Property Market 2017

The_Conductor

Henbabani wrote: »

i'm still can't see the rents going much further, they aren't cheap now but when i looked in daft, i see some 1Bdr for 1400-1500 waiting more than two weeks and they are in D1, even 2BDR in D9 for 1400 online for more than 3 weeks, i guess we reached the upper limit or near.

Have to agree- even with the remarkable meddling the government has made in the market- the facts on the ground- is people's salaries have not increased to support the staggering increases in rent- and even with supply side issues being what they are- the inalienable fact is people earn a finite amount of money- and their limits had to be reached at some stage- well, they've been reached........

Other than a few executive class lettings-the rental market is now out of equilibrium- and is slowly starting to correct downwards again. This is the case in Central Dublin and Galway- and will surely hit the other urban areas imminently, before radiating outwards.

Talk to some of the letting agents in local markets- they are advising landlords to revise their expectations downwards.

Its not the RPZ that is the issue- its a simple fact- everything is getting more and more expensive here- but people's net take home pay- is not reflecting this.

Its like the first buds of spring- or the first leaves falling in the autumn- depending on whether you're a tenant or a landlord- the times, they are a-changing..........

lcwill

Some interesting charts in the Governments latest "Housing Sector Chartpack" - just stumbled across this this morning.

Figure 2.4 shows "The Rent to Income ratio has now been above the long term average for 12 consecutive quarters."

http://finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/170817%20Housing%20and%20Property%20Sector%20Chartpack%20August%202017%20Online%20version.pdf

The_Conductor

lcwill wrote: »

Some interesting charts in the Governments latest "Housing Sector Chartpack" - just stumbled across this this morning.

Figure 2.4 shows "The Rent to Income ratio has now been above the long term average for 12 consecutive quarters."

http://finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/170817%20Housing%20and%20Property%20Sector%20Chartpack%20August%202017%20Online%20version.pdf

I'd take that report with a large grain of salt.
By its own admission- it is not 'quality controlled'- that is- its in arrears, for many of the stats- esp. the Daft stats- its based on 'asking' rather than achieved rental levels- and the affordability index for first time buyers in the report- looks at how the current 4.6 times net annual income level- is just above the long term average of 4.5 times net annual income- however, its not quality adjusted to take into account the improbably low interest rates that people are paying............

Its a rather fluffy set of maps, figures and graphs- the assumptions it is reliant on- are optimistic in the extreme- and in many cases represent information supplied by dubious sources with obvious agendas (such as the Threshold data- which shows a 7.1% increase in Dublin rents year to date- which despite the fact that the RTB contradicts it on a county basis- the Threshold figure is used to reinforce the RPZ criteria- rather than the RTB figure- as the RTB figure is deemed 'incomplete').

I accept it must be awful trying to put together a reasonable set of statistics (I know who put these together- and have spoken to them about them earlier this summer)- however, you really need to sanity check your data- and you cannot put CSO or RTB on a similar standing to DAFT or Threshold data- and to suggest they are on a level playing field- does an immense disservice to the people who put time and effort into complying the information from the outset.

I'm glad that DPER/DoF are publishing this type of data- I am however, embarrassed that the section who compiled this report- obviously don't have anyone with a statistics qualification on their team.

I think it was Churchill who coined the phrase- 'lies, lies and damned statistics'- well, unfortunately, it applies in this case.

I put together statistics (not on the housing sector!!!) for annual reports.
I'd be torn through for a short-cut, if I presented this as a fair and reasoned look at a sector.

OwlsZat

The_Conductor wrote: »

I'd take that report with a large grain of salt.
By its own admission- it is not 'quality controlled'- that is- its in arrears, for many of the stats- esp. the Daft stats- its based on 'asking' rather than achieved rental levels- and the affordability index for first time buyers in the report- looks at how the current 4.6 times net annual income level- is just above the long term average of 4.5 times net annual income- however, its not quality adjusted to take into account the improbably low interest rates that people are paying............

Its a rather fluffy set of maps, figures and graphs- the assumptions it is reliant on- are optimistic in the extreme- and in many cases represent information supplied by dubious sources with obvious agendas (such as the Threshold data- which shows a 7.1% increase in Dublin rents year to date- which despite the fact that the RTB contradicts it on a county basis- the Threshold figure is used to reinforce the RPZ criteria- rather than the RTB figure- as the RTB figure is deemed 'incomplete').

I accept it must be awful trying to put together a reasonable set of statistics (I know who put these together- and have spoken to them about them earlier this summer)- however, you really need to sanity check your data- and you cannot put CSO or RTB on a similar standing to DAFT or Threshold data- and to suggest they are on a level playing field- does an immense disservice to the people who put time and effort into complying the information from the outset.

I'm glad that DPER/DoF are publishing this type of data- I am however, embarrassed that the section who compiled this report- obviously don't have anyone with a statistics qualification on their team.

I think it was Churchill who coined the phrase- 'lies, lies and damned statistics'- well, unfortunately, it applies in this case.

I put together statistics (not on the housing sector!!!) for annual reports.
I'd be torn through for a short-cut, if I presented this as a fair and reasoned look at a sector.

Rather than giving a fluffy it's not accurate overview why don't you specifically critique the charts you believe to be untrue?

The_Conductor

OwlsZat wrote: »

Rather than giving a fluffy it's not accurate overview why don't you specifically critique the charts you believe to be untrue?

I specifically pointed out historical prices not being adjusted for affordability with interest rates factored in. I also specifically pointed out equal billing being given to asking and achieved rents, and to statistics presented by vested interests- and the CSO.

This isn't fluffy- its fact.

It is not fair to put the CSO on an equal footing with Threshold and DAFT- period. This accounts for over half the graphs shown.

If I have time later I may go through it for you- but to be brutally honest- I think its a waste of time my critiquing the charts, one by one- on the basis of the simple but irrefutable fact- is my main critique is the equal billing which has been given to figures provided by the CSO- to Threshold and DAFT- without any meaningful text to point out clearly the strength of information from one body- versus the weakness of information eminating from others.

The manner in which historical affordability figures (particularly for buyers) are presented- without any mention whatsoever of interest rates- sticks out like a sore thumb too.

Mere lipservice is paid to volumes in the market- it is mentioned in passing 7 times in relation to both the rental and buyers market- however, there are no figures presented- or a comparison in how this differs from historical norms- or indeed, a definition of what 'historical norms' actually are.

Have a look at the graphs yourself- I can go through them- one by one- when I have the time- if I feel sufficiently motivated to do so- however, on the basis of the equal billing given to DAFT, Threshold and the CSO- I have zero inclination whatsoever to put time and effort into dismantling the figures (plus there is no discussion on the background figures- no appendices detailing the sampling, error rates, or background on the tables and maps- they're simply presented as a fait accompli. While there is an introduction- the guys simply state its a chartpack- and their sole purpose is to disseminate information- not to comment on the quality of the information- simply to bring it to a larger audience. It does point that for several charts- the information 'has not been quality adjusted'- I would argue that this is patently insufficient.

Sigh..........

Fkall

Villa05 wrote: »

Land owners won't want t waive planning permission as it will devalue their asset

Tax should be localised to areas where there is a shortage. RPZ is probably the best way of achieving that.

How is the bedroom tax applied in the UK is it nationwide or localised

Planning permission only last 5 years.

ArnieSilvia

The_Conductor wrote: »

I specifically pointed out historical prices not being adjusted for affordability with interest rates factored in. I also specifically pointed out equal billing being given to asking and achieved rents, and to statistics presented by vested interests- and the CSO.

This isn't fluffy- its fact.

It is not fair to put the CSO on an equal footing with Threshold and DAFT- period. This accounts for over half the graphs shown.

If I have time later I may go through it for you- but to be brutally honest- I think its a waste of time my critiquing the charts, one by one- on the basis of the simple but irrefutable fact- is my main critique is the equal billing which has been given to figures provided by the CSO- to Threshold and DAFT- without any meaningful text to point out clearly the strength of information from one body- versus the weakness of information eminating from others.

The manner in which historical affordability figures (particularly for buyers) are presented- without any mention whatsoever of interest rates- sticks out like a sore thumb too.

Mere lipservice is paid to volumes in the market- it is mentioned in passing 7 times in relation to both the rental and buyers market- however, there are no figures presented- or a comparison in how this differs from historical norms- or indeed, a definition of what 'historical norms' actually are.

Have a look at the graphs yourself- I can go through them- one by one- when I have the time- if I feel sufficiently motivated to do so- however, on the basis of the equal billing given to DAFT, Threshold and the CSO- I have zero inclination whatsoever to put time and effort into dismantling the figures (plus there is no discussion on the background figures- no appendices detailing the sampling, error rates, or background on the tables and maps- they're simply presented as a fait accompli. While there is an introduction- the guys simply state its a chartpack- and their sole purpose is to disseminate information- not to comment on the quality of the information- simply to bring it to a larger audience. It does point that for several charts- the information 'has not been quality adjusted'- I would argue that this is patently insufficient.

Sigh..........

To support what you're saying - from personal experience, when I was renting an apartment in Dublin I knocked down the price from 900 to 780 a month, part of the deal was that I brought some of my own furniture. Same for another apartment, asking 1200, got it for 1070. This was 4 and 5 years ago respectively. Prices were still relatively high but these were lovely places to be - the 780 a month one was a top floor penthouse apartment, 120 sqm with huge balconies. Certainly better than a house I own now.

In today's market people bid upwards and there's plenty of them. Back when I was renting, I was the only one viewing the property. I bought the house 3 years ago because I saw what's going to happen with rents.

OwlsZat

There used to be online tools for watching price fluctuations for listed Irish property. Any still about?

mloc123

OwlsZat wrote: »

There used to be online tools for watching price fluctuations for listed Irish property. Any still about?

daftdrop.com

0gac3yjefb5sv7

I think I saw a chart in this thread about average Dublin property prices from circa 1995 or so but can't seem to find it now.

Anyone know where this may have been sourced from?

Hollister11

The house beside my parents rental just sold for 460K, another one around the corner went for the same. My parents one is 200sq ft bigger than both of these. My parents paid 360K 13 years ago, Hopefully they reach the 500K mark next year.

The_Conductor

Hollister11 wrote: »

The house beside my parents rental just sold for 460K, another one around the corner went for the same. My parents one is 200sq ft bigger than both of these. My parents paid 360K 13 years ago, Hopefully they reach the 500K mark next year.

More expensive house prices are doing very funny things at the moment.
You get 500k for it tomorrow- but 400k in a years time- there is no consistency in prices once you go over a certain level- it all depends on precisely who is interested, and just how interested they are.........

500k for a rental- regardless of the fact that its 200sq ft larger than the last property that sold- sounds aspirational. I'm not saying its impossible- just a bit of a long shot.........

stevedublin

mloc123 wrote: »

daftdrop.com

it probably needs rebranding/renaming!

OwlsZat

I notice the property prices seem to have leveled and the price of gold is climbing. Warren Buffet took a big punt on consumer credit but is he alone? Ireland has 50B due soon which will require another loan, as do countless others. Who's going to fund us this time? The Germans again for another bit of compound interest?
How much credit have the banks given out as of late and is it stalling, will tighter leading rules normalize prices? Lots of uncertainty out there.

dory

House I was just, finally able to put a deposit on went up 10k today. It's a new housing estate so prices were fixed and were at the same level for ages. Just got a salary increase.....and logged on to see they've gone up. Out of my price range again. Feel like crying.

cnocbui

dory wrote: »

House I was just, finally able to put a deposit on went up 10k today. It's a new housing estate so prices were fixed and were at the same level for ages. Just got a salary increase.....and logged on to see they've gone up. Out of my price range again. Feel like crying.

My sympathies. Move to Australia, they actually have a sensible legal system, particularly in relation to property transactions. There, a deposit is binding on both parties and actually means what it is supposed to.

Sarn

cnocbui wrote: »

My sympathies. Move to Australia, they actually have a sensible legal system, particularly in relation to property transactions. There, a deposit is binding on both parties and actually means what it is supposed to.

My interpretation is that the deposit wasn't put down yet. They just got it together but the prices have moved up.

Prices have really gone crazy in some areas. I know of one place that was bought last year for €485k, last I checked it was over €610k and there was still four parties interested. Another, went for €640k when another on the street went for €500k the year before.

0gac3yjefb5sv7

Sarn wrote: »

My interpretation is that the deposit wasn't put down yet. They just got it together but the prices have moved up.

Prices have really gone crazy in some areas. I know of one place that was bought last year for €485k, last I checked it was over €610k and there was still four parties interested. Another, went for €640k when another on the street went for €500k the year before.

Surely at or very near a peak and something has to give.

The_Conductor

Pheonix10 wrote: »

Surely at or very near a peak and something has to give.

Until such time as something happens on the supply side- the pent-up demand will ensure nothing drastic happens pricewise. If there was some sort of international crisis- we could have overnight crashes- however, Brexit aside- which is like a slow thrundling accident that has been well signposted- how likely is a catastrophic international event to happen?

OwlsZat

The_Conductor wrote: »

Until such time as something happens on the supply side- the pent-up demand will ensure nothing drastic happens pricewise. If there was some sort of international crisis- we could have overnight crashes- however, Brexit aside- which is like a slow thrundling accident that has been well signposted- how likely is a catastrophic international event to happen?

Deutsche Bank Facing Bankruptcy:
Another ticking time bomb is Germany’s largest bank, Deutsche Bank. They are not only the financial backbone of Germany, but also the European Union because they fund the euro system, extending loans to weaker nations like Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and Italy. In the last two years, they’ve lost nearly $2 billion, instituted a hiring freeze, cut bonuses by 80%, and are facing a $2.5 million civil penalty to pay to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. They are now so desperate for cash, last month they announced they will create more shares and sell them at a 35% discount, which caused their stock price to drop 13% over the next four days. (Source: Internationalman.com)
Over 90% of Deutsche Bank’s revenues comes from derivatives, which makes them extremely vulnerable to losses in the event of unexpected changes in interest rates, so the risks are great. To put it in perspective, Deutsche Bank is ten times larger than Lehman Brothers, whose collapse in 2008 caused a major financial crisis. If Deutsche goes bankrupt, the euro and the EU would likely crash quickly, causing a global disruption in currency values and International trade.


I'm not sure how accurate that is and I'd be interested if others have opinions. What we do know is that the squeezed middle are feeling it across a number of Eu member states. Not sure how they are going to afford further repayments without wage growth.

cnocbui

OwlsZat wrote: »

Deutsche Bank Facing Bankruptcy:
Another ticking time bomb is Germany’s largest bank, Deutsche Bank. They are not only the financial backbone of Germany, but also the European Union because they fund the euro system, extending loans to weaker nations like Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and Italy. In the last two years, they’ve lost nearly $2 billion, instituted a hiring freeze, cut bonuses by 80%, and are facing a $2.5 million civil penalty to pay to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. They are now so desperate for cash, last month they announced they will create more shares and sell them at a 35% discount, which caused their stock price to drop 13% over the next four days. (Source: Internationalman.com)
Over 90% of Deutsche Bank’s revenues comes from derivatives, which makes them extremely vulnerable to losses in the event of unexpected changes in interest rates, so the risks are great. To put it in perspective, Deutsche Bank is ten times larger than Lehman Brothers, whose collapse in 2008 caused a major financial crisis. If Deutsche goes bankrupt, the euro and the EU would likely crash quickly, causing a global disruption in currency values and International trade.


I'm not sure how accurate that is and I'd be interested if others have opinions. What we do know is that the squeezed middle are feeling it across a number of Eu member states. Not sure how they are going to afford further repayments without wage growth.

What happened here when banks got into strife? Same will happen in Germany I would imagine, taxsuckers will foot the bill.

0gac3yjefb5sv7

Is there any reputable economist or housing market publications that give an insight into where the market may be going in the coming years?

Ideally one that has prior expertise of the crash in 08.

karenalot

Sarn wrote: »

Prices have really gone crazy in some areas. I know of one place that was bought last year for €485k, last I checked it was over €610k and there was still four parties interested. Another, went for €640k when another on the street went for €500k the year before.

A neighbours house of one I bought in 2006 recently sold for 12% less than what I paid. If prices keep rising at the same rate that area will be hitting boom time prices by next year. 3 years ago I was wondering if the house would come out of negative equity. It's certainly a quick changing market.

jamesthepeach

karenalot wrote: »

A neighbours house of one I bought in 2006 recently sold for 12% less than what I paid. If prices keep rising at the same rate that area will be hitting boom time prices by next year. 3 years ago I was wondering if the house would come out of negative equity. It's certainly a quick changing market.

A neighbour of sold his house for 370000 in 2012 and was complaining that he was making a loss, but his company had offered him a job in Germany and were going to pay his rent ober there so he was going to take advantage and sell his house here rather than leave it empty for a few years. I confirmed the final selling price on the ppr, great tool for nosey neighbours

Last week that same house was put on the market for 650k no changes whatsoever have been made to it. Can't wait to see what it goes for, but another nosey neighbours like myself called the ea and was told there were already bids over 700k on it. I'd say the guy who sold it a few years ago is kicking himself now. Someone is after making a killing on that house.

Graham

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Someone is after making a killing on that house.

Assuming the house they're now going to buy hasn't increased by a similar amount or more.

If they're retiring to Cavan, happy times

The_Conductor

Graham wrote: »

If they're retiring to Cavan, happy times

Personally- I'd rather Portugal

jamesthepeach

Graham wrote: »

Assuming the house they're now going to buy hasn't increased by a similar amount or more.

If they're retiring to Cavan, happy times

I never met him, but the owner was from Cork.
His son lived in it while he was at uni and shared with a few class mates who probaby paid rent. Noone has lived in it since he moved out at the start of the summer.
I assume hes probably finished uni now and the guy is offloading the house.

karenalot

Dublin homes will hit boom prices within a year, report says

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/dublin-homes-will-hit-boom-prices-within-a-year-report-says-1.3208068

The cost of an average-sized family home in some Dublin locations will top boom-time prices within a year, a new report has claimed. However, its authors have played down fears that another dangerous property bubble is inflating.

The new pricing survey from the Institute of Professional Auctioneers and Valuers (IPAV) puts the average cost of a family home in selected areas of the capital at just under €518,000, more than twice the State-wide average. According to the pricing survey – the first to be published by the group representing the auctioneering sector – the average price of a three-bedroom home nationwide is a little more than €253,000.

“I don’t think people should be alarmed by the scale of the price increases and I don’t think we are anywhere near bubble,” the chief executive of the IPAV Pat Devitt told The Irish Times.

He said an absence of supply rather than easy access to cheap credit was what was pushing prices higher in some – but not all – areas.
“This has been said over and over again but the reality is the supply just is not there. There is not enough houses being built and if we don’t do anything about that prices are going to keep going.”

Topgear on Dave

karenalot wrote: »

Dublin homes will hit boom prices within a year, report says

"Quick pass me the sick bucket" :mad:

Henbabani

i'm really not buing all these surveys based on daft information. "the prices going up"? i'm watching more than a year how many homes there's in Dublin area, 2 Bdr for max 200K, from last july it's still almost the same number, around 240 houses.
so if you can still find 240 properties for that price, he can't say we going to cross the boom price.
i think today more than in the last few years, the media "killing" the government and they are aware the problem. something is going to happend and i think we already close to the maximum prices. there's still almost 30% to rich the boom prices and i really can't see it happend, unless you rely on daft survey.