Irish Property Market 2020 Part 2

fliball123

Hubertj wrote: »

I'm very surprised that someone with too much time on their hands hasn't investigated this. We all know of vacant units in the ovepriced developments in Grand Canal and Ballsbridge. So even if CSO is way off for various reasons, lets say 100k "Vacant units". It must be pretty difficult to hide that many. Why hasn't some PBP clown done a Sherlock on it?

I raised this with props why aren't the current government saying this as SF are currently rising in popularity stating we have not got enough housing to house our people and as you say people before profit would be all over this like a bloody rash if it were the case that over 100k property was lying vacant and was available for use.

Marius34

PropQueries wrote: »

As I already said:

"We would only find out how much if such a tax (without loopholes) was introduced as international funds still like to stay on the right side of the law.

Yes, I used 'maybe' as those purchases made between 2012 and 2016 are still shrouded in secrecy."

You said previously that it easily with solve Census vacancy problem, but on other side you have no any knowledge or read anywhere about those funds vacancy.

I'm confident those type of Census checks will always be very high, as the history tells.
Is GeoDirectory vacancy wrong, since its massively difference from CSO census?

cnocbui

I would have thought that collating data from energy providers would be one way to investigate this empty property phenomenon.

hometruths

fliball123 wrote: »

Yet they still dont understand supply vs demand = price I have accepted that demand may come down but it will have to keep pace with the supply side to see any drops in price.

You sure nailed apples, but in the context of a housing market you have a bit of a struggle understanding supply and demand yourself.

fliball123 wrote: »

As in if I have 10 apples and 10 people want to buy then the price is set, if 5 people no longer want an apple then the price drops but if we take 5 apples out then the price reset to what it was.

According to this year on year to end of September, national prices and Dublin prices are lower
https://bl.ocks.org/pinsterdev/raw/98d5baa18a1bc6d603e0/

fliball123 wrote: »

9/10 months on and still no price drop. Yet schmittle will come on and with no proof say prices are dropping even do both CSO and PPR confirms he is full of hot air.

I may well be full of hot air, but neither you or the PPR are confirming it.

As for the CSO, you can't trust a thing they say, rudimentary amateurs.

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

I'm very surprised that someone with too much time on their hands hasn't investigated this. We all know of vacant units in the ovepriced developments in Grand Canal and Ballsbridge. So even if CSO is way off for various reasons, lets say 100k "Vacant units". It must be pretty difficult to hide that many. Why hasn't some PBP clown done a Sherlock on it?

Yep, I'm a bit surprised too.

PropQueries

Marius34 wrote: »

You said previously that it easily with solve Census vacancy problem, but on other side you have no any knowledge or read anywhere about those funds vacancy.

I'm confident those type of Census checks will always be very high, as the history tells.
Is GeoDirectory vacancy wrong, since its massively difference from CSO census?

Well, whether it's c. 180,000 in Q2 2016 as per Census 2016 or c. 90,000 in Q2 2020 as per the GeoDirectory survey as you mentioned. Either way, if I was investing in property, I would like to know who owns them.

Remember, they don't have to sell them in mass to move the market prices or rents. They could, just as easily, approach the government and ask them to rent or buy them.

They could easily approach the Government and say they have 20,000 units here, ready to go. Want to rent or buy them for social housing? Straight away, you have 20,000 homes that were previously rented to tenants on HAP etc. losing their tenant and having to re-enter the market with no Government back-stop i.e. HAP, which has been keeping rents artificially high for the past 4 years.

Such an action by the funds would just as easily move the market prices or rents as selling them in mass.

Marius34

cnocbui wrote: »

I would have thought that collating data from energy providers would be one way to investigate this empty property phenomenon.

I would think the same, but it seems it's works in opposite, many companies including Energy companies using their data.
It's quite new, but it's getting popular for companies as source data for Residential and Commercial properties. As well probably due to constant update of the data

PropQueries

Marius34 wrote: »

I would think the same, but it seems it's works in opposite, many companies including Energy companies using their data.
It's quite new, but it's getting popular for companies as source data for Residential and Commercial properties.

They used to calculate the vacant homes by using the ESB connections until 2016/2017. Then the opposition gave out stating that the Government at the time was using them to inflate the house building figures.

I agree though. I always thought the ESB connections were a more reliable measure of new supply (new builds and previously vacant stock) entering the market.

fliball123

schmittel wrote: »

You sure nailed apples, but in the context of a housing market you have a bit of a struggle understanding supply and demand yourself.



According this year on year to end of September, national prices and Dublin prices are lower
https://bl.ocks.org/pinsterdev/raw/98d5baa18a1bc6d603e0/



I may well be full of hot air, but neither you or the PPR are confirming it.

As for the CSO, you can't trust a thing they say, rudimentary amateurs.

You don't understand anything you keep telling people not to buy due to the innate want you have for prices to drop for months now you have been spouting prices have dropped during the recession and used a drop in an asking price here and there to back up your dumb ass theories I have put up the CSO and PPR data over and over and do I need to do it again to prove you wrong. I have always said prices may drop and I am on record here as saying I think they will drop by about 5% or so in the next 18 months or so but the difference between you and me and even if I am wrong in my assumptions of prices going up or down I have never gone out of my way to tell a poster on here to buy or not buy. As for apples when I am dealing with someone who has a lesser intellect I feel like I have to explain it to you like your a 5 year old.

Marius34

PropQueries wrote: »

Well, whether it's c. 180,000 in Q2 2016 as per Census 2016 or c. 90,000 in Q2 2020 as per the GeoDirectory survey as you mentioned. Either way, if I was investing in property, I would like to know who owns them.

over 90.000 in difference! So you don't know if its Census right or GeoDirectory, but you keep sharing Census as a factual numbers?
Over 90.000, not big deal, as long as it's large number, it suits you?

hometruths

fliball123 wrote: »

You don't understand anything you keep telling people not to buy due to the innate want you have for prices to drop for months now you have been spouting prices have dropped during the recession and used a drop in an asking price here and there to back up your dumb ass theories I have put up the CSO and PPR data over and over and do I need to do it again to prove you wrong. I have always said prices may drop and I am on record here as saying I think they will drop by about 5% or so in the next 18 months or so but the difference between you and me and even if I am wrong in my assumptions of prices going up or down I have never gone out of my way to tell a poster on here to buy or not buy. As for apples when I am dealing with someone who has a lesser intellect I feel like I have to explain it to you like your a 5 year old.

All of the above is verifiably false.

Except for the comment that I have a lesser intellect than you. It's not verifiable from what we have posted on here, but of course that's possible. I couldn't possibly comment.

fliball123

schmittel wrote: »

All of the above is verifiably false.

Except for the comment that I have a lesser intellect than you. It's not verifiable from what we have posted on here, but of course that's possible. I couldn't possibly comment.

Your starting to sound like trump there fake news your the comical Ali of boards. Sure if anyone wants to have a look at your vested interest and the amount of times you were proven wrong on price drops all they have to do is look back at your posts and see how many times you were corrected by other posters who had actual fact backing up their claims

hometruths

fliball123 wrote: »

Your starting to sound like trump there fake news your the comical Ali of boards. Sure if anyone wants to have a look at your vested interest and the amount of times you were proven wrong on price drops all they have to do is look back at your posts and see how many times you were corrected by other posters who had actual fact backing up their claims

Ok, I'll bite.

fliball123 wrote: »

You don't understand anything you keep telling people not to buy due to the innate want you have for prices to drop for months now you have been spouting prices have dropped during the recession and used a drop in an asking price here and there to back up your dumb ass theories I have put up the CSO and PPR data over and over and do I need to do it again to prove you wrong.

When I have ever specifically advised people not to buy? Link?
When have I ever said prices have dropped during the recession and used a drop in an asking price here and there to back up my dumb ass theories Link?

The big difference between you and me, is I have never resorted to personal abuse with you, and always attacked the post and not the poster. You have been warned about this before.

PropQueries

Marius34 wrote: »

over 90.000 in difference! So you don't know if its Census right or GeoDirectory, but you keep sharing Census as a factual numbers?
Over 90.000, not big deal, as long as it's large number, it suits you?

I believe I normally post both when discussing it and ask people to pick whichever figure they wish.

Yes, they are 4 years apart. But, still, 90,000 is, in my opinion, a big deal. To put the figure into perspective, England with 10 times our population had only 216,000 vacant homes in 2018.

And yes, I would be interested in large numbers. It matters given how small our country and our economy is. Same with our public debt. Pre-covid, it was the third highest in the world on a per capita basis. Only the USA and Japan were ahead of us. And, remember, the USA and Japanese debt is in their own currency so they can literally print their debt away.

Technically we can too, with ECB approval. Our debt is in euro, which, given the amount of control we have over it, our debt might as well be in dollars, sterling or yen.

MacronvFrugals

Wasnt there someone on here saying they're buying shares in IRES a few weeks ago lol now thats someone with a very identifiable vested interest in the housing market.

KnowingWind

Im wondering has anyone's opinion been changing as the outlook for covid has changed.
I mean when this first started many thought it could have blown over by now.
It now seems it could get worse before it gets better, which of course will effect economy.

There could be more houses coming on the market.
e.g. investor properties not getting rent. Dying older people. At some point some people are going to struggle paying mortgages. Hopefully people will be removed from such properties quicker this time around then last recession. Of course give some leeway but not too much.

PropQueries

Timing belt wrote: »

WFH may not an option for most of these properties due to very poor WIFI connections.

The states program for connecting every home in the country to fast broadband is actually progressing a lot faster than many people believe. Every home will be connected within the next 7 years and they're already further along than many people realise.

cnocbui

Timing belt wrote: »

WFH may not an option for most of these properties due to very poor WIFI connections.

Rural internet speeds have improved considerably for many properties. I have gone from about 6 Mbps to 150, and I could get 1000 if I wanted to pay a bit more, and there is grass growing up the middle of the road I am on.

cnocbui

PropQueries wrote: »

The states program for connecting every home in the country to fast broadband is actually progressing a lot faster than many people believe. Every home will be connected within the next 7 years and they're already further along than many people realise.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/22/irelands-rural-broadband-plan-is-3-years-ahead-of-schedule-mccourt.html

MacronvFrugals

PropQueries wrote: »

The states program for connecting every home in the country to fast broadband is actually progressing a lot faster than many people believe. Every home will be connected within the next 7 years and they're already further along than many people realise.

You've more faith in this than me, they're cheaping out on some aspects which could cause bandwidth issues especially with more users than expected.

Marius34

Timing belt wrote: »

WFH may not an option for most of these properties due to very poor WIFI connections.

I believe there are many reasons why "Office people" will not move to vacant homes in country side.
They are typically in bad conditions, very cold with very low BER ratings, cost lots of money to renovate them. You want some comfort at home. You want facilities around. You don't want every morning and evening to travel 10km to bring your kids to kindergarten or secondary school. Or travel 10km to get a milk for your breakfast coffee or something

cnocbui

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

You've more faith in this than me, they're cheaping out on some aspects which could cause bandwidth issues especially with more users than expected.

Such as?

Australia recently screwed the pooch totally in this regard, but I am not aware of Ireland getting it wrong.

Rossvet

Won't many of these "office people" be already living in houses and commuting to jobs in City centres?

MacronvFrugals

cnocbui wrote: »

Such as?

Australia recently screwed the pooch totally in this regard, but I am not aware of Ireland getting it wrong.

From what i understand they're relying on cellular for a decent part of it when imo it should be all fibre.

Then theres the ownership structure which is meh to say the least, we're paying all this money and wont even own the infra.

Hubertj

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

From what i understand they're relying on cellular for a decent part of it when imo it should be all fibre.

Then theres the ownership structure which is meh to say the least, we're paying all this money and wont even own the infra.

I don't think wireless is being considered due to the densification requirements to make it work. I may be open to correction on this but i believe the wireless suggestion was also rejected due to the 5g link to Covid. Added to that, the possibility of using Microsoft Data Centres for Telco cloud was a no go considering Bill Gates being responsible for the development of the virus

MacronvFrugals

Hubertj wrote: »

I don't think wireless is being considered due to the densification requirements to make it work. I may be open to correction on this but i believe the wireless suggestion was also rejected due to the 5g link to Covid. Added to that, the possibility of using Microsoft Data Centres for Telco cloud was a no go considering Bill Gates being responsible for the development of the virus

Thanks Hub i thought the cellular to fill gaps was still on the table, are they going with fibre>copper to the last mile?

hometruths

Pelezico wrote: »

This surely evidence of a strong housing market. Remarkable in the face of the deepest recession of tge last 100 years.

PropQueries wrote: »

The same report states "However, we estimate transaction volumes through July and August were still down 37%" compared to Q3 2019.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Prices kept going up even with less buyers and less bidders. That means strong confidence

Surprisingly enough I have an alternative theory to the strong confidence in the market one!

As most of us realize the supply and demand demand dynamics of buying houses are different from that of most other purchasing decisions, for example, buying apples.

Nobody has to save for a deposit to buy an apple, nor are they constrained by their income limits as to the quality of apple they can buy, nor are they worried that their ability to access the apple market might have gone this next time years.

That’s because the vast majority of people who buy apples are cash buyers and as far as apples are concerned all buyers are equal.

As far as housing is concerned all buyers are not equal. The strongest buyers tend to be cash buyers, the weakest tend to be FTBers.

In today’s housing market, evidence seems to suggest that Transaction volumes are dropping, % of cash buyers vs mortgage buyers is dropping, and the number of FTBers as % of mortgage buyers is rising.

In other words the strongest buyers are leaving the market, and the weakest buyers are panic buying. The forced buyers are currently sustaining prices. this is not market confidence, they are buying because they feel they have to do so now.

It may last forever, it may not. Who knows.

The_Conductor

PropQueries wrote: »

IRES REIT is the primary one who is public and must inform investors of vacancy rates. But, they have mastered the art of renting to the state.

There was a documentary on RTE about one of their new built housing estates in Dublin 15 a couple of years ago if anyone can find the link to it. I think nearly all were rented to the state at c. €2,400 per month and the tenants were shocked when they learned of the rent. It was an interesting watch at the time.

If that is the case- it would seem that the State is the one paying top dollar for rental properties- and is actively setting the standard for all private sector tenants.

I sincerely hope that if this is the case- that the State cops the hell on, and pays a more reasonable rate- so rents float downwards for ordinary tenants who actually pay their own rent.

Hubertj

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

Thanks Hub i thought the cellular to fill gaps was still on the table, are they going with fibre>copper to the last mile?

I’d have to ask 1 of the geeks in work to answer that properly. Mmwave, base stations, blah blah

hometruths

The_Conductor wrote: »

If that is the case- it would seem that the State is the one paying top dollar for rental properties- and is actively setting the standard for all private sector tenants.

I sincerely hope that if this is the case- that the State cops the hell on, and pays a more reasonable rate- so rents float downwards for ordinary tenants who actually pay their own rent.

This is a very important point.

Various government policies and actions/inactions have incentivized property owners to keep them vacant (or disincentivised them from having them occupied).

This in turn creates shortages and pushes up rents, forcing the government into long term leases at high rents with landlords - thereby creating a floor on rents.

This is will continue until the government recognizes that their policies are causing the vacancies, thus the shortage, thus the rent increases.

As you say, they need to cop the hell on. But will they?!