Property Market 2015

connacht_man

alastair wrote: »

2015 median sales price, Queens NYC - $499,990
Q2 2015 median sales price, Dublin - €281,958 ($313,355)

Not exactly obvious where that 'insanity' is.

I was not aware that 281,958 was the current average price in Dublin , a close relative of mine bought a three bed semi 900 sqr foot house in Beaumont Dublin 9 before xmas for exactly 300 k , Beaumont would be seen as a slightly below average area

obviously paid a little too much for it

alastair

connacht_man wrote: »

I was not aware that 281,958 was the current average price in Dublin , a close relative of mine bought a three bed semi 900 sqr foot house in Beaumont Dublin 9 before xmas for exactly 300 k , Beaumont would be seen as a slightly below average area

obviously paid a little too much for it

A 3 bed semi wouldn't really be a median Dublin property though. Lots of apartments and 2 bed houses to shift the balance downwards. I've no idea if he paid above/below the odds for Beaumont nonetheless.

gaius c

alastair wrote: »

2015 median sales price, Queens NYC - $499,990
Q2 2015 median sales price, Dublin - €281,958 ($313,355)

Not exactly obvious where that 'insanity' is.

Ah come on. That's just silly now. You've compared the largest borough in New York with a population over twice that of Dublin and home to not one but two major international airports to the entire county of Dublin.

The Take Five articles on the IT are great for these comparisons. Here's one I picked at random and it's for €750k.



It was somewhere out between Rush & Swords and is still for sale, albeit with a price drop. They have the wrong picture in the article btw.

Meanwhile for the same money I could have lived on Emerson Hill on Staten Island.



On a direct "here's what you get for your money" global basis, Irish house prices represent value so bad that foreigners initially suspect that it's some sort of elaborate joke. I remember another one that had a house in Goatstown for the same price as a house in the Hollywood hills.

@Connacht man
Average is not the same thing as median.

ongarite

alastair wrote: »

2015 median sales price, Queens NYC - $499,990
Q2 2015 median sales price, Dublin - €281,958 ($313,355)

Not exactly obvious where that 'insanity' is.

True, by capital city standards Dublin rental & asking prices are relatively cheap.
http://www.globalpropertyguide.com/most-expensive-cities
http://www.globalpropertyguide.com/Europe/Ireland/price-rent-ratio

Bob24

alastair wrote: »

2015 median sales price, Queens NYC - $499,990
Q2 2015 median sales price, Dublin - €281,958 ($313,355)

Not exactly obvious where that 'insanity' is.

One thing that would surely be insane would be to think that Dublin's stature in the world, potential to create wealth, or population concentration are even remotely in the same league as NYC.

alastair

gaius c wrote: »

Ah come on. That's just silly now. You've compared the largest borough in New York with a population over twice that of Dublin and home to not one but two major international airports to the entire county of Dublin.

You're the one who made the comparison in the first place. Queens is as good a NYC suburb as any - broad range of property types comparible with Dublin. The population density isn't really anything to do with anything - again NYC is your choice, and it has a higher population density than Dublin, irrespective which borough you choose. With a property price median nearly twice that of Dublin, your 'random' pick five example is clearly not terribly representative of the generality. Dublin is far more affordable than NYC suburbs.

Greyian

alastair wrote: »

You're the one who made the comparison in the first place. Queens is as good a NYC suburb as any - broad range of property types comparible with Dublin. The population density isn't really anything to do with anything - again NYC is your choice, and it has a higher population density than Dublin, irrespective which borough you choose. With a property price median nearly twice that of Dublin, your 'random' pick five example is clearly not terribly representative of the generality. Dublin is far more affordable than NYC suburbs.

It is also worth considering property sizes. While the Queens prices may look much higher, if you check the average price/sqft (http://www.trulia.com/real_estate/Queens-New_York/market-trends/), you can see that there are many areas with property prices below $350/sqft (or about €3,400/sqm). Compare that to Dublin, where there are 60sqm properties going for €250k+, and suddenly the value offered in Dublin looks quite poor again.

gaius c

alastair wrote: »

You're the one who made the comparison in the first place. Queens is as good a NYC suburb as any - broad range of property types comparible with Dublin. The population density isn't really anything to do with anything - again NYC is your choice, and it has a higher population density than Dublin, irrespective which borough you choose. With a property price median nearly twice that of Dublin, your 'random' pick five example is clearly not terribly representative of the generality. Dublin is far more affordable than NYC suburbs.

I'll try repeating.
A built-up urban area compared to the entire county of Dublin, which includes rural areas is an apples/oranges comparison.

On a value for money basis compared with equivalent properties in other cities, Dublin prices are laughably bad. The Take Five series has been highlighting this for years. I gave you one such example, which you ignored as it seemed inconvenient to your agenda.

alastair

Greyian wrote: »

It is also worth considering property sizes. While the Queens prices may look much higher, if you check the average price/sqft (http://www.trulia.com/real_estate/Queens-New_York/market-trends/), you can see that there are many areas with property prices below $350/sqft (or about €3,400/sqm). Compare that to Dublin, where there are 60sqm properties going for €250k+, and suddenly the value offered in Dublin looks quite poor again.

But again, the generality doesn't support this. Average asking price per sq foot for small sized properties (50-100 sq metres) Dublin at the moment is €345, and it would be safe to assume the average selling price is a bit lower.

slowjoe17

alastair wrote: »

You're the one who made the comparison in the first place. Queens is as good a NYC suburb as any - broad range of property types comparible with Dublin. The population density isn't really anything to do with anything - again NYC is your choice, and it has a higher population density than Dublin, irrespective which borough you choose. With a property price median nearly twice that of Dublin, your 'random' pick five example is clearly not terribly representative of the generality. Dublin is far more affordable than NYC suburbs.

Queens is a relatively affluent part of NYC (where the Bronx and Brooklyn are the poorer areas.)

A better comparison if you HAVE to use Queens, would be with SCD.

alastair

gaius c wrote: »

I'll try repeating.
A built-up urban area compared to the entire county of Dublin, which includes rural areas is an apples/oranges comparison.

On a value for money basis compared with equivalent properties in other cities, Dublin prices are laughably bad. The Take Five series has been highlighting this for years. I gave you one such example, which you ignored as it seemed inconvenient to your agenda.

Well, let me try repeating for your benefit. Queens is a primarily suburban borough, and Dublin, even encompassing the entire county, is primarily suburban. You chose to make the comparison, and the claim you made is simply not supported by the facts. Queens is more expensive than Dublin if you're buying property. I didn't 'ignore' your take five example (given that I referenced it, I'm not sure why you would believe this?) - I pointed out that it was not representative of the generality. It isn't.

The_Conductor

Moderator note:

Lets tone things down folks- I don't want to have to start warning people- if you can't keep civil towards one another, I will however have to........

Remember- if you disagree with a post- refute the post- *without attacking the poster*......... We give a remarkable amount of leeway in threads like this one- please don't abuse the good nature of other posters, and the forum's moderators........

alastair

slowjoe17 wrote: »

Queens is a relatively affluent part of NYC (where the Bronx and Brooklyn are the poorer areas.)

A better comparison if you HAVE to use Queens, would be with SCD.

Queens median household income 2014 - $54,373
Dublin median household income 2011 - €52,000 / $57,774 (presumably similar in 2014)

Doesn't look like affluence is much of a differentiator.

connacht_man

alastair wrote: »

A 3 bed semi wouldn't really be a median Dublin property though. Lots of apartments and 2 bed houses to shift the balance downwards. I've no idea if he paid above/below the odds for Beaumont nonetheless.

id have thought 900sqr foot was a little on the small side so if you add appartments into the mix , it would probably be about the average

MayBea

Interestingly, the number of cash buyers is still quite high. It remains fairly constant at 45% to 50% (according to the stats):

There were 11,113 transactions in the second quarter of this year.
Of these, 5,604 involved borrowing to some extent, but an almost equal 5,509 were paid for outright with cash - or 49.6pc of all deals.
"This means that cash buyers have consistently accounted for around 50pc or more of purchases since the final quarter of 2012," said analyst Dr John McCartney.

johnnyskeleton

MayBea wrote: »

Interestingly, the number of cash buyers is still quite high. It remains fairly constant at 45% to 50% (according to the stats):

There were 11,113 transactions in the second quarter of this year.
Of these, 5,604 involved borrowing to some extent, but an almost equal 5,509 were paid for outright with cash - or 49.6pc of all deals.
"This means that cash buyers have consistently accounted for around 50pc or more of purchases since the final quarter of 2012," said analyst Dr John McCartney.

Utterly baffling. Who are all these people with these huge cash reserves, unless they are institutional purchases or all the cash rich people are constantly just selling houses to each other!

castle2012

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Utterly baffling. Who are all these people with these huge cash reserves, unless they are institutional purchases or all the cash rich people are constantly just selling houses to each other!

Its mainly money coming from outside the country , American s etc . Also the county council s are buying some property s .

gaius c

alastair wrote: »

Well, let me try repeating for your benefit. Queens is a primarily suburban borough, and Dublin, even encompassing the entire county, is primarily suburban. You chose to make the comparison, and the claim you made is simply not supported by the facts. Queens is more expensive than Dublin if you're buying property. I didn't 'ignore' your take five example (given that I referenced it, I'm not sure why you would believe this?) - I pointed out that it was not representative of the generality. It isn't.

In other news, I lumped Cork city and Dunmanway together and found that the average price was lower than Salthill.

Therefore the Galway property market is higher than Cork. That's the logic you are proposing.

gaius c

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Utterly baffling. Who are all these people with these huge cash reserves, unless they are institutional purchases or all the cash rich people are constantly just selling houses to each other!

On the bright side, at least it's only real money that's being staked this time.

alastair

gaius c wrote: »

In other news, I lumped Cork city and Dunmanway together and found that the average price was lower than Salthill.

Therefore the Galway property market is higher than Cork. That's the logic you are proposing.

Not quite. Unless you're trying to pass this straw man argument off as 'my logic'? Your comparison (let's not forget) was suburban NYC and Dublin (overwhelmingly suburban sprawl). When you actually compare them, you (unsurprisingly) find that NYC (and not the exotic upper east side, but ordinary suburban Queens) is rather more expensive than 'insane' Dublin. No need to go finding alternative rural red herrings to muddy the waters - Dublin isn't Dunmanway, and there's no need to 'lump' anything into Dublin to highlight the difference in property pricing. You should be grateful that I didn't choose the outer suburbs of NYC, which are far pricier than Queens.

athtrasna

Enough thanks. Take it to pm if you want to continue this discussion

Mod

MayBea

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Utterly baffling. Who are all these people with these huge cash reserves, unless they are institutional purchases or all the cash rich people are constantly just selling houses to each other!

REIT only has purchased nearly 1,600 apartments in Dublin Area over the past 18 months and have plans to purchase more. http://www.newstalk.com/Rising-rents-add-to-strong-profits-at-Irelands-largest-landlord-IRES-Reit

Quite how much they've been affected by finish of CGT exemption, I wonder...

gosplan

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Utterly baffling. Who are all these people with these huge cash reserves, unless they are institutional purchases or all the cash rich people are constantly just selling houses to each other!

Outside investment. They'll lose interest if the property market looks stable and not subject to crazy 10% annual rises.

The_Conductor

MayBea wrote: »

REIT only has purchased nearly 1,600 apartments in Dublin Area over the past 18 months and have plans to purchase more. http://www.newstalk.com/Rising-rents-add-to-strong-profits-at-Irelands-largest-landlord-IRES-Reit

Quite how much they've been affected by finish of CGT exemption, I wonder...

Its quite simply that they can borrow the money at incredibly low rates- and as an REIT- aren't subject to the lending rules which a landlord would be subject to- so they can leverage their finances far better than a private landlord could- and crowd out the market. However- they're not interested in one-off units- they want whole developments (entirely understandably). The end of the CGT exemption is moot- they're not planning on selling the units- they're going to be milch cows for the foreseeable future.

johnnyskeleton

Sorry if there is already a thread on this:

http://www.daft.ie/report/marcus-ohalloran-2015q2-rental/infographic?gclid=COCXyJ7ZsscCFYGy2wodVrQIdg

Saw the second page rent vs mortgage illustration and thought it was very interesting. One of the curious things about the celtic tiger was that in almost all scenarios in 2006 the monthly mortgage was more than the rent for an equivalent property. This was justified by a lot of people on the basis that they would own their own home, prices were only going up etc etc.

But from a more objective point of view, surely it sould cost slightly less to pay for a mortgage than to rent. This is because in a rental situation the landlord pays for repairs etc and you also have the benefit of moving elsewhere. Also, the buy to let model (whatever your views on same as an investment or social phenomenon, it is the easiest way to compare the opportunity cost of investing the money elsewhere) doesn't make any sense if the mortgage amount is greater than the rent, unless one is speculating as to future gains.

Could this be evidence of a bubble? Rent, if you like is a liquid valuation of the value of accommodation, whereas the mortgage represents the investment cost in the asset. Where the cost of investment exceeds its revenue it implies very low yields.

However, a curious aspect to this is that the urban vs rural divide that is often touted doesn't necessarily hold true here. Specifically, rents outstrip mortgages for 2 beds in all areas other than South County Dublin. Whereas for a 4 bed, only in Waterford City do rents exceed the mortgage payment.

I believe from looking at rents and property prices in my own area (D7) that the rental yields on smaller properties (1 and 2 bed apartments and houses) are reasonably good, but the 3/4 bed places are disproportionately high.

This is no doubt because of the everybody-wants-a-three-bed-semi-detached-house feeling that's going on at the moment. But if you really want a 3 bed semi, it would seem that it is cheaper to rent same at the moment rather than buy. I think the new bubble, if it is a bubble, is related to the size of property rather than location (albeit that the more expensive houses in South County Dublin are more expensive hence have a lot more to lose).

athtrasna

Mod note

Think this thread is a good fit rather than needing a separate thread. Threads merged.

gaius c

Rents *have* to be higher than mortgages. Landlords can't make money otherwise.

Having mortgages higher is a sign as clear as daylight of a bubble.

Bob24

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Saw the second page rent vs mortgage illustration and thought it was very interesting. One of the curious things about the celtic tiger was that in almost all scenarios in 2006 the monthly mortgage was more than the rent for an equivalent property. This was justified by a lot of people on the basis that they would own their own home, prices were only going up etc etc.

But from a more objective point of view, surely it sould cost slightly less to pay for a mortgage than to rent. This is because in a rental situation the landlord pays for repairs etc and you also have the benefit of moving elsewhere.

All you are saying is correct, but when comparing renting vs buying aren't you overlooking the fact that a mortgage has a limited duration and at some point you stop paying; while renting is for life?

Doesn't the fact that you are acquiring the asset vs renting it justify higher monthly payments?

Greyian

athtrasna wrote: »

Mod note

Think this thread is a good fit rather than needing a separate thread. Threads merged.

I just posted a rather long response that other thread, and it seems it has now disappeared

Greyian

gaius c wrote: »

Rents *have* to be higher than mortgages. Landlords can't make money otherwise.

Having mortgages higher is a sign as clear as daylight of a bubble.

Not necessarily. Rents have to be higher than the interest portion of the mortgage.

If you had to pay mortgage of €1000/month, and could get €990/month in rent (ignore taxation for this scenario), would you not consider that a good deal? Pay €10/month (on top of the rent) for the duration of the mortgage, and at the end have an asset worth hundreds of thousands of euro?