2021 Irish Property Market chat - *mod warnings post 1*

Timing belt

schmittel wrote: »

The Sinn Fein policy is actually a pretty good one to be fair. There are two conditions attached:



So basically if affordability is your biggest concern, buy a house in this scheme. Happy days.

If investment is more of a factor and you're looking for income or capital gains, then sorry this is not for you. Fair enough.

FGs attacks on it shows their mindset that they see rising property prices as the only game in town and compounding the current problems.

SFs policy has the wisdom of taking a longer term view by trying to create a subsector in the market of affordable properties that will be available for people facing the same problem in 5, 10 or 15 years time.

This is an altogether better approach.

How does this policy differ from the building of large scale council estates that the populist don’t want anymore as they say they only lead to ghettos. The building of large scale council estates solved previous housing crises but it is no longer an option or is it under SF policy just with a bit of glitter to make it more attractive.

Mad_maxx

PropQueries wrote: »

Just looking at the share prices of the companies with most (all?) exposure to the Irish property market:

Cairn Homes: Today = €1.09 vs Jan 2018 = €2.00

Glenveagh: Today = €0.90 vs Jan 2018 = €1.26

Irish Reit: Today = €1.57 vs Dec. 2019 = €1.83

Hibernian Reit: Today = €1.15 vs May 2018 = €1.57

While Hibernian Reit (primarily office based investments) can be explained, why have the other three (primarily residential investments and primarily invested in the Greater Dublin region) moved in the opposite direction to what is both the public's perception and what the most recent data appears to show in relation to the movement of property prices in the Irish residential market?

Genuinely not a loaded question. Seems like one of the buys of the decade if someone is on the bullish side IMO

Even if someone believes the current low prices are down to the fact that share prices move according to international sentiment, they really should appear like a buy if someone believes that the Irish property market can indeed only go one way, rent or selling wise, going forward IMO

the REIT,s have never tracked the property market to any sort of accurate degree , they arent really a way to invest in property at all , they just have a property sounding name and pay a solid dividend and this is marketed as another form of rent

hometruths

Timing belt wrote: »

How does this policy differ from the building of large scale council estates that the populist don’t want anymore as they say they only lead to ghettos. The building of large scale council estates solved previous housing crises but it is no longer an option or is it under SF policy just with a bit of glitter to make it more attractive.

The difference that leaps out is the fact the houses being are being sold for in excess of 200k.

However they envisage delivering it they are unlikely to be filled with dole scroungers.

Yurt2

Mad_maxx wrote: »

why New Zealand may i ask ?

they do have a much more pro workers taxation code , is it purely down to this ?

He's in for a land if he attempts to buy property in proximity any of the cities in NZ. Their housing crisis is an order of magnitude worse than ours, and he'll find himself on boards.nz arguing the toss about what is and isn't affordable there as well; perhaps on the other side of the equation as the proceeds of his buy-to-lets can't buy him a dunny in Upper Hutt.

Timing belt

schmittel wrote: »

The difference that leaps out is the fact the houses being are being sold for in excess of 200k.

However they envisage delivering it they are unlikely to be filled with dole scroungers.

Council houses in the past were not totally filled with dole scroungers but with people on lower incomes.. I get the fact that people will buy so should have more respect for their properties and neighbourhoods but an area with 'Affordable houses' will have the same stigma attached than council estates did previously. That is not me saying that people should look down on them, it is just saying that I don't see how it is different. If FF/FG/G started building big council estates tomorrow to house people in HAP Rent prices would fall and houses would become more affordable of the back of this but there would be a massive outcry that council estates lead to ghettos and needs to be avoided at all costs.

Mad_maxx

Yurt! wrote: »

He's in for a land if he attempts to buy property in proximity any of the cities in NZ. Their housing crisis is an order of magnitude worse than ours, and he'll find himself on boards.nz arguing the toss about what is and isn't affordable there as well; perhaps on the other side of the equation the proceeds of his buy-to-lets can't buy him a dunny in Upper Hutt.

ive lived and worked in NZ though years and years before the property market went nuts , it is indeed much more expensive to buy property down there and the standards in NZ are truly awful relative to Ireland , houses are like glorified barns in many places

L1011

Timing belt wrote: »

Council houses in the past were not totally filled with dole scroungers but with people on lower incomes..

Nothing has changed here - the majority of people in social housing are in employment.

hometruths

Timing belt wrote: »

Council houses in the past were not totally filled with dole scroungers but with people on lower incomes.. I get the fact that people will buy so should have more respect for their properties and neighbourhoods but an area with 'Affordable houses' will have the same stigma attached than council estates did previously. That is not me saying that people should look down on them, it is just saying that I don't see how it is different. If FF/FG/G started building big council estates tomorrow to house people in HAP Rent prices would fall and houses would become more affordable of the back of this but there would be a massive outcry that council estates lead to ghettos and needs to be avoided at all costs.

Building an estate of houses and selling them to people who qualify for mortgages of circa 200k is different to building an estate of houses and giving them to people who qualify for a free house.

A bit silly to suggest otherwise. IMO.

Yurt2

Timing belt wrote: »

Council houses in the past were not totally filled with dole scroungers but with people on lower incomes.. I get the fact that people will buy so should have more respect for their properties and neighbourhoods but an area with 'Affordable houses' will have the same stigma attached than council estates did previously. That is not me saying that people should look down on them, it is just saying that I don't see how it is different. If FF/FG/G started building big council estates tomorrow to house people in HAP Rent prices would fall and houses would become more affordable of the back of this but there would be a massive outcry that council estates lead to ghettos and needs to be avoided at all costs.

It scrambles some Irish folks brains the whole concept of affordable housing. In many people's imagination, there are only two types of housing possible: Social housing filled with Margret Cash clones strung-out on heroin, and mortgaged private housing filled with the self-styled brave industrious and long-suffering Paddy everyman who holds up the sky - and nothing in-between.

Any stigma is a stigma of ignorance.

Affordable housing projects delivered at scale have the real potential to break the back on the housing crisis and alleviate what would otherwise become a decade after decade quality of life and social crisis.

Timing belt

schmittel wrote: »

Building an estate of houses and selling them to people who qualify for mortgages of circa 200k is different to building an estate of houses and giving them to people who qualify for a free house.

A bit silly to suggest otherwise. IMO.

Council house were rented by the tenant and later offered for sale at a affordable price.... they were not free houses given away.

hometruths

Timing belt wrote: »

Council house were rented by the tenant and later offered for sale at a affordable price.... they were not free houses given away.

Good point. I now realize you’re totally correct. This scheme is no different to the council estates of yesteryear and will surely lead to large scale squalid ghettos.

jill_valentine

Am I imagining it or is it a new country every time

cnocbui

Yurt! wrote: »

It scrambles some Irish folks brains the whole concept of affordable housing. In many people's imagination, there are only two types of housing possible: Social housing filled with Margret Cash clones strung-out on heroin, and mortgaged private housing filled with the self-styled brave industrious and long-suffering Paddy everyman who holds up the sky - and nothing in-between.

Any stigma is a stigma of ignorance.

Affordable housing projects delivered at scale have the real potential to break the back on the housing crisis and alleviate what would otherwise become a decade after decade quality of life and social crisis.

All the government has to do is borrow a bit more and all fixed. Can't see any problems with that.

Yurt2

cnocbui wrote: »

All the government has to do is borrow a bit more and all fixed. Can't see any problems with that.

You're aware that affordable housing is purchased by individuals/couples via a private mortgage right?

cnocbui

Mad_maxx wrote: »

why New Zealand may i ask ?

they do have a much more pro workers taxation code , is it purely down to this ?

No, but taxation is a biggie, it being far less there. No CGT and no inheritance tax, for instance. But there are plenty of other factors. The government doesn't kow-tow to a church. It's health system isn't 3rd world level It has a modern, sensible legal system It's not run by dickheads. It's got a population about the same as Ireland but they manage to run constant government surplus' while taxing far less. It's warmer than Ireland, the weather is better and it's got double the annual hours of sunshine compared to where I am at the moment.

Then there's the spectacular geography with varied climes with not every square centimetre of land being fenced off and farmed. And it's got the southern night skies, which are far more spectacular than the northern hemisphere.

Yurt! wrote: »

He's in for a land if he attempts to buy property in proximity any of the cities in NZ. Their housing crisis is an order of magnitude worse than ours, and he'll find himself on boards.nz arguing the toss about what is and isn't affordable there as well; perhaps on the other side of the equation as the proceeds of his buy-to-lets can't buy him a dunny in Upper Hutt.

Thanks for the heads-up, I never thought to look into the housing market first. I'm good.

mcsean2163

bellylint wrote: »

just interested, where do you base/get that from? Would like to look into it more myself.

This was a talking point a while back. Places like luxury apartments in islandbridge empty.

Sbp free extract


Capital Dock: nearly half the 190 apartments in the 22-storey built-to-let tower in Dublin’s Docklands are vacant. Picture: Fergal Phillips.
Hundreds of luxury apartments lie vacant at two of Dublin’s most prominent rental blocks controlled by a billion-dollar US fund.

A detailed analysis of the Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) register by the Business Post has shown nearly four-fifths of the 246 apartments in phase three of Clancy Quay in Dublin 8 are empty.

Nearly half of the apartments in Capital Dock, a 190-apartment, 22-storey built-to-let tower in Dublin’s Docklands are also vacant..

cnocbui

How much of that emptiness is due to the previous occupants working in tech and returning to their home countries to WFH?

PropQueries

cnocbui wrote: »

How much of that emptiness is due to the previous occupants working in tech and returning to their home countries to WFH?

Many people living in Dublin noticed this phenomenon over the past 3 or more years and the media eventually picked up on it. According to the Sunday Business Post on the 23rd February 2020 (pre-covid): "The luxury gap: hundreds of high-end apartments lying empty across Dublin. Unoccupied units at upmarket rental apartment schemes in the capital are compared to boomtime ‘ghost estates’ by critics."

Link to SBP article here: https://www.businesspost.ie/ireland/the-luxury-gap-hundreds-of-high-end-apartments-lying-empty-across-dublin-ac7da06c

PropQueries

According to mortgage broker Michael Dowling of Dowling Financial:

“Every lender is now refusing applications from people whose employer is using the EWSS scheme, even when they themselves are not on it. Absolutely every one of the banks. If the employer is using it there is an automatic assumption the company is going to fail. It is very unfair.”

However, according to the article, most banks are denying blocking home loans due to the subsidy scheme. There's c. 40,000 companies using the scheme and it covers c. 300,000 employees.

Anyone know which story is closer to the truth i.e. the broker or the banks side? The broker is fairly adamant.

Link to article in Irish Independent here: https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/broker-says-lenders-are-using-wage-subsidy-scheme-to-refuse-mortgages-40196093.html

PropQueries

Another report out from the SCSI on the cost of rebuilding a home. They now put it at:

"The Society of Chartered Surveyors in Ireland (SCSI) has published its latest guide to rebuilding costs, which shows the cost of rebuilding an average three-bed semi ranges from €218,000 in Dublin to €140,000 in the northwest."

What accounts for the near €80k difference between Dublin and the North-West? And, it's not higher-specs as they're the exact same 3-bed semi and they're both near enough A1/A2 rebuilds.

I still don't buy the story that the construction wage premium in Dublin can possibly bridge that difference in cost IMO

Link to article in Irish Independent here: https://www.irishtimes.com/business/construction/rebuilding-costs-rise-due-to-energy-standards-and-cost-of-materials-1.4510134

Cyrus

PropQueries wrote: »

Another report out from the SCSI on the cost of rebuilding a home. They now put it at:

"The Society of Chartered Surveyors in Ireland (SCSI) has published its latest guide to rebuilding costs, which shows the cost of rebuilding an average three-bed semi ranges from €218,000 in Dublin to €140,000 in the northwest."

What accounts for the near €80k difference between Dublin and the North-West? And, it's not higher-specs as they're the exact same 3-bed semi and they're both near enough A1/A2 rebuilds.

I still don't buy the story that the construction wage premium in Dublin can possibly bridge that difference in cost IMO

Link to article in Irish Independent here: https://www.irishtimes.com/business/construction/rebuilding-costs-rise-due-to-energy-standards-and-cost-of-materials-1.4510134

Probably better direct the question to them ?

Cyrus

Yurt! wrote: »

You're aware that affordable housing is purchased by individuals/couples via a private mortgage right?

They will have to build it before they can sell it and knowing our recent history of the state building anything it will very likely be sold at a loss

Cyrus

schmittel wrote: »

Good point. I now realize you’re totally correct. This scheme is no different to the council estates of yesteryear and will surely lead to large scale squalid ghettos.

I realise you are being facetious but it won’t be any different , however I do disagree that all council estates are squalid ghettos.

But this will have a risk of that for sure, and Sinn Fein will want to appeal to the non workers too unfortunately so
It won’t be quite as noble as it’s made out .

As an aside are stats available on the percentage of full time workers v social welfare recipients in social housing ?

hometruths

Cyrus wrote: »

I realise you are being facetious but it won’t be any different , however I do disagree that all council estates are squalid ghettos.

But this will have a risk of that for sure, and Sinn Fein will want to appeal to the non workers too unfortunately so
It won’t be quite as noble as it’s made out .

As an aside are stats available on the percentage of full time workers v social welfare recipients in social housing ?

SF can appeal to the non workers too with all the range of current schemes - council houses, long term leases, HAP etc etc.

One of the attractions of this scheme to me is that the number of eligible people for all of the above should be reduced. If the bank will give you a 200k mortgage then you should go down the affordable housing route not hold your hand out for HAP.

This should be a priority for future govts, whereas FF/FGs policy will increase the burden on these schemes.

No idea of stats available on % of full time workers v social welfare in social housing.

But I would be pretty confident that the % of full time workers with private mortgages is way higher than those on welfare with private mortgages.

johnnyskeleton

PropQueries wrote:

What accounts for the near €80k difference between Dublin and the North-West? And, it's not higher-specs as they're the exact same 3-bed semi and they're both near enough A1/A2 rebuilds.

I still don't buy the story that the construction wage premium in Dublin can possibly bridge that difference in cost IMO

It will be an average of the costs incurred so the Dublin price will be higher simply because people in Dublin will pay more. The builders charge more and have higher wages, they might pay higher prices for different materials and it may take longer to rebuild e.g. a terraced house on a narrow street vs a detached cottage on a decent sized plot.

But ultimately what determines it is that people in Dublin will pay more

PropQueries

schmittel wrote: »

SF can appeal to the non workers too with all the range of current schemes - council houses, long term leases, HAP etc etc.

One of the attractions of this scheme to me is that the number of eligible people for all of the above should be reduced. If the bank will give you a 200k mortgage then you should go down the affordable housing route not hold your hand out for HAP.

This should be a priority for future govts, whereas FF/FGs policy will increase the burden on these schemes.

No idea of stats available on % of full time workers v social welfare in social housing.

But I would be pretty confident that the % of full time workers with private mortgages is way higher than those on welfare with private mortgages.

Would be an interesting statistic from a general knowledge point of view.

But, either way, I think it's a meaningless debate in that these people need to be housed in any event.

It's one of the primary reasons why we're meant to pay taxes in this country i.e. take care of the disadvantaged. It's also the one group that needs to be taken care of as history can provide many examples of what happens if they're not taken care of. Call it 'protection money'

But the statistics do show one thing. They're not costing us as much as many appear to believe IMO

Wanderer78

PropQueries wrote:

But the statistics do show one thing. They're not costing us as much as many appear to believe IMO

Its a red herring, welfare claimants have very little to do with our housing issues, it's ultimately the actions of the fire sectors (finance, insurance and real estate), pushing up prices, and successive governments supporting these activities and their actions

JimmyVik

I see in the papers today that half of companies are saying they will have some sort of WFH when COVID is gone.
I wonder what "some sort of" means.

My company has "some sort of" WFH for the past few years. Certain people can WFH one to two days a week if they are able to.
If nothing else changes then the same amount of days will be done in the office as there were before. I now from being at interviews that they tend to offer people who state they want to work from home less than the ones who dont state it. HR seem to have the view that that person will settle for less if we give them 2 days a week from home as a favour.

Villa05

JimmyVik wrote:

I see in the papers today that half of companies are saying they will have some sort of WFH when COVID is gone. I wonder what "some sort of" means.

Mine have said a minimum of 2 days per week on site.
Whether the employer is the owner or paying rent on their premises will be a significant factor to the degree of wfh adoption

Cyrus

schmittel wrote: »

SF can appeal to the non workers too with all the range of current schemes - council houses, long term leases, HAP etc etc.

One of the attractions of this scheme to me is that the number of eligible people for all of the above should be reduced. If the bank will give you a 200k mortgage then you should go down the affordable housing route not hold your hand out for HAP.

This should be a priority for future govts, whereas FF/FGs policy will increase the burden on these schemes.

No idea of stats available on % of full time workers v social welfare in social housing.

But I would be pretty confident that the % of full time workers with private mortgages is way higher than those on welfare with private mortgages.

if thats the way its delivered i could support something like that, but do you believe if a sinn fein lead government starts building large estates in parts of the country that everyone will be getting a private mortage?

I doubt it.