Opinions on when the next property crash may happen

Lumen

Google: alison o riordan apartment

trobbin

mrslancaster wrote: »

+ 1

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056060654

Samuel T. Cogley

Perfectly reasonable sum for a D2/D4, essentially city centre pad (500K). I wouldn't have been too fussed tbh other than buying at the worst possible time. Until Dublin goes High rise (some time around the time Capt. Kirk is going to be born I expect) property like that will always been in demand, albeit very volatile in price.

One thing that does get me though - 625K for a penthouse - you would have thought they'd have brightened it up a bit. Looks like bit of a ****hole in the ad.

Yourself isit

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Perfectly reasonable sum for a D2/D4, essentially city centre pad (500K). I wouldn't have been too fussed tbh other than buying at the worst possible time. Until Dublin goes High rise (some time around the time Capt. Kirk is going to be born I expect) property like that will always been in demand, albeit very volatile in price.

One thing that does get me though - 625K for a penthouse - you would have thought they'd have brightened it up a bit. Looks like bit of a ****hole in the ad.

It's in no way reasonable. You bought at the top of the boom right?


Anyway what people don't get is that unlike 2006 when the dogs on the street could buy a house prices now exclude most people. The stats show that the median age of the ftb is 35. In ten years it will reflect the reality now that only 30% of young people can buy houses, present trends contuining.

Meanwhile a lot of people with skin in the property game will have died off.

We will have to decide whether we want a property owning democracy or not. If we do we need lower prices, which means more supply.

AsianDub

That "penthouse" is a sh*thole. I lived in the 38m2 one bed a floor below. More or less the same spec. Sure it has a wrap around balcony but the apartments are very low spec. Built in 1997, theyre not the same as the Hanover and more modern developments. Crap electric heaters that break. Rotting windows, damp, mould, no where to dry clothes, low water pressure in the shower that needed a booster pump. Low spec kitchen. Hardly any storage. Development is kept very well and the location is great but 695k for that is scandalous especially when you can buy better for less around it. No surprise looking at the EA whos selling it though

Samuel T. Cogley

Yourself isit wrote: »

It's in no way reasonable. You bought at the top of the boom right?


Anyway what people don't get is that unlike 2006 when the dogs on the street could buy a house prices now exclude most people. The stats show that the median age of the ftb is 35. In ten years it will reflect the reality now that only 30% of young people can buy houses, present trends contuining.

Meanwhile a lot of people with skin in the property game will have died off.

We will have to decide whether we want a property owning democracy or not. If we do we need lower prices, which means more supply.

500K for 80Sqm in D2 or D4 is perfectly reasonable. If you want 100Sqm for 300K head on out to D5. Where exactly (given that planning is simply not going to change in the short term) do you propose they put large scale, price affecting supply in D2 and D4? The Poolbeg site is likely to have prices in this range for 2 and 3 beds; this is a waterfront penthouse apartment - quit the hyperbole on property owning democracy. Supply will be in the suburbs and while I agree affordable housing is key, that's simply not des res' in the centre of a capital city.

Quite agree on the spec though - not good.

Idbatterim

Lumen wrote: »

Google: alison o riordan apartment

Probably the the best thread I've ever read on boards.ie and that's saying something!

Idbatterim

I've just taken a look at that 695k apartment. L O f**king L! I hope it's a cash buyer, this is the kind of **** that will cost us a fortune if Nama 2 ever transpires!!!

trobbin

Idbatterim wrote: »

I've just taken a look at that 695k apartment. L O f**king L! I hope it's a cash buyer, this is the kind of **** that will cost us a fortune if Nama 2 ever transpires!!!

I'm thinking the same. But make no mistake, this is a credit bubble.

Cyrus

trobbin wrote: »

I'm thinking the same. But make no mistake, this is a credit bubble.

A credit bubble ?

Do tell

thierry14

Lumen wrote: »

Google: alison o riordan apartment

What's her apartment worth now I wonder?

Yourself isit

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

500K for 80Sqm in D2 or D4 is perfectly reasonable. If you want 100Sqm for 300K head on out to D5. Where exactly (given that planning is simply not going to change in the short term) do you propose they put large scale, price affecting supply in D2 and D4? The Poolbeg site is likely to have prices in this range for 2 and 3 beds; this is a waterfront penthouse apartment - quit the hyperbole on property owning democracy. Supply will be in the suburbs and while I agree affordable housing is key, that's simply not des res' in the centre of a capital city.

Quite agree on the spec though - not good.

No no no. It's not reasonable for 80m2 in a tiny city on a damp island of the coast of Europe. That "badly specced" appartment will be unsellable when the wheels come off. It can't be a "forever" home.

trobbin

thierry14 wrote: »

What's her apartment worth now I wonder?

That's a good point. It's probably worth as much now, maybe even more.

B00MSTICK

trobbin wrote: »

That's a good point. It's probably worth as much now, maybe even more.

Probably not hers, but similar - http://www.daft.ie/dublin/apartments-for-sale/hanover-quay/31-the-waterfront-grand-canal-dock-hanover-quay-dublin-1416653/

Scott Gibbs

Look at the fundamentals running into the last crash:

- Cheap credit (not present now)

- 100% mortgages (not present now)

- Excess supply (there is now a property shortage)

- Too many properties being built (now there are too few being built)

- Ridiculously low rental yield (yield are now high)

- A collapsing economy (the economy is now robust)

- Easy to generate a positive rate of return on deposits (now people are being compelled to invest in things like property, thus creating more demand)

Because we've come through a crash, everyone thinks they're an expert. The last crash was obvious and should have been seen coming a mile off. At the moment, there is no prospect of a crash.

Yourself isit

Scott Gibbs wrote: »

Look at the fundamentals running into the last crash:

- Cheap credit (not present now)

- 100% mortgages (not present now)

- Excess supply (there is now a property shortage)

- Too many properties being built (now there are too few being built)

- Ridiculously low rental yield (yield are now high)

- A collapsing economy (the economy is now robust)

- Easy to generate a positive rate of return on deposits (now people are being compelled to invest in things like property, thus creating more demand)

Because we've come through a crash, everyone thinks they're an expert. The last crash was obvious and should have been seen coming a mile off. At the moment, there is no prospect of a crash.

The last boom just had different reasons for the crash.

Also the economy was robust until the housing market collapsed.

Cyrus

Scott Gibbs wrote: »

Because we've come through a crash, everyone thinks they're an expert. The last crash was obvious and should have been seen coming a mile off. At the moment, there is no prospect of a crash.

This

Any correction in Dublin property is a long way off

If there was a crash imminent every tom dick and harry on internet forums wouldn't be calling it

trobbin

Scott Gibbs wrote: »

Look at the fundamentals running into the last crash:

- Cheap credit (not present now)

- 100% mortgages (not present now)

- Excess supply (there is now a property shortage)

- Too many properties being built (now there are too few being built)

- Ridiculously low rental yield (yield are now high)

- A collapsing economy (the economy is now robust)

- Easy to generate a positive rate of return on deposits (now people are being compelled to invest in things like property, thus creating more demand)

Because we've come through a crash, everyone thinks they're an expert. The last crash was obvious and should have been seen coming a mile off. At the moment, there is no prospect of a crash.

I completely disagree with all your points. Now everything you're saying is coming straight from what the media is telling you.

No cheap credit? Biggest thing people would agree with is that 100% mortgages no longer exist, but they're wrong. They aren't been advertised, but they exist.

Anyway here's a link to one of hundreds of threads on boards from 2006.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=52551587

Remember people argued the same points as you are now back then. Apparently there was a huge housing shortage back then, as there is now. But what that really means is (affordable houses) it's gone!

My sister recently had to get a mortgage, asked for 250k to build on some of the family land. Bank went ahead and approved her and the hubby for 450k after they applied for 250." Just in case you need it, it's easier than re applying "

Yourself isit

Cyrus wrote: »

This

Any correction in Dublin property is a long way off

If there was a crash imminent every tom dick and harry on internet forums wouldn't be calling it

Yes the experts and smart money would be calling it. Like in 2006.


Oh wait...

listermint

Yourself isit wrote: »

Yes the experts and smart money would be calling it. Like in 2006.


Oh wait...

Look man you are wrong. The property supplements in the newspaper everyweek show it's a no brainer , up up up.

Samuel T. Cogley

On credit - it's not a bubble per se but I'd say its pretty sensative to rate increases.

bmwguy

I bought my house for 220k in 2010. It was 370k in 2007 when i looked first but I didnt go ahead with the purchase it was just too much money. I was mortgage approved but I didn't feel right about the market. The crash came, houses were taken off the market and i missed my chance to owe the bank 370k. It would have been almost 9 times salary which would have been madness. They would have given me 100% too.

When 2010 came around it was about 4 times salary and I needed to put in 10% myself. Same broker, same bank but I got approved with 1 payslip, no p60, no bank statements. In 2010 after the crash they still hadn't learned their lesson.

Now fast forward to 2016 and my brother has bought a near identical property with his partner. The hoops they had to jump through to borrow exactly 3.5 times joint income was a very different experience that I had. He bought just as the HTB was brought in but before it added to the inflation by stimulating demand, not supply as the government said it would! His house was 25% more expensive than mine although mine did drop about 10% to 2012 when it started to rise. So in 4 years the inflation in house prices was about 35% or 8.75 % a year which is unsustainable.

They have risen 20k since end of 2016 due to HTB bringing average price rises of close to 10% p.a. over 5 years 2012 to 2017. Unsustainable.
What were the annual % price rises 2000-2007 can anyone remember?

Will there be a crash? Despite what I said I don't think so this time I felt it coming last time. It was an unpopular opinion I had back 10 years ago I was treated with a bit of negativity when I suggested it. Once the banks stick to lending rules and not bend them people will only pay what the natural market dictates. HTB will be phased out as well I predict.

Graham

Yourself isit wrote: »

No no no. It's not reasonable for 80m2 in a tiny city on a damp island of the coast of Europe.

The property s overpriced because weather

Ignoring the fact it's a penthouse in the middle of a thriving European capital city with great demand and limited supply.

Cyrus

Yourself isit wrote: »

Yes the experts and smart money would be calling it. Like in 2006.


Oh wait...

Experts and smart money ? What are you talking about

bmwguy

Graham wrote: »

The property s overpriced because weather

Ignoring the fact it's a penthouse in the middle of a thriving European capital city with great demand and limited supply.

Yes no point in bashing Ireland or Dublin it's thriving as you say. House prices are, after all, a function of the wages that can be earned by living there. Some anomalies here and there (i can't reconcile price differences between some different suburbs of Dublin for example) but overall, without bank and government meddling prices will reflect supply, demand and wages.

Cyrus

trobbin wrote: »

No cheap credit? Biggest thing people would agree with is that 100% mortgages no longer exist, but they're wrong. They aren't been advertised, but they exist.

The amount of people being granted 100% mortgages over the past 5 years must be less than 1% most people I know borrowing less than 80% as they had been saving for so long

Also the 450k foisted on your sister what kind of multiple of their combined earnings was it and how much equity did she have

I recently applied for mortgage approval, not a first time buyer & have a large deposit.
3 different banks, 3 different amounts, from 200k, 275k & 325k.
Same Central Bank rules?
Seems some rules can still be bent.
( all the above were an exemption to the 3.5 salary rule, but wildly different amounts)
If others are like me, that's got to be driving prices up

mloc123

bubblypop wrote: »

I recently applied for mortgage approval, not a first time buyer & have a large deposit.
3 different banks, 3 different amounts, from 200k, 275k & 325k.
Same Central Bank rules?
Seems some rules can still be bent.
( all the above were an exemption to the 3.5 salary rule, but wildly different amounts)
If others are like me, that's got to be driving prices up

Yes, the rules can be bent... In 15% (or 20%?) Of all applications, that is no secret.

mloc123

mloc123 wrote: »

Yes, the rules can be bent... In 15% (or 20%?) Of all applications, that is no secret.

Oh yeah, I know they can be, but wouldn't you think that most banks would be bending them to the same degree?
Just seemed strange to me to have such a wild difference in the amounts they would let me borrow

myshirt

bubblypop wrote: »

Oh yeah, I know they can be, but wouldn't you think that most banks would be bending them to the same degree?
Just seemed strange to me to have such a wild difference in the amounts they would let me borrow

You're likely on 70k plus for a single salary. That's the difference. They won't do it for lower incomes. So nothing too strange.