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

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

Except, that I'm sharing what they say:
"In contrast to the low vacancy rates of the Greater Dublin Area, there is a different picture in the west of the country, with the three highest vacancy rates all found in Connacht"

https://www.geodirectory.ie/knowledge-centre/reports-blogs/geoview-residential-buildings-report-q2-2020#:~:text=GeoView%20Residential%20Buildings%20Report%20Q2%202020%20Highlights&text=In%20Dublin%20the%20decline%20in,a%20decrease%20in%20vacancy%20rates

Since you don't like what they say, it requires your explanation what it "means"

I do not have a like or dislike of what they say. I think that is the difference between you and I.

The rates are low compared to Connacht - thats what it means. But it is easier to understand why there is a higher % of vacancies in Connacht where demand is weak.

But the rates are undeniably high compared to what you'd expect in the highest demand centre with a housing shortage.

And oddly enough my post above on vacancies was in response to a poster saying people ignore where the vacancies are situated i.e they are in rural areas.

So I say ok, lets look at Dublin specifically. And you say?

What about Connacht?! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Bass Reeves

PropQueries wrote: »

Anyone know of the potential backlog in probate sales due to the covid restrictions and how fast they may be cleared?

Barry Cowen put the potential figure of such homes that could be entering probate each year at up to c. 26k in 2018 and even back then, his comments in the Dail were in relation to the significant backlog that existed at that stage and that the backlog was limiting the supply of such properties re-entering the market.

Could be a tsunami of such sales ready to re-enter the market in a relatively short period of time IMO. And, many would be in sought after, prime locations in our cities and towns.

So there is has been no house going through probate for the last 100 years

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

0.2% decrease nationally.

My point exactly.

Oddly enough my post above on vacancies was in response to a poster saying people ignore where the vacancies are situated i.e they are in rural areas.

So I say ok, lets look at Dublin specifically. And you say?

0.2% decrease nationally.

timmyntc

fliball123 wrote: »

Timmy
If we have more people living here via immigration it means we need more housing to house them

If we have had more births than deaths over the last 100 years it means we have need more housing as we have more people who need to live here.

I believe our population has grown by nearly 500k in the last decade and where people like yourself fall down is by not joining the dots and understanding that they all need somewhere to live. It can be renting, building, sharing, buying or looked after by the state

Now then what has the government been doing since SF started pointing the gun at them about housing. They started buying more and more property and renting from REITS/Vultures and even private landlords. Do you not think that our increase in population has had nothing to do with this?? along with covid and the impact on new builds slowing down this has not been the main reason for the scenario we are in.

So then you have REITS buying more and more property due to the state backed guaranteed high returns they will get. This in turn has taken supply away from FTBs and STBs

So immigration when it comes to housing is relevant. Its relevant as it skews the amount of property we need to have in the country. I cant understand how you cannot see this. Its pretty simple so i will break the equation down for you

More people = a need for more housing


so its not a nonsense argument

Yes but we were discussing the impact of second hand sales.

Immigration and its effect on demand is a whole other kettle of fish - of course I can see it. But its not relevant to what we were discussing, which is 2nd hand sales.
You stated that 2nd hand sales were a zero sum game which is false

PropQueries

Cyrus wrote: »

you will need a tsunami of some sort if your predictions are to come close to fruition

As Ronan Lyons pointed out today: "When there are fewer homes available to buy, prices increase. When there are between about 4,000 and 5,000 homes on the market, there is little pressure – up or down – on Dublin sale prices. And when there are lots of homes for sale – in some cases up to 7,000 – prices fall rapidly."

It doesn't take much of a previously unforeseen/unaccounted for supply of pre-existing housing to re-enter the market to turn the current situation upside down and to it very rapidly IMO

awec

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

Ronan Lyons writing in The Currency today, of the opinion that the extraordinary situation the past year in the housing market is likely to be a temporary state of affairs. Well, I don't think anyone would dispute that the price rises were unlikely to be sustainable given supply crashed while demand exploded, but it is interesting that his view is that the primary reason for the collapse in supply was due to second hand homes not being put on the market as opposed to construction being shuttered.

https://thecurrency.news/articles/46503/lockdown-liquidity-and-respite-for-homebuyers-what-the-data-tells-us-about-the-outlook-for-house-prices/



Now I see why Props talks of seeing big things happening in August - covid restrictions will be all but dusht at that stage and the floodgates of second hand homes hitting the market will be opened (let's not forget Brexit as well, minimal to no fallout)!

Interestingly the article talks about the importance of new housing being built continually to maintain a healthy market. Also mentions Ireland has consistently failed to do this for decades.

PropQueries has continually insisted we need no new properties, it was all an illusion and Ireland's problem has only ever been that we haven't taxed vacant properties enough. Given The Currency is seen as a reputable and impartial source by all on this forum, maybe we finally put this one to bed?

On another note, looking at new housing and second hand in isolation is not really possible. It is all interconnected. The supply of new builds will affect the supply of second hand. The closure of construction sites unquestionably had an effect on the supply of second hand houses for sale.

DataDude

timmyntc wrote: »

Yes but we were discussing the impact of second hand sales.

Immigration and its effect on demand is a whole other kettle of fish - of course I can see it. But its not relevant to what we were discussing, which is 2nd hand sales.
You stated that 2nd hand sales were a zero sum game which is false

One point which Ronan Lyons makes, even if it was a zero sum game (it isn't), it still provides liquidity to the housing market and more people find the "right home".

Also from a pure numbers perspective. If you have 100 people chasing 50 homes. 50% of people will miss out. If you add 100 sellers and 100 buyers into the mix (zero-sum game). You then have 200 people chasing 150 homes. Only 25% miss out.

The extra supply is helpful even if it was a zero sum game.

Bass Reeves

PropQueries wrote: »

As Ronan Lyons pointed out today: "When there are fewer homes available to buy, prices increase. When there are between about 4,000 and 5,000 homes on the market, there is little pressure – up or down – on Dublin sale prices. And when there are lots of homes for sale – in some cases up to 7,000 – prices fall rapidly."

It doesn't take much of a previously unforeseen/unaccounted for supply of pre-existing housing to re-enter the market to turn the current situation upside down and to it very rapidly IMO

One thing to remember in the 2004-8 boom moving was not an option. It was too risky to sell and then to buy I know of 2-3 people who were squeezed out of the market in that period. One couple ended up renting for 10 years before they could afford to buy again.

Building onto existing properties became the chosen option instead as you had more control of your budget. The gap between selling and rebuying became too much

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

Timmy
If we have more people living here via immigration it means we need more housing to house them

If we have had more births than deaths over the last 100 years it means we have need more housing as we have more people who need to live here.

I believe our population has grown by nearly 500k in the last decade and where people like yourself fall down is by not joining the dots and understanding that they all need somewhere to live. It can be renting, building, sharing, buying or looked after by the state

Now then what has the government been doing since SF started pointing the gun at them about housing. They started buying more and more property and renting from REITS/Vultures and even private landlords. Do you not think that our increase in population has had nothing to do with this?? along with covid and the impact on new builds slowing down this has not been the main reason for the scenario we are in.

So then you have REITS buying more and more property due to the state backed guaranteed high returns they will get. This in turn has taken supply away from FTBs and STBs

So immigration when it comes to housing is relevant. Its relevant as it skews the amount of property we need to have in the country. I cant understand how you cannot see this. Its pretty simple so i will break the equation down for you

More people = a need for more housing


so its not a nonsense argument

timmyntc wrote: »

Yes but we were discussing the impact of second hand sales.

Immigration and its effect on demand is a whole other kettle of fish - of course I can see it. But its not relevant to what we were discussing, which is 2nd hand sales.
You stated that 2nd hand sales were a zero sum game which is false

Did you not read the part that
More population = more housing.
More people coming into the country than leaving = more housing
More housing being snapped up by REITS / vulures and government mean less supply on the both the first and second hand market.

So it does feed into the second hand sales market. I tried to bring you along nice and slowly but you still dont get it.

The most common situation of someone selling a house will be someone puts a house on the market they sell it and then they also need to buy ergo one house into the 2nd hand supply chain and one house going out of the 2nd hand supply chain.

You have argued this is not correct by saying people will be downsizing and ignoring a lot of people went through a year of lockdown and are yearning for a bigger place. ( I made this move personally). So there will be alot of upsizing as well.

You have argued that people can sell and leave the country. I have shown you stats more people are coming in to the country to live than leaving. Meaning that for every person leaving there will at least one person coming in looking to be housed.

Props brought up executor sales and while people are dying they have always been dying but guess what 100 years we have had births out pace deaths. So demand has been upping for years now.

So the zero sum game on the 2nd hand market is not nonsense. I have pointed out what is wrong with your argument and while some here say it will be better to have more supply I agree it will but demand is not going down anytime soon.

PropQueries

awec wrote: »

Interestingly the article talks about the importance of new housing being built continually to maintain a healthy market. Also mentions Ireland has consistently failed to do this for decades.

PropQueries has continually insisted we need no new properties, it was all an illusion and Ireland's problem has only ever been that we haven't taxed vacant properties enough. Given The Currency is seen as a reputable and impartial source by all on this forum, maybe we finally put this one to bed?

On another note, looking at new housing and second hand in isolation is not really possible. It is all interconnected. The supply of new builds will affect the supply of second hand. The closure of construction sites unquestionably had an effect on the supply of second hand houses for sale.

So, we didn't have an over-supply of housing post-2008 crash?

And, outside the nonsense argument (my view on it) that c. 5,000 of these homes need to be knocked down every year due to obsolescence, I don't buy the argument all that over-supply from the last bust has been soaked up. Not including the c. 120k+ new homes we have built in the past 10 years.

My opinion (and, it's just my opinion) is that they're mostly owned/controlled by one fund or the other and we should see them re-enter the market on their exit.

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

I do not have a like or dislike of what they say. I think that is the difference between you and I.

The rates are low compared to Connacht - thats what it means. But it is easier to understand why there is a higher % of vacancies in Connacht where demand is weak.

But the rates are undeniably high compared to what you'd expect in the highest demand centre with a housing shortage.

And oddly enough my post above on vacancies was in response to a poster saying people ignore where the vacancies are situated i.e they are in rural areas.

So I say ok, lets look at Dublin specifically. And you say?

What about Connacht?! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

I had enough of your interpretation. There are written rules for Geodirectory. I'll stick with what it says, not what it means.
It's 1.6% vacancy for Dublin, which focus for long term, and they consider Dublin as low vacancy. Whereas Census over 6%, which is focus on the night of 24 April 2016, they can include it, regardless if person was away for 6 month, or 1 week.

fliball123

PropQueries wrote: »

So, we didn't have an over-supply of housing post-2008 crash?

And, outside the nonsense argument (my view on it) that c. 5,000 of these homes need to be knocked down every year due to obsolescence, I don't buy the argument all that over-supply from the last bust has been soaked up. Not including the c. 120k+ new homes we have built in the past 10 years.

My opinion (and, it's just my opinion) is that they're mostly owned/controlled by one fund or the other and we should see them re-enter the market on their exit.

Well your talking about 1/2 million rise in the population Props even by your 2.5 family sums there has been/is a lot of housing needed

hometruths

DataDude wrote: »

One point which Ronan Lyons makes, even if it was a zero sum game (it isn't), it still provides liquidity to the housing market and more people find the "right home".

Also from a pure numbers perspective. If you have 100 people chasing 50 homes. 50% of people will miss out. If you add 100 sellers and 100 buyers into the mix (zero-sum game). You then have 200 people chasing 150 homes. Only 25% miss out.

The extra supply is helpful even if it was a zero sum game.

Exactly, one of biggest problems is turnover of existing stock is at record lows, and it is another vicious circle.

GeoDirectory always used to report on the turnover rate of the market and would consistently comment that it was problematically low.

They suddenly stopped both the commentary and the reporting on turnover about the same time they changed their methodology of reporting vacancies.

The cynic in me has always wondered why.

DataDude

No idea on what the appropriate price is. But this is a serious house...I guess ideally you wouldn't want a Semi-D at €4.5m, but I'd put up with it.

https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/dunmara-strand-road-killiney-county-dublin/4499807

EDIT- I know it wouldn't fit with the style, and probably not even allowed if it's a protected structure. But with a view like this it nearly seems like a bit of a shame that there aren't more expansive views of the sea from Kitchen/Living Room/Bedrooms.

cnocbui

PropQueries wrote: »

As Ronan Lyons pointed out today: "When there are fewer homes available to buy, prices increase. When there are between about 4,000 and 5,000 homes on the market, there is little pressure – up or down – on Dublin sale prices. And when there are lots of homes for sale – in some cases up to 7,000 – prices fall rapidly."

It doesn't take much of a previously unforeseen/unaccounted for supply of pre-existing housing to re-enter the market to turn the current situation upside down and to it very rapidly IMO

Converting old uninsulated structures into something habitable and desirable by modern standards, is not something that can or will happen rapidly. There isn't the manpower to do it and the econimics may make it unjustifiable.

I have personally been in the position of thinking of rennovating an old stone building to modern standards, and concluded it wasn't worth the financial risk.

You are very quick to make light of very weighty issues. If you had some skin in the game, you mightn't be so forthcoming with your easy quick fixes.

timmyntc

fliball123 wrote: »

Did you not read the part that
More population = more housing.
More people coming into the country than leaving = more housing
More housing being snapped up by REITS / vulures and government mean less supply on the both the first and second hand market.

So it does feed into the second hand sales market. I tried to bring you along nice and slowly but you still dont get it.

The most common situation of someone selling a house will be someone puts a house on the market they sell it and then they also need to buy ergo one house into the 2nd hand supply chain and one house going out of the 2nd hand supply chain.

You have argued this is not correct by saying people will be downsizing and ignoring a lot of people went through a year of lockdown and are yearning for a bigger place. ( I made this move personally). So there will be alot of upsizing as well.

You have argued that people can sell and leave the country. I have shown you stats more people are coming in to the country to live than leaving. Meaning that for every person leaving there will at least one person coming in looking to be housed.

Props brought up executor sales and while people are dying they have always been dying but guess what 100 years we have had births out pace deaths. So demand has been upping for years now.

So the zero sum game on the 2nd hand market is not nonsense. I have pointed out what is wrong with your argument and while some here say it will be better to have more supply I agree it will but demand is not going down anytime soon.

This is the last I'm saying on this so as not to pollute the thread.

I dont think you understand what a zero-sum game is or isn't.
Immigration, it's impact on demand, and indigenous demand do not factor into the equation if you are trying to work out whether 2nd hand sales are a zero-sum game.

A zero-sum game would be when every 2nd hand house sold, the seller then buys a house. There is no net addition to property market because the 2nd hand seller is also a buyer. Of course I've highlighted various scenarios that show why this isn't strictly the case.

If we were to take your line of thought you could come to the conclusion that 2nd hand homes are a negative sum game! Because immigration demand is increasing and there is more demand for 2nd hand homes than those being sold or something.

Or you could make the same argument about new builds being a zero sum game because all new supply is taken up by demand created from immigration.

But thats not what zero sum game is. Either you dont understand or are too stubborn to admit you were wrong. Regardless, I'm not replying to you on this anymore.

Hubertj

DataDude wrote: »

No idea on what the appropriate price is. But this is a serious house...I guess ideally you wouldn't want a Semi-D at €4.5m, but I'd put up with it.

https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/dunmara-strand-road-killiney-county-dublin/4499807

EDIT- I know it wouldn't fit with the style, and probably not even allowed if it's a protected structure. But with a view like this it nearly seems like a bit of a shame that there aren't more expansive views of the sea from Kitchen/Living Room/Bedrooms.

I’d take it! Not mad about the stone exterior and poxy tennis court but the location is amazing!

PropQueries

cnocbui wrote: »

Converting old uninsulated structures into something habitable and desirable by modern standards, is not something that can or will happen rapidly. There isn't the manpower to do it and the econimics may make it unjustifiable.

I have personally been in the position of thinking of rennovating an old stone building to modern standards, and concluded it wasn't worth the financial risk.

You are very quick to make light of very weighty issues. If you had some skin in the game, you mightn't be so forthcoming with your easy quick fixes.

If the Government put a 10% derelict property tax on it (like Washington D.C.), I would believe many would be very imaginative in how they could bring them up to code and back into the market in a very cost efficient and timely manner

I also like the idea of Denmark where a property owner must tell the state if a property is vacant and why or they face a fine. It's obviously being debated to death in the media on why the Government doesn't pick at this low lying fruit and a simple idea like Denmark's would finally put it to bed IMO.

If this Government doesn't do it, the next most likely will and they're making a big mistake in not targeting it as the next Government will take the credit for solving the housing crisis if such a supply does indeed exist IMO

cnocbui

DataDude wrote: »

No idea on what the appropriate price is. But this is a serious house...I guess ideally you wouldn't want a Semi-D at €4.5m, but I'd put up with it.

https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/dunmara-strand-road-killiney-county-dublin/4499807

EDIT- I know it wouldn't fit with the style, and probably not even allowed if it's a protected structure. But with a view like this it nearly seems like a bit of a shame that there aren't more expansive views of the sea from Kitchen/Living Room/Bedrooms.

That actually seems like far better value than the other million plus aspirational properties I've seen linked here.

Try suggesting replacing useless sash windows with UPVC tripple glazing and see what sort of a response you get. Carbon taxes should be refundable on listed buildings.

If you have to ask how much that place costs to heat, you can't afford it. I wonder where they are hiding the 10,000L kerosene tank?

DataDude

Hubertj wrote: »

I’d take it! Not mad about the stone exterior and poxy tennis court but the location is amazing!

Agreed on the tennis court, although as far as tennis courts goes it beats most of the sh*tty ones you see in many McMansions. Wouldn't like it as much as some period homes, but I think I quite like the exterior (maybe that would change over time).

Always annoys me in east-facing houses like that with space when people don't extend the seating areas beyond the footprint of the house so you get all night sun from behind instead of being plunged into the shadow of the house at 4pm. Amateurs!

Cyrus

DataDude wrote: »

No idea on what the appropriate price is. But this is a serious house...I guess ideally you wouldn't want a Semi-D at €4.5m, but I'd put up with it.

https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/dunmara-strand-road-killiney-county-dublin/4499807

EDIT- I know it wouldn't fit with the style, and probably not even allowed if it's a protected structure. But with a view like this it nearly seems like a bit of a shame that there aren't more expansive views of the sea from Kitchen/Living Room/Bedrooms.

some place.

i think it has been on and off the market for quite some time now. Since 2017 at least.

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

I had enough of your interpretation. There are written rules for Geodirectory. I'll stick with what it says, not what it means.
It's 1.6% vacancy for Dublin, which focus for long term, and they consider Dublin as low vacancy. Whereas Census over 6%, which is focus on the night of 24 April 2016, they can include it, regardless if person was away for 6 month, or 1 week.

GeoDirectory do not count properties that they consider are for sale or for rent. Hence the difference with the census.

They reduced their vacancy numbers by almost 20k for sale and 20k for rent at a time when there was less than 5k for rent on the market.

This is not my interpretation- this is explained in the methodology which I have showed you many times.

DataDude

Cyrus wrote: »

some place.

i think it has been on and off the market for quite some time now. Since 2017 at least.

Yep, thought it looked somewhat familiar alright. Was on at €6m back in 2015:
https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/homes-and-property/new-to-market/castellated-killiney-beachfront-home-for-6m-1.2434810

fliball123

timmyntc wrote: »

This is the last I'm saying on this so as not to pollute the thread.

I dont think you understand what a zero-sum game is or isn't.
Immigration, it's impact on demand, and indigenous demand do not factor into the equation if you are trying to work out whether 2nd hand sales are a zero-sum game.

A zero-sum game would be when every 2nd hand house sold, the seller then buys a house. There is no net addition to property market because the 2nd hand seller is also a buyer. Of course I've highlighted various scenarios that show why this isn't strictly the case.

If we were to take your line of thought you could come to the conclusion that 2nd hand homes are a negative sum game! Because immigration demand is increasing and there is more demand for 2nd hand homes than those being sold or something.

Or you could make the same argument about new builds being a zero sum game because all new supply is taken up by demand created from immigration.

But thats not what zero sum game is. Either you dont understand or are too stubborn to admit you were wrong. Regardless, I'm not replying to you on this anymore.

You only have to take a step back and look at property prices we are in the middle of a pandemic and prices have gone up (rocketed up). Is this because of my conclusion in that 2nd hand homes is a at the very least a zero sum game (could well be a negative sum) there is way more demand then there is supply. So this in itself the fact property prices are shooting up would suggest my theory is right. Dont bother replying as you have not got a clue what your arguing about.

I have tried to show you our population increase including immigration is directly feeding into the market and forcing the government into buying and renting. The government renting initiatives has made it more attractive for REITS/vultures and foreign investors to buy. The state is not just buying new property they are very active in the second hand market too. Yet you think migration has no impact on 2nd hand property. REALLY?? See how you go trying to outbid an entity has has access to billions and see where you land with trying to buy a 2nd hand property.

Everyone including foreign people need somewhere to live and until you think of property at this level and start seeing the trickle effect that everyone needs some where to live trickles into all aspect of our property market including the 2nd hand market.

Your have painstakingly gone out of your way to show one side to the 2nd hand market only bringing in downsizing and people selling and leaving. When I shot both of those arguments down and the stats back me up your having a go at the poster.

So 2nd hand market is at the very least a zero sum game its probably negative at the moment with the way demand is. You need proof?

Emigration a plus figure for the last 6 years
Property prices going up (including 2nd hand property)
Availability of 2nd hand homes down
Demand for 2nd hand homes through the roof


As the old Wimbledon commentators used to say game set and match.

Bass Reeves

cnocbui wrote: »

Converting old uninsulated structures into something habitable and desirable by modern standards, is not something that can or will happen rapidly. There isn't the manpower to do it and the econimics may make it unjustifiable.

I have personally been in the position of thinking of rennovating an old stone building to modern standards, and concluded it wasn't worth the financial risk.

You are very quick to make light of very weighty issues. If you had some skin in the game, you mightn't be so forthcoming with your easy quick fixes.

Did up an old stone farm house between 2015-2018. Never employed an engineer or any other professional. House was stripped to four bare walls reroofed, new floors, plumbing wiring, windows and doors. Drylined it, new stairs, solar panel, stove and oil heated. Turned it into a two bed house. It cost about 600 euro/ sqM. I did some of the work myself. It is now rented. I hate to even contemplate it now. It would run to way the wrong side of 100K and I have to chase every trades man I needed. I have a lady with two children in it. She is delighted with a modern well insulated ( but its D rated) house that is cheap to heat and run. But then I am one of those gouging heartless LL's that are out there.

All these things sound easy on paper, until you go and do them. It seems easy doing them in a recession, i had factored in a rental yield of 8-10% of costs to do it up, its hitting 16%

Inflating prices government make property more expensive
The more people has to pay for property the less money they spend for other things
The less money they spend the less other people earn
The less other people earn the less them can get mortgage
The more people has to pay high rent the less they spend for other things and they can not save to buy house
The more people can not afford buy houses the more houses gets overpriced
In this situation we have housing bubble and investors from abroad has serious risk investing in property in Ireland
Forget about supply and demand start talk about affordability.
Any inflation is impossible in this situation because people only can spend for rent and food

cnocbui

PropQueries wrote: »

If the Government put a 10% derelict property tax on it (like Washington D.C.), I would believe many would be very imaginative in how they could bring them up to code and back into the market in a very cost efficient and timely manner

I also like the idea of Denmark where a property owner must tell the state if a property is vacant and why or they face a fine. It's obviously being debated to death in the media on why the Government doesn't pick at this low lying fruit and a simple idea like Denmark's would finally put it to bed IMO.

If this Government doesn't do it, the next most likely will and they're making a big mistake in not targeting it as the next Government will take the credit for solving the housing crisis if such a supply does indeed exist IMO

You are mistaken. The property is not vacant. The owner is currently working overseas on contract and is due to return shortly.

MacronvFrugals

i'v been reading up lately on Spain's version of NAMA, incidentally setup by the same guys who did NAMA Alvarez and Marshall

The spanish wined and dined the vulture funds but very little business was ever done with the prevailing attitude being 'we dont screw over our own people'

they described Ireland as being wholeheartedly 'open for business'

Cal4567

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

i'v been reading up lately on Spain's version of NAMA, incidentally setup by the same guys who did NAMA Alvarez and Marshall

The spanish wined and dined the vulture funds but very little business was ever done with the prevailing attitude being 'we dont screw over our own people'

they described Ireland as being wholeheartedly 'open for business'

Without going around in circles but that's my experience. While there's been increased interest in Ireland over the last 2/3 years, the first wave of investors have been here since 2012/13, with a lot of employment for recently left NAMA employees. Frank Connolly's NAMA book describes it all much better than I could ever do.

cnocbui

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Did up an old stone farm house between 2015-2018. Never employed an engineer or any other professional. House was stripped to four bare walls reroofed, new floors, plumbing wiring, windows and doors. Drylined it, new stairs, solar panel, stove and oil heated. Turned it into a two bed house. It cost about 600 euro/ sqM. I did some of the work myself. It is now rented. I hate to even contemplate it now. It would run to way the wrong side of 100K and I have to chase every trades man I needed. I have a lady with two children in it. he is delighted with a modern well insulated ( but its D rated) house that is cheap to heat and run. But then I am one of those gouging heartless LL's that are out there.

All these things sound easy on paper, until you go and do them. It seems easy doing them in a recession, i had factored in a rental yield of 8-10% of costs to do it up, its hitting 16%

I have a 128 year old cut stone 'house' in the distant reaches of Connemara. I had someone recently interested who took his architect to view it, who estimated €500,000 to renovate.

I have no doubt that was for something that would end up gracing the front cover of an architecture magazine and would be put up for an award. I think my gut and caution was right. Even at a relatively paltry €300,000, I wouldn't be up for such a financial risk. Rental prospects would be dire, due to remoteness.