Property Market 2015

Greyian

Barely Hedged wrote: »

Decline in Dublin prices between Dec to Apr was around -0.5%.

Taking your interpretation you're expecting, roughly speaking, CSO May numbers for Dublin to show a drop of over 13%?

No, I'm using figures from the PPR, not the CSO figures. The CSO figures don't factor in a lot of sales.

Barely Hedged

Greyian wrote: »

No, I'm using figures from the PPR, not the CSO figures. The CSO figures don't factor in a lot of sales.

Fair enough. Another way of interpreting it but why don't the official statistics office use your numbers then?

gosplan

Barely Hedged wrote: »

Fair enough. Another way of interpreting it but why don't the official statistics office use your numbers then?

CSO figures are a bit off and there's a lag.

Figs are averaged across a few months rather than the one it's reported as and then these figures are for sales, so the deals would have been struck earlier again.

The CSO smooths out the numbers so it doesn't look too erratic. The use hedonic regression to account for the fact that one month you might have an abnormal number of million-euro mansions sold and then the next there's a block of 40 apartments sold to an investment fund.

If they just published crude averages the numbers would bounce wildly from one month to the next and it would be hard to gauge a real trend. For the same reason, they do a three-month rolling average (of mortgage draw-downs only which is a pity).

I am bidding on a house at the moment and would buy at the right price but even so, I genuinely think the engine is stalling at the moment and there will be a bit of a 'reset' visible in the autumn figures. But not a crash.

The economy is in decent shape and demographics tell us there are plenty of people looking to buy. There's definitely a mismatch between over-excited sellers/agents posting inflated asking prices while sellers' buying power is static or falling slightly. Reality is biting them at the moment but they will sell for something similar to last year's prices if they want to sell.

Barely Hedged

gosplan wrote: »

CSO figures are a bit off and there's a lag.

Figs are averaged across a few months rather than the one it's reported as and then these figures are for sales, so the deals would have been struck earlier again.

gosplan wrote: »

CSO figures are a bit off and there's a lag.

Figs are averaged across a few months rather than the one it's reported as and then these figures are for sales, so the deals would have been struck earlier again.

Or it could be due to the fact that the PPR can't be relied on because it is on a best efforts basis, subject to long lags in price registrations (properties from 2014 and 2013) are appearing daily now and no market commentator uses it to interpret the property market. The PPR admit as much on their website with the big asterisk on the top of the page.

I see your presentation of the PPR numbers has already garnered many thanks in a short space of time. Shows how willing people are to believe anything once it suits their outlook

Barely Hedged

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The CSO smooths out the numbers so it doesn't look too erratic. The use hedonic regression to account for the fact that one month you might have an abnormal number of million-euro mansions sold and then the next there's a block of 40 apartments sold to an investment fund.

If they just published crude averages the numbers would bounce wildly from one month to the next and it would be hard to gauge a real trend. For the same reason, they do a three-month rolling average (of mortgage draw-downs only which is a pity).

I am bidding on a house at the moment and would buy at the right price but even so, I genuinely think the engine is stalling at the moment and there will be a bit of a 'reset' visible in the autumn figures. But not a crash.

The economy is in decent shape and demographics tell us there are plenty of people looking to buy. There's definitely a mismatch between over-excited sellers/agents posting inflated asking prices while sellers' buying power is static or falling slightly. Reality is biting them at the moment but they will sell for something similar to last year's prices if they want to sell.

I would trust professional staticians using globally recognised statistical methodologies rather than the work of civil servants registering stamp duty returns with a massive disclaimer on their results.

I agree with your sentiment on the market but I still see 5% growth yoy

Yes, me too. Nothing is perfect but the CSO makes an honest effort to produce something that's as robust-as-possible.

Time will tell on the YoY growth/decline. Hard to call. I definitely see fewer people at viewings and houses staying on the market longer.

But there are enough people to buy and often still enough for a bidding war. Those bidding wars, anecdotally, are less frenzied than last year so maybe the final prices will not be as frothy.

We'll have to revisit this one at the end of Jan 2016

gosplan

Barely Hedged wrote: »

Or it could be due to the fact that the PPR can't be relied on because it is on a best efforts basis, subject to long lags in price registrations (properties from 2014 and 2013) are appearing daily now and no market commentator uses it to interpret the property market. The PPR admit as much on their website with the big asterisk on the top of the page.

I see your presentation of the PPR numbers has already garnered many thanks in a short space of time. Shows how willing people are to believe anything once it suits their outlook

I was talking about the CSO lag. They explain it themselves here...

CSO wrote:

"Theoretically the RPPI for April 2015 should be based solely on mortgage transactions that were drawn down for the first time in that month.

In practise, to reduce volatility, we take a three month rolling average, so the 'April' figure we publish is actually an average of February, March and April. This introduces a lag in our index.

It also needs to be borne in mind that the date the mortgage is drawn down may be a few months after the sale been agreed. So if you are interested in sale agreed prices, then the lag is extended further.

Therefore, depending on what point of the sales process you are interested in, our index certainly lags developments in the housing market.

Having said this, we usually show similar trends to daft.ie, for example, which is based on asking prices (although often properties are not be sold for the asking price)."

So all I'm really saying is that the CSO isn't that up to date.

As regards PPR, I'd say you're right but it's valuable when you drill down to a street and sale prices.

Barely Hedged

gosplan wrote: »

I was talking about the CSO lag. They explain it themselves here...



So all I'm really saying is that the CSO isn't that up to date.

As regards PPR, I'd say you're right but it's valuable when you drill down to a street and sale prices.

There is a significant lag with PPR from personal experience. Can be 2 and 3 years of a lag.

As you say, its valuable on a street/area level, but not on an national or Dublin level

Glenbhoy

Barely Hedged wrote: »

There is a significant lag with PPR from personal experience. Can be 2 and 3 years of a lag.

As you say, its valuable on a street/area level, but not on an national or Dublin level

The PPR v CSO has been discussed earlier on this thread, both have their merits and drawbacks (one being based on actual hard figures and the other set of figures being made up:)), but say what you will, the PPR figures tend to be accurate and timely. As you know there is a legal requirement to file stamp duty returns within 30 days of closing (although this can be extended to 45 days), guys tracking this on the property pin estimate that virtually all transactions comply, any you have noticed which aren't compliant are very much the exceptions.

Barely Hedged

Glenbhoy wrote: »

The PPR v CSO has been discussed earlier on this thread, both have their merits and drawbacks (one being based on actual hard figures and the other set of figures being made up:)), but say what you will, the PPR figures tend to be accurate and timely. As you know there is a legal requirement to file stamp duty returns within 30 days of closing (although this can be extended to 45 days), guys tracking this on the property pin estimate that virtually all transactions comply, any you have noticed which aren't compliant are very much the exceptions.

So why do the CSO use a global standard in measuring house prices movements. Is it that people on the property pin are right and all the national statistical offices are wrong?

When REITs report their quarterly and annual reports, is it the CSO numbers they use or the PPR?

When brokers and banks, managing large amounts of people's investments In property, comment on the property market, do they use the CSO or PPR?

The_Conductor

Barely Hedged wrote: »

So why do the CSO use a global standard in measuring house prices movements. Is it that people on the property pin are right and all the national statistical offices are wrong?

When REITs report their quarterly and annual reports, is it the CSO numbers they use or the PPR?

When brokers and banks, managing large amounts of people's investments In property, comment on the property market, do they use the CSO or PPR?

The CSO extrapolate from statistically significant samples-on an ongoing basis.
The PPR figures- are the raw data- but reported erratically, and in arrears.

Both sets of figures are accurate- and should, when normalised, concur with one another (however, this could be 24-36 months in arrears- when the data is long stale).

The PPR figures- will highlight (starkly) trends, before they become apparent in the CSO figures- however, their accuracy decreases the newer the data you're looking at. Looking at statistical distributions- its still scientifically accurate- however, not as accurate- as CSO sampling.

All transactions are reported to the PPR- no matter how small (eventually). Arguably- historical PPR information is in fact more accurate than CSO figures.

Statistically significant transactions are reported to the CSO.

The CSO actually use PPR information themselves- to identify any deficiencies in their sampling and are constantly fine tuning their sampling.

Both approaches have their pros and cons- depending on what you intend to use the information for. I'd argue that trends are apparent a lot more quickly on PPR data- but that the data itself is more error prone- than CSO data. For official purposes- CSO data- even with its lags- is thus used- even though it hides a myriad of sins- not least the fact that its historic before its ever available, and its from a smaller population sample.

Unearthly

Visiting a lot of apartments lately and finding no one else there except maybe one other party here and there

Last year in September there was heaps.

Estate agents are telling me that the vendor will most likely sell for less than asking. I smell blood

The_Conductor

Unearthly wrote: »

Visiting a lot of apartments lately and finding no one else there except maybe one other party here and there

Last year in September there was heaps.

Estate agents are telling me that the vendor will most likely sell for less than asking. I smell blood

There is damn well blood in the water.
There is a panic beginning to show.
From talking to a few estate agents over the past week or so- they're all saying 'its the summer slowdown- don't panic- don't reduce your price wait until the market reopens in September.........

I genuinely think that September will be an eye opener..........

Barely Hedged

The_Conductor wrote: »

The CSO extrapolate from statistically significant samples-on an ongoing basis.
The PPR figures- are the raw data- but reported erratically, and in arrears.

Both sets of figures are accurate- and should, when normalised, concur with one another (however, this could be 24-36 months in arrears- when the data is long stale).

The PPR figures- will highlight (starkly) trends, before they become apparent in the CSO figures- however, their accuracy decreases the newer the data you're looking at. Looking at statistical distributions- its still scientifically accurate- however, not as accurate- as CSO sampling.

All transactions are reported to the PPR- no matter how small (eventually). Arguably- historical PPR information is in fact more accurate than CSO figures.

Statistically significant transactions are reported to the CSO.

The CSO actually use PPR information themselves- to identify any deficiencies in their sampling and are constantly fine tuning their sampling.

Both approaches have their pros and cons- depending on what you intend to use the information for. I'd argue that trends are apparent a lot more quickly on PPR data- but that the data itself is more error prone- than CSO data. For official purposes- CSO data- even with its lags- is thus used- even though it hides a myriad of sins- not least the fact that its historic before its ever available, and its from a smaller population sample.

What did the PPR numbers report for the months in 2014 when we saw the huge growth?

What would be interesting to see would be the PPR v CSO MoM increases/decreases for each month in 2014.

While I acknowledge and understand the points you raise between the two, it still doesn't change or in anyway diminish the three points I raised previously

Villa05

Barely Hedged wrote:

So why do the CSO use a global standard in measuring house prices movements. Is it that people on the property pin are right and all the national statistical offices are wrong?

Is a measurement that excludes 50% of transactions accurate.

Have bankers and brokers ever manipulated stats to paint a rosy a picture as possible.

What is the track record of a banker or broker

Not saying the pin is the almighty, but it called the crash and the bottom correctly. Some exceptional posters

The_Conductor

'Accurate' and 'Statistically Significant' are too entirely different kettle of fish.
At any given time- our closest approximation of one or the other- will be a better reflection of what is currently happening, than the other.
I'm not going to suggest its like comparing apples to oranges- but you are talking about two entirely different interpretations of incomplete data sets.

Barely Hedged

Villa05 wrote: »

Is a measurement that excludes 50% of transactions accurate.

Have bankers and brokers ever manipulated stats to paint a rosy a picture as possible.

What is the track record of a banker or broker

Not saying the pin is the almighty, but it called the crash and the bottom correctly. Some exceptional posters

It's reporting a trend at a national and regional level. Cash sales at a population level are subject to more volatility so they're excluded to develop the trend which ultimately should correlate with inflation, wage growth etc. This gives governments and banks a better insight into the state of the market.

In so far, the PPR is good for indicating trends in very specific areas - where's up and coming in a postcode etc. It does not give any regional or national insight.

The vast generalisation about bankers - well if that's what you want to believe you're more than welcome too.

That's funny because I remember reading the property pin from 2012 and 2013 and comments such as houses in Ranelagh would find their natural level at 300k.

I was contemplating which place to sign up to at the time - Boards or The Pin. The Pin was full of off the wall cranks who said they called the market.

Yep, that amount is true about calling the drop but if you're constantly calling a drop in a cyclical market you'll be right sometime will you not?

sapper

a bit off topic but anyone know why the PPR hasnt been updated since June 12? Been some recent sales in my street and am gumming to find out the sold price

Sometimes you'd be waiting four or five months to see a sale posted on the PPR. Make yourself comfortable, it could be a long wait

Very frustrating. But the PPR is a handy guide for what's happening in an area/street generally - albeit several month late. And the CSO is a measure of what was happening more broadly a few months ago.

sapper

Deleted User wrote: »

Sometimes you'd be waiting four or five months to see a sale posted on the PPR. Make yourself comfortable, it could be a long wait

Very frustrating. But the PPR is a handy guide for what's happening in an area/street generally - albeit several month late. And the CSO is a measure of what was happening more broadly a few months ago.

Gah - I sold my own house recently and it was up on the PPR in less than a week..thought this meant that they were much quicker then they were at the start...

fuzzynev

I purchased a house recently and a week after receiving the keys the house appeared on the PPR. However the sale price on the PPR is 10% less than I paid, why would this be the case?

Bob24

fuzzynev wrote: »

I purchased a house recently and a week after receiving the keys the house appeared on the PPR. However the sale price on the PPR is 10% less than I paid, why would this be the case?

It the house is a new build, the PPR price doesn't include VAT I believe (but it would be 13.5%)

sapper

Just guessing but maybe your solicitor messed up in declaring the sale price and declared the cash amount paid @ sale and not the actual agreed price (ie. they left out the deposit)?

The PPR put a contact address on their website info@psr.ie - they say any errors are raised with the Revenue

MayBea

In the month of May residential property prices rose by 0.5% nationwide. Residential property prices remained up 13.8% on an annual basis.

In Dublin residential property prices fell by 0.1% in May. Dublin residential property prices were 15.2% higher than in May 2014.

Dublin house prices fell by 0.2% in May whilst Dublin apartment prices rose by 0.4%.
http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/rppi/residentialpropertypriceindexmay2015/#.VYp_xGTBzGc

brownbeard

May CSO figures:

http://cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/rppi/residentialpropertypriceindexmay2015/#.VYp_12O4JRE

fuzzynev

Bob24 wrote: »

It the house is a new build, the PPR price doesn't include VAT I believe (but it would be 13.5%)

This is probably it, house was a new build and the difference is actually closer to 13.5%. Thanks!

MayBea

MayBea wrote: »

In the month of May residential property prices rose by 0.5% nationwide. Residential property prices remained up 13.8% on an annual basis.

In Dublin residential property prices fell by 0.1% in May. Dublin residential property prices were 15.2% higher than in May 2014.

Dublin house prices fell by 0.2% in May whilst Dublin apartment prices rose by 0.4%.
http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/rppi/residentialpropertypriceindexmay2015/#.VYp_xGTBzGc

Inneresting...

It's all within the margin of error so I suppose things are (or were) fairly flat.

The annual rate of growth in the year to March was 16.8% but in the 12 months to May it was 13.8%.

It's clear that last year was the big rebound but we're on some kind of normal trajectory now. Whether that dips down a bit in the coming months (which is my best guess) or ticks upwards in single digits remains to be seen.

Was it Spider who called 20% YoY growth for 2015? That's already looking fairly unlikely unless there's a big surge ahead. (I know, I know, I shouldn't gloat. Yet.)

sapper

Im in the market to buy in Dublin right now and these stats are wrecking my head.

Obviously I am biased but to my mind the RPPI in Dublin for May @ 83.2 is undeniably down from where it was in Dec 2014 at the height of the rebound @ 83.8. ie. the market has turned and prices are slowly gently going down

However whats the bet that all the headlines will be about how price rises are still the order of the day - ie. the media will use the soundbite "Dublin residential property prices were 15.2% higher than in May 2014".

Everyone I talk to reads these headlines and thinks that prices are still going up...more importantly sellers read these headlines and think that it is reasonable to ask 15% more than what "the house down the road" sold for last year.

MayBea

Spider has gone unusually quiet over the last few months..

The market is definitely flattening..but not dramatically falling. My guess is we'll soon to see the government's Help to Buy/cash grant scheme etc. back on the agenda.