jobs, not some organised conspiracy to drive up prices!

Not much sign of this in the latest figures.
http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elcq/earningsandlabourcostsq42014finalq12015preliminaryestimates/#.VWnLdc-2Dtk

Paid hours per week are unchanged in the year to Q1 2015

Average hourly earnings increase 0.4% to €22.23 in year to Q1 2015

I think that lending limits being implemented from mid-Q1 this year (which haven't been reflected in CSO stats yet) are going to have a much more profound effect on the future trajectory of house prices than 0.4% increase in earnings.

Idioteque

Balmed Out wrote: »

...When they receive a bid they'll ring about previous bidders or people who viewed and expressed an interest, people often wait for another bid to come in and set the ball rolling before they bid themselves...

How does this work though? In my experience a very limited number of EA's have followed up after viewing and most have said something along the lines of "if you're not in the pot your of little interest to me"...so are people ringing the EA every week to see if there's a first bid on a property they are interested in?

Balmed Out

Idioteque wrote: »

How does this work though? In my experience a very limited number of EA's have followed up after viewing and most have said something along the lines of "if you're not in the pot your of little interest to me"...so are people ringing the EA every week to see if there's a first bid on a property they are interested in?

I imagine with so much more buyers in Dublin it may be very different then West Cork. If I have viewed a house I will always be let know when the first bid is made.

leinsterdude

leinsterdude wrote: »

Hi, curious what you are looking to spend, why not try Naas, Kilcullen, Johnstown etc etc

Around 400k, I suppose. Some very nice houses in the areas you mention but N. Kildare is a bit closer to where our families are. We also need to use the airport regularly and N. Kildare is (slightly) closer - but not by much, admittedly.

The_Conductor

Deleted User wrote: »

Around 400k, I suppose. Some very nice houses in the areas you mention but N. Kildare is a bit closer to where our families are. We also need to use the airport regularly and N. Kildare is (slightly) closer - but not by much, admittedly.

Celbridge/Leixlip/Lucan/Maynooth- N4 to the M50 is fast for the airport (well- unless you're in peak traffic) and its definitely North Kildare.
Best bang for your buck- is probably Celbridge- hard to find 'value' in this price range in Lucan/Leixlip/Maynooth- though when you consider other factors- you may reassess this.......

Would agree with that. Maynooth->airport in 25 mins off peak.

Downside of Celbridge is the train station is a good way from where most houses are (compared to Maynooth/Leixlip) but that doesn't bother me as much as it might bother others because I don't go to (Dublin) town every day.

Maynooth market went mad last summer but houses are sitting there a long time and selling below (inflated) asking prices. Last year asking prices were lower and they were going for more. Leixlip looks like decent value in parts and is closer to town/airport etc.

Hard to say much about Lucan in general because it's massive! Loads of houses for sale in Weston at the moment for some reason. Nice looking estate, although separated from Lucan village by the N4.

The_Conductor

Weston Park etc- was all part of Leixlip- it was one of those areas that the Late Mr. Lawlor rezoned as 'Lucan' to enhance its price........
It may be separated from the village by the N4- but if you go down by the golf course (where the 'Hawkridge' development is) you have the underpass into the village- you don't have to take the flyover.

The location of Hazelhatch is only really an issue- if you intend to rely predominantly on rail transport- the Maynooth side of Celbridge- is a good location for those who drive (and you get very good bang for your buck in that part of town).

Lucan- for 400k- I'd almost say forget it- look elsewhere- but with the market the way it is- you just might pick up a wonderful bargain. Semi's in Laraghcon- have sold in this territory- though not recently.

Maynooth- is in a bit of a state of flux.Lots of new property hitting the market- there is a whole new estate down past the Gaelscoil just finishing at the moment- that might tick all your boxes.

Leixlip- your money isn't really going to go far- and your options are limited. You can get an identikit house for good value- but is that what you're looking for at this price?

Interesting about Weston/Lawlor!

Just looking on Daft, you're right about prices in Celbridge: 4-beds 325k, 310k and 320k. Also see houses in Abbey Farm which looks very nice but asking an extra 125k-250k. Might as well look elsewhere at those kinds of prices (IMHO).

400k could get you into Kew Park of Beech Park in Lucan. Couple of houses were on the market there recently for around that level. Nice estates, I think.

Just to broaden it in case I'm accused of hijacking the thread...!

Last autumn when some people were saying things were cooling in popular parts of Dublin, I wasn't really seeing it in the commuter belt but I think it has spread now. You get more square metres for your money in Kildare/Meath though - good value if your commute is not too bad.

Fewer people at open viewings and definitely cooler on the bidding front. Still plenty of people who want to buy but buyer power has been dented by the new rules. Slowly but surely those pre-Feb AIPs are leaving the market - either because people are buying houses or the old AIPs are expiring i.e if you got AIP in November you're probably out now one were or another.

castle2012

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Interesting about Weston/Lawlor!

Just looking on Daft, you're right about prices in Celbridge: 4-beds 325k, 310k and 320k. Also see houses in Abbey Farm which looks very nice but asking an extra 125k-250k. Might as well look elsewhere at those kinds of prices (IMHO).

400k could get you into Kew Park of Beech Park in Lucan. Couple of houses were on the market there recently for around that level. Nice estates, I think.

Just to broaden it in case I'm accused of hijacking the thread...!

Last autumn when some people were saying things were cooling in popular parts of Dublin, I wasn't really seeing it in the commuter belt but I think it has spread now. You get more square metres for your money in Kildare/Meath though - good value if your commute is not too bad.

Fewer people at open viewings and definitely cooler on the bidding front. Still plenty of people who want to buy but buyer power has been dented by the new rules. Slowly but surely those pre-Feb AIPs are leaving the market - either because people are buying houses or the old AIPs are expiring i.e if you got AIP in November you're probably out now one were or another.

I'm living in laytown co Meath and over the last 6 months prices are gone bananas. I see a definite shortage of supply. 3 bed semi in inse bay went on the market at €155 and sold €197.500 . 2 bed terrace 's in castleglen Donacarney where going for €82 k last October, one sold last month for €139k . Would it be the case that the CB cap has pushed people outside of Dublin ? It certainly seems that way.

OfflerCrocGod

Riverireland wrote: »

There is a huge homeless crisis and a massive housing shortage in general. Supply needs to be increased.

So the way to solve the homeless crisis is by raising property prices? Not sure how higher property prices will help people who are struggling to afford at current prices. Personally it seems a more sensible approach is to lower the cost of land and of building houses.

stevedublin

Higher property prices make it more worthwhile to build new property and so increase stock of houses/appts.

riclad

i Think nama owns alot of the land,buildings around dublin .
nama is designed to make a profit .
IT will try and get a good price for any thing it sells .
i Don,t see much chance of the value of land going down .
I think maybe the problem is in dublin the cost of building a house plus
the site cost is more than the average cost of buying a house.
Most of the building companys went out of business in the last 7 years .
The government is borrowing money to pay for the new civil servant wage increases .

There,s no money for a large program of social housing construction for those on the housing list .

Mongfinder General

castle2012 wrote: »

I'm living in laytown co Meath and over the last 6 months prices are gone bananas. I see a definite shortage of supply. 3 bed semi in inse bay went on the market at €155 and sold €197.500 . 2 bed terrace 's in castleglen Donacarney where going for €82 k last October, one sold last month for €139k . Would it be the case that the CB cap has pushed people outside of Dublin ? It certainly seems that way.

It's either live in a kipp in Dublin or head to the commuter belt for a decent place to live. Anything above 300k is a serious wedge of a deposit and family homes under 300k desirable areas are disappearing

The_Conductor

riclad wrote: »

i Think nama owns alot of the land,buildings around dublin .

You're wrong. NAMA does own property in Dublin- however, its predominantly commercial and not residential in nature (along with a recent play on the hotel sector- which will be interesting to see how it plays out).

riclad wrote: »

nama is designed to make a profit .

NAMA is designed to maximise returns for the taxpayer. This does not necessarily equate with a 'profit' and indeed- many of its disposals have been at a loss (esp. when you figure that the loans that transferred over to NAMA were at a discount to their book values to begin with.

riclad wrote: »

IT will try and get a good price for any thing it sells .

Not necessarily. The latest wheeze is to get them to fund social housing- which at best will be done on a cost recovery basis.

riclad wrote: »

i Don,t see much chance of the value of land going down .

It goes up and down. As the tax on development land becomes more prohibitive- there will be a use it or loose it gambit taken by developers. It is not worth their while to sit on development banks anymore- the longer the hold them- the less they are worth (and the more tax that is payable on them).

riclad wrote: »

I think maybe the problem is in dublin the cost of building a house plus
the site cost is more than the average cost of buying a house.

Its an issue- but the bigger issue- is people want to live in specific house types in specific areas. Lets call a spade a spade- us Irish are snobs- plain and simple. We built over 2000 houses in North County Dublin in the last 2 and a half years- that people are refusing to buy.

riclad wrote: »

Most of the building companys went out of business in the last 7 years .

Its not that the building companies went out of business (though many did)- most of them survive- and simply downsized, laying off staff. The big problem is they can't upscale again- as many of the building and construction workers have emigrated. We massively need new apprenticeship schemes- urgently- in the construction trades. The people we need now- are in Australia, New Zealand, the UK, Canada and the US.

riclad wrote: »

The government is borrowing money to pay for the new civil servant wage increases .

The 'civil servantwage increase' is a partial restoration of paycuts. Of the over 6 billion in wage cuts- the proposal is to restore about 560 million over 3 years (170m in 2016- 180m in 2017 and 210m in 2018) Its not a pay rise- its a restoration of cuts- and in addition over half of the proposed increase- will go back to the exchequer as paycheck deductions (payroll deductions will take back just under 60% of the gross restoration in pay). The 'net' amount of the increase for a public sector worker- is less than 230 Euro per year- in 2016- less than 20 Euro a month- roughly a fiver a week. Sitting down and plugging the numbers- is actually quite easy- spend a few minutes- you'll be surprised.

Also- calling it 'civil service' is wrong too. Over 80% of public sector are HSE staff- the remaining 18% is Gardai, teachers, firemen, civil servants- and all the other public servants. Civil servants make up less than 8% of the public sector.

Borrowing to pay for pay restoration- is almost like a headline from the Indo. Its populist drivel.

riclad wrote: »

There,s no money for a large program of social housing construction for those on the housing list .

NAMA is providing funds for some construction. The issue is local authorities divested themselves of their housing stock- and indeed- tenants continue to have the right to buy local authority housing (at a discount to open market prices). This *needs* to be reformed. We are never going to replenish our local authority housing stock- if they are selling properties faster than they are building new ones......... Scotland has recently abandoned this approach- we *need* to do the same.

Barely Hedged

gaius c wrote: »

The Irish market is broken as you well know with a surplus of investors (often with cash) over residential buyers and also various tax wheezes that provide incentives to squeeze transactions into the end of the year to avail of whatever tax incentive is on offer. Normal markets see the bulk of the selling in spring and the house moving over the summer.

Thats what ive been saying all along! Selling now (May onwards), transacting in June/July/Sept

Barely Hedged wrote: »

People will be buying now and over the coming months with the transactions finalised in June, July and September.

gaius c wrote: »

Still below where it was in December though. Not a great look for peak selling season.

Can you explain why you initially said that because Aprils increase < 1% was a good indicator selling season wasnt going well considering what i have been saying all along?

gaius c wrote: »

You might understand the investors market but you clearly don't understand the residential market.
Some explanations online:

Linky

My Point above should answer that.

gaius c wrote: »

More than that actually because stock is starting to build up as neighbours realise that they've both reduced by the same amount and still not selling.

And sales prices are in fact dropping. Don't be fooled by two marginally positive months on the CSO index. They are still below where they were at the end of last year and they are down quite considerably from where they were last summer.

Again, i emphasise the point:

Barely Hedged wrote: »

Im saying its pointless extrapolating from Dec - Apr figures for the summer months.

which is pretty much what your graph is telling us to do.

gaius c wrote: »

If the demand is still there, why is the panic from last year gone? If the demand is still there, why are there masses of price drops when everything sold for over asking price last year? Why is poorer quality stock taking longer to shift? If demand was genuinely as strong as last year, it would get snapped up out of desperation.

I think that could be the nub of the problem. You consider demand to be panic. There doesnt have to be panic to be demand.

gaius c wrote: »

A big factor is that landlords in arrears are being forced to sell. There was never any real shortage of stock in Dublin. What there is, is a shortage of available properties.

Whats the definition of "available" properties and how many repossessions do you think will take place in 2015 that will impact prices negatively?

gaius c wrote: »

Of course it will. It's basic economics.

That analysis can be summed up as basic alright. Youve completely discounted what is the principal component for increasing property prices - an improving economy.

gaius c wrote: »

And never forget, the 10% mortgages will be running out soon. That means a considerable curtailment of credit available to housebuyers.
Tick tock tick tock.

I cant think of any Irish bank that would offer mortgages in the past two/three years with 90% LTV and a large notional value without the applicant having considerable cash resources to act as potential collateral. I think youre overstating the impact it will have by simply comparing it to the unrealistic scenario where everybody was borrowing at 90% LTV for any amount. This was simply not happening after an applicants file went forward for approval. The only situation it was true was on the banks online calculator!

jimosterberg

Deleted User wrote: »

Interesting about Weston/Lawlor!

Just looking on Daft, you're right about prices in Celbridge: 4-beds 325k, 310k and 320k. Also see houses in Abbey Farm which looks very nice but asking an extra 125k-250k. Might as well look elsewhere at those kinds of prices (IMHO).

400k could get you into Kew Park of Beech Park in Lucan. Couple of houses were on the market there recently for around that level. Nice estates, I think.

Just to broaden it in case I'm accused of hijacking the thread...!

Last autumn when some people were saying things were cooling in popular parts of Dublin, I wasn't really seeing it in the commuter belt but I think it has spread now. You get more square metres for your money in Kildare/Meath though - good value if your commute is not too bad.

Fewer people at open viewings and definitely cooler on the bidding front. Still plenty of people who want to buy but buyer power has been dented by the new rules. Slowly but surely those pre-Feb AIPs are leaving the market - either because people are buying houses or the old AIPs are expiring i.e if you got AIP in November you're probably out now one were or another.

There are new houses for sale in Beech Park in Leixlip. A rated energy homes.

gaius c

stevedublin wrote: »

Higher property prices make it more worthwhile to build new property and so increase stock of houses/appts.

Or they can look at their cost base because it's more than the market can bear.

jmayo

The_Conductor wrote: »

NAMA is designed to maximise returns for the taxpayer. This does not necessarily equate with a 'profit' and indeed- many of its disposals have been at a loss (esp. when you figure that the loans that transferred over to NAMA were at a discount to their book values to begin with.

Mot people, when lauding a NAMA sale that makes NAMA a few quid above the amount they paid on loan, fail to ever mention that fact that taxpayer stills loses the amount that was written off in bank re-capitalisation or loan writedown when sold to NAMA.

The_Conductor wrote: »

It goes up and down. As the tax on development land becomes more prohibitive- there will be a use it or loose it gambit taken by developers. It is not worth their while to sit on development banks anymore- the longer the hold them- the less they are worth (and the more tax that is payable on them).

Do we actually have a tax on unused development land ?

The_Conductor wrote: »

The 'civil servantwage increase' is a partial restoration of paycuts. Of the over 6 billion in wage cuts- the proposal is to restore about 560 million over 3 years (170m in 2016- 180m in 2017 and 210m in 2018) Its not a pay rise- its a restoration of cuts- and in addition over half of the proposed increase- will go back to the exchequer as paycheck deductions (payroll deductions will take back just under 60% of the gross restoration in pay). The 'net' amount of the increase for a public sector worker- is less than 230 Euro per year- in 2016- less than 20 Euro a month- roughly a fiver a week. Sitting down and plugging the numbers- is actually quite easy- spend a few minutes- you'll be surprised.

Also- calling it 'civil service' is wrong too. Over 80% of public sector are HSE staff- the remaining 18% is Gardai, teachers, firemen, civil servants- and all the other public servants. Civil servants make up less than 8% of the public sector.

Borrowing to pay for pay restoration- is almost like a headline from the Indo. Its populist drivel.

Whilst I usually agree with you wholeheartedy I love the way you have slipped into public sector speech here.
To the rest of us a payrise is a payrise even if it is reversing a previous paycut and not usually termed a pay restoration.
It makes it sound something else.

It reminds of the other oft used term - increment.
To those of us in private sector this is annual payrise and is not seen as some sort of entitlement, but something to be earned.

Sorry if slightly derailing, but I find it funny the way language can be used.

riclad

I agree ,selling council houses makes no sense,
but its too late now.
Most council houses have already been sold in dublin.
Almost anyone that could afford to ,bought their council house .

IT may be hard for a building company to get finance to build new apartments
at the moment .

Riverireland

OfflerCrocGod wrote: »

So the way to solve the homeless crisis is by raising property prices? Not sure how higher property prices will help people who are struggling to afford at current prices. Personally it seems a more sensible approach is to lower the cost of land and of building houses.

I'm reasonably certain I never mentioned raising property prices through something does have to be done about negative equity. Supply needs to be greatly increased, building new homes would certainly help.

jmayo

Riverireland wrote: »

I'm reasonably certain I never mentioned raising property prices through something does have to be done about negative equity. Supply needs to be greatly increased, building new homes would certainly help.

You appear to be intimating the re-inflation of a burst bubble to allow people escape negative equity, i.e. increasing house prices to help those in negative equity ?

If someone paid over the odds for a property at the height or even during most of the bubble, then it is tough luck if their mortgage is greater than the current value of the property.
Now some have believed those losses should be socialised, but for the life of me I never remember anyone suggesting the socialisation of profits from increased house prices.
The solution to their problems should not result in creating fresh problems for others like inflated house prices and accommodation rental costs.

To paraphrase it is akin to re-inflating one groups rib boat by taking the air out of another groups rib.

Contrary to some people's opinions, I don't think high property prices and high accommodation costs benefit the economy or society.

The only thing that needs to be done about negative equity is to somehow allow the mortgage holder move it to a new property, that way people can move if they need to.

If they can repay their debts then they just have to face the fact they are paying more for the house than what it is worth or may ever be worth.
Negative equity should only become an issue if and when they need to sell.

johnp001

Barely Hedged wrote: »

That analysis can be summed up as basic alright. Youve completely discounted what is the principal component for increasing property prices - an improving economy.

Economic progress has been made in that the sharp decline in economic indicators has been largely arrested which is an "improvement" of sorts but there is no significant and sustained increase in earnings like in the the previous bubble.
Loans for house purchase continue to decline

Alan McQuaid-Merrion stockbrokers wrote:

mortgage approvals are on the rise but the stricter lending rules from the Central Bank as regards house purchases will likely have a negative impact on borrowing.
“Even with a pick-up in activity, overall bank lending is forecast to remain fairly subdued in 2015, and still well below what the economy needs for sustainable growth in the long-run,” he added.

gaius c

It's the demographics. Less FTB's around and all the folk at viewings are people in their thirties who couldn't buy years ago.

stevedublin

gaius c wrote: »

Less FTB's around and all the folk at viewings are people in their thirties who couldn't buy years ago.

The dramatic fall in 20 somethings in your graph is obviously due to emigration.
Assuming the Irish economy continues to grow, these people will probably return to Ireland (with savings which would act as deposits for house/apartment purchases).

Bob24

stevedublin wrote: »

The dramatic fall in 20 somethings in your graph is obviously due to emigration.

Might also have something to do with this:

fret_wimp2

gaius c wrote: »

It's the demographics. Less FTB's around and all the folk at viewings are people in their thirties who couldn't buy years ago.

nice graph but gives a partial picture open to severe misinterpretation.

-20something is more a colloquialism than a demographic where as 65+ is quite clear in what it is. is 20something 100% for definite people aged between 20 & 30?

-assuming for a second that 20something means >20 && <30, what about the folks who just turned 30?

Personally in my group of 25+ friends, the vast majority are 32-42 in age.
Of these:

- 2 own a house/property, purchased circa 2007 when loans were being handed out like they were going out of fashion. thats 23 who dont own property.
-all are working.
-I estimate 80% of us earn well above average wage.
-in the last year 5 out of 25 have emigrated. These 5 people had well paying, stable jobs. They gave them up to try out another country simply because there was no chance of them owning anything above a 1-2 bed apartment in D24 or beyond.

Some of this is irrelevant, but mentioned to show the graphs are very easily misinterpreted and to say something is "obvious" is just silly.

Michael D Not Higgins

Bob24 wrote: »

Might also have something to do with this:

Yes but look at the years in question and in particular the variance of birth rate ten years apart, early 80s on is when they are hitting 20, early 70s when they're leaving 20s. The variance alone doesn't account for nearly enough of the change in the other graph.

johnp001

stevedublin wrote: »

The dramatic fall in 20 somethings in your graph is obviously due to emigration.

Emigration for 2014 is significantly down on the 2 years prior.
http://www.cso.ie/multiquicktables/quickTables.aspx?id=pea18_2

stevedublin wrote: »

Assuming the Irish economy continues to grow, these people will probably return to Ireland (with savings which would act as deposits for house/apartment purchases).

It is a big assumption that the Irish economy will continue to grow against the headwind of widespread deflation internationally.
What is the driver for the diaspora to return to prop up Ireland's property market which is showing all the signs of being about to collapse?