Property Market 2016

loveisdivine

Saw a house back in December that we liked the look of, up for 175k it went sale agreed fairly quickly. Just noticed it back on the market again now, sale must have fell through, but this time it's advertised for 195k.

Just wanted to add, this whole thing of advertising places way below what they expect to get kinda has me worried to be honest. There's only a handful of places that are suitable for us and within budget, if they are actually expecting to sell for a good bit over the asking, then that reduces are choices even more. It's really hard to get an idea of what's actually in your budget.

whiskeyman

loveisdivine wrote: »

Saw a house back in December that we liked the look of, up for 175k it went sale agreed fairly quickly. Just noticed it back on the market again now, sale must have fell through, but this time it's advertised for 195k.

Just wanted to add, this whole thing of advertising places way below what they expect to get kinda has me worried to be honest. There's only a handful of places that are suitable for us and within budget, if they are actually expecting to sell for a good bit over the asking, then that reduces are choices even more. It's really hard to get an idea of what's actually in your budget.

As others have said, you can't go by advertised selling price.
Different sellers / EAs have different strategies regarding setting price.
I've seen places way undervalued and others grossly overvalued - and this is based on recent sales of similar properties in the area among other factors.

Regarding wondering what's in your budget, do some research on the property register site and see what prices places are actually being sold at (within past year if possible) that may interest you.
You'll have a good idea then what's in your budget.

Bob24

loveisdivine wrote: »

Just wanted to add, this whole thing of advertising places way below what they expect to get kinda has me worried to be honest. There's only a handful of places that are suitable for us and within budget, if they are actually expecting to sell for a good bit over the asking, then that reduces are choices even more. It's really hard to get an idea of what's actually in your budget.

Don't only view properties for which you think the asking price is the best value for money. Sometimes a similar property advertised for a higher price will actually sell for less money because the original price attracted less bidders and competition is not as fierce.

mel123

impr0v wrote: »

Do you mind me asking what price bracket this house was/is in?

It was advertised for 300k

SarahMollie

mel123 wrote: »

It was advertised for 300k

In Drumcondra thats the starting price for a small 3 bed terraced house. Can go for much more depending on where in Drumcondra it is, condition etc.

mel123

SarahMollie wrote: »

In Drumcondra thats the starting price for a small 3 bed terraced house. Can go for much more depending on where in Drumcondra it is, condition etc.

I know, as i said it was a 'doer-upper', and i was just pointing out the story of asking price compared to current bid at the moment, that 120k is a LOT over the asking price

MayBea

Interestingly, Limerick is the most affordable place to buy a home, across 367 cities in nine countries – Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, China (Hong Kong), Ireland, Japan, Canada, the US & Britain - according to Demographia.
Its house price/average household income is only 1.8. (€92,800 to €51,200 )
The next most affordable is said to be Waterford with 2.1 median multiple.
Dublin is "seriously unaffordable", ranked 4.5 alongside Hull, Durham and South Yorkshire.
Things are worse in London (8.5), Vancouver (10.8) and Sydney (12.2) with Hong Kong (19) at the top of a list of the world's least affordable cities.

SarahMollie

MayBea wrote: »

Interestingly, Limerick is the most affordable place to buy a home, across 367 cities in nine countries – Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, China (Hong Kong), Ireland, Japan, Canada, the US & Britain - according to Demographia.
Its house price/average household income is only 1.8. (€92,800 to €51,200 )
The next most affordable is said to be Waterford with 2.1 median multiple.
Dublin is "seriously unaffordable", ranked 4.5 alongside Hull, Durham and South Yorkshire.
Things are worse in London (8.5), Vancouver (10.8) and Sydney (12.2) with Hong Kong (19) at the top of a list of the world's least affordable cities.

I know this probably wont be popular but is 4.5 times income really "seriously unaffordable" for a capital city? The CB rules pretty much tie in with this and I think it would be a good point to maintain at over the coming years.

During the celtic tiger, houses were between 9-10 times peoples income in Dublin. Thats definitely not a situation we're want to return.

MayBea

The_Conductor wrote: »

The only sellers who are actually selling- are those who are desperate.
Most sellers have put off selling until later in the year- or 2017- when they expect a relaxation of the Central Bank rules to provide firm underpinnings to the market. Unfortunately the commentary from the Central Bank- on how they plan to evaluate how the deposit rules are working later this year- has had a chilling effect on the market.

I was at a house viewing a few months ago in the area we were primarily interested in, out of curiosity. It was reasonably priced, and did genuinely receive bids (+6%) but the owner took it off the market. It's now relisted back onto Daft to the rentals section.

SarahMollie

MayBea wrote: »

I was at a house viewing a few months ago in the area we were primarily interested in, out of curiosity. It was reasonably priced, and did genuinely receive bids (+6%) but the owner took it off the market. It's now relisted back onto Daft to the rentals section.

Unfortunately there is nothing to stop people putting their houses on the market for the LOLs.

Michael D Not Higgins

SarahMollie wrote: »

I know this probably wont be popular but is 4.5 times income really "seriously unaffordable" for a capital city? The CB rules pretty much tie in with this and I think it would be a good point to maintain at over the coming years.

During the celtic tiger, houses were between 9-10 times peoples income in Dublin. Thats definitely not a situation we're want to return.

Agreed, and comparing to the UK markets, Durham, Hull and Yorkshire aren't what you'd call booming property markets. If anything it shows Dublin is affordable currently and Limerick and Waterford are undervalued.

Zenify

SarahMollie wrote: »

I know this probably wont be popular but is 4.5 times income really "seriously unaffordable" for a capital city? The CB rules pretty much tie in with this and I think it would be a good point to maintain at over the coming years.

During the celtic tiger, houses were between 9-10 times peoples income in Dublin. Thats definitely not a situation we're want to return.

Who do you think will benefit from a higher ratio? low ratio puts less pressure on everyone: prices are lower for buyers, less stress for banks and people trading up will also buy lower too. everyone wins right?

TRS30

Sleepy wrote: »

A 2 bed house isn't exactly a family home and most of the 3+ beds are either in crap neighbourhoods, really only a 2 bed + box room or require 40/50k sunk into them (which is a fairly big ask of a FTB scraping together the circa 35k they need to buy at this price level)

I think our ideas of "decent houses" are quite far off TBH. I'm not expecting to buy in Clontarf or Malahide at that level but a 3 bedroom family home in an area where you wouldn't be afraid to let your children play on the green shouldn't be out of the question for a family earning 65/70k a year...

You'll get a 3 bed semi in Swords in a nice area for 250K. I happen to know a nice one coming on the market soon

MayBea

SarahMollie wrote: »

I know this probably wont be popular but is 4.5 times income really "seriously unaffordable" for a capital city? The CB rules pretty much tie in with this and I think it would be a good point to maintain at over the coming years.

During the celtic tiger, houses were between 9-10 times peoples income in Dublin. Thats definitely not a situation we're want to return.

Well, only two capitals are within the "seriously unaffordable" ranking: Dublin and Tokyo (4.1 to 5.0). All other capitals are "severely unaffordable" (5.1 & over)
Affordable are 3.0 & under.
Actually, Galway is 2.8, hence is also "affordable" .
Dublin is among the most affordable capitals in the list.

SarahMollie

Zenify wrote: »

Who do you think will benefit from a higher ratio? low ratio puts less pressure on everyone: prices are lower for buyers, less stress for banks and people trading up will also buy lower too. everyone wins right?

I'm not arguing for a higher ratio. If you read my post properly, I've said that a return to the higher ratios of the past would not be desirable.

Facts are that capital cities like Dublin tend to attract a premium. So 4.5 times income isnt actually that bad in comparison to other capital cities.

Also "everyone wins, right?"??? I think you're misunderstanding market factors and the motivation of the various players here.

You're saying that ordinary home owners and Banks have the same objectives? This is absolutely not the case. Yes, prospective buyers would like cheaper house prices but Banks would love the prices to go up. If people need to borrow less then banks make less money.

MrMorooka

Dublin doesn't really compare to other capital cities in terms of infrastructure and services though. But it does compare on price, we can agree it is a more affordable capital city. But it's also not as nice as other capitals.:o

Villa05

SarahMollie wrote:

I know this probably wont be popular but is 4.5 times income really "seriously unaffordable" for a capital city? The CB rules pretty much tie in with this and I think it would be a good point to maintain at over the coming years.

It would be intresting to know when that survey was conducted as you won't get much (that would fall into the category of family home) for 92k in limerick.

Still reasonable in Limerick but not 92k

SarahMollie

MrMorooka wrote: »

Dublin doesn't really compare to other capital cities in terms of infrastructure and services though. But it does compare on price, we can agree it is a more affordable capital city. But it's also not as nice as other capitals.:o

Honestly it really annoys me when peoples first reaction is to speak badly about Dublin. Its such a negative part of the Irish disposition to always want to put our own down.

Granted Public Transport is a serious problem, but for many other reasons many people think Dublin is a desirable place to live. Good social scene, good Bars and Restaurants, relatively safe in comparison to other cities of its size. City beaches and mountains on our doorstep. Good and improving employment prospects for young people.

Plenty of people obviously want to live in Dublin, otherwise it wouldn't be so hard to get accommodation.

yqtwqxqm

SarahMollie wrote: »

Honestly it really annoys me when peoples first reaction is to speak badly about Dublin. Its such a negative part of the Irish disposition to always want to put our own down.

Granted Public Transport is a serious problem, but for many other reasons many people think Dublin is a desirable place to live. Good social scene, good Bars and Restaurants, relatively safe in comparison to other cities of its size. City beaches and mountains on our doorstep. Good and improving employment prospects for young people.

Plenty of people obviously want to live in Dublin, otherwise it wouldn't be so hard to get accommodation.

Having lived in several European and American cities for extended periods I think Dublin is right up there.
And I think its really nice that we havent got the High-rise fever that a lot of cities suffer from now too. It really hurts me to hear of people asking for high rises in Dublin. Noooooooo.

air

yqtwqxqm wrote: »

It really hurts me to hear of people asking for high rises in Dublin. Noooooooo.

How do you expect Dublin to grow economically without an increase in density?
There is little or no available housing in the city as is and the commuter roads and rail lines are at capacity.
It doesn't need skyscrapers but Dublin needs to go up if it's to have a future.

Rew

San Francisco is suffering due to lack of ability to go up given they cant go out. For the first time the flow of people out of the city is greater then those coming in. Other cities like Austin are benefitting as companies choose to locate else where. There are already mumblings form companies in Dublin about lack of good office space and lack of residential space for staff.

I think Dublin is going in the right direction to make it a great city to live in but it has a long way to go. Its easy to confuse people wanting to live in Dublin versus living here because thats where the jobs are (and their family ties are here). Many people headed to Canada and Australia because they have a better life there and not because they couldn't get jobs here.

SarahMollie

Rew wrote: »

San Francisco is suffering due to lack of ability to go up given they cant go out. For the first time the flow of people out of the city is greater then those coming in. Other cities like Austin are benefitting as companies choose to locate else where. There are already mumblings form companies in Dublin about lack of good office space and lack of residential space for staff.

I think Dublin is going in the right direction to make it a great city to live in but it has a long way to go. Its easy to confuse people wanting to live in Dublin versus living here because thats where the jobs are (and their family ties are here). Many people headed to Canada and Australia because they have a better life there and not because they couldn't get jobs here.

Pretty sure its well documented that a lot of people who went to Canada and Australia in the past 10 years went precisely because they couldn't get work here - here being Ireland as a whole, not just Dublin.

Previous to that lots of people went for a year or two, but most ultimately came home again.

Obviously those are countries that are known for a high standard of living, but Australia is starting to struggle, especially WA due to the collapse in the price of a barrel of oil and weaknesses in the Chinese economy.

Canada is a fantastic place but cost of living there is very high, especially if you're not a citizen as you dont get the benefits of their healthcare system and have to pay privately, etc.

I work in the tech sector and many of my colleagues have come from around the world. Vast majority are loving their time in Dublin and many have stayed much longer than intended.

If we can just get the transport situation undercontrol and don't make a mess of urban planning (I'm in favour of going up rather than out as it happens) then I think we're going to be in a good place!

Rew

SarahMollie wrote: »

Pretty sure its well documented that a lot of people who went to Canada and Australia in the past 10 years went precisely because they couldn't get work here - here being Ireland as a whole, not just Dublin.

Yes but not all which was my point.

Obviously those are countries that are known for a high standard of living, but Australia is starting to struggle, especially WA due to the collapse in the price of a barrel of oil and weaknesses in the Chinese economy.

Oz is at 2008 Ireland on steroids ready to bust in my very uneducated opinion but regardless of the boom there the standard of living was and still is in some places great. Same for Canada. I know plenty of people who have no issue getting a job here who went over just because they could have a life there you cant have here. We are doing the right things, working on transport cutting back on cars, promoting cycling but they need to be thinking about more public amenities. They should be investing in MTB trails, faculties at the beaches supporting the likes of triathlon, kite surfers and like. Better camping and walking facilities. Flogging Coillte off is crazy. Anything to give people as much support and scope for hobbies and activities as possible. We have generally poor swimming pools and other local amenities. The school situation is a massive turn off for people with kids, its a nightmare whether they are baptised or not. There are no cycling road race events in Dublin anymore because they aren't supported which is very short sighted.

We need to make Ireland a fantastic place to live, the focus has been skewed a bit on making it a fantastic place to work.

I work in the tech sector and many of my colleagues have come from around the world. Vast majority are loving their time in Dublin and many have stayed much longer than intended.

As do I so I have that perspective to and the perspective of spending time in our remote offices and the benefits that brings.

Not wanting to stray too far from the topic making Dublin affordable to live with quality acomadation and not the crap that was built in the boom is a big part of making to a great place to live. I already see new builds going up in the suburbs being built on top of each other with tiny gardens and limited parking.

Rew

ECB rate just went to 0%

Villa05

Rew wrote:

ECB rate just went to 0%

Upward pressure on variable rates fairly soon

mooreman09

gaius c wrote: »

And that is exactly why the CB rules are needed.

Agreed - However, they need to be tweaked for renters.

I was in a position to move home with my GF and save. Hence our finances are now very healthy. We'd be another year at least from buying if we were renting.

Its not the 3.5 limit that is preventing buyers. Its the deposit rules. The *3.5 limit simply prevents people from overdoing it, which is good.

Unless the Govt bring in some sort of Bond/Bridge for renters (maybe a bond that is retrieved through taxation?) or sets up a body to done something of this regard then renters are really up against it. Its not very fair.

A couple that are friends with us are the same age, however they have a child. Therefore they are renting @€;1100 per month. They would love to buy a house (and could afford it), however it will take them years to save for a deposit.

Something needs to be done fast in this regard.

jay0109

About €4 saving per month for me.....thank you Super Mario :P

I'll have an extra pint next time I'm down West

SarahMollie

Villa05 wrote: »

Upward pressure on variable rates fairly soon

Upward? How so? The rate was reduced and they've also announced a 4 year programme called TLTRO where they'll be effectively paying banks to borrow money

They're also giving negative rates for banks with money on deposit with them. (-0.04%)


Upshot is that the banks will want to lend! Without the CB rules holding them back they'd be out of control with all this stimulus in the market.

Bob24

mooreman09 wrote: »

A couple that are friends with us are the same age, however they have a child. Therefore they are renting @€;1100 per month. They would love to buy a house (and could afford it), however it will take them years to save for a deposit.

Something needs to be done fast in this regard.

Probably, but in my view what needs to be done is not to give them leverage to borrow more.

Things like reducing childcare cost so that they can save more or improving supply would likely be better both or your friends and for society in the long run.

Bob24

SarahMollie wrote: »

Upward? How so? The rate was reduced and they've also announced a 4 year programme called TLTRO where they'll be effectively paying banks to borrow money

They're also giving negative rates for banks with money on deposit with them. (-0.04%)


Upshot is that the banks will want to lend! Without the CB rules holding them back they'd be out of control with all this stimulus in the market.

Irish banks will argue (rightly or wrongly, I honestly don't know) that these new ECB rates will increase their cost for managing tracker mortgages and that they need to recover that loss on variable rate mortgages.