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

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

Brought up in North Wicklow, left Ireland after college, missed all the excitement of the boom years, moved back to Ireland in 2012 and been living here since then.

There's definitely a risk of overdevelopment, but no more than anywhere else. In the case of Greystones I think it is a well identified enough risk that it will be managed well. Definitely no shortage of amenities/infrastructure. It's definitely overdeveloped in terms of coffee shops, but presumably that will correct itself in time!

Interestingly I read recently that Charlesland golf course has shut for good, so no doubt all that land will be developed. I suspect it will be earmarked to futureproof amenities and infrastructure as well as housing. They could make something very special as a seaside recreational space there too.

What is very noticeable is that it is a young town. A lot of young families/young children which is a nice vibe if you're at that stage of life yourself. This is why I have posted a few times about who is going to buy the semi ds in Goatstown etc. If young buyers - i.e current generation - are turning their back on them in favour of places like Greystones, they are going to stay in these places. Can guarantee you nobody who is living here is thinking I cannot wait until I can afford to trade up to a semi d in Goatstown/Booterstown/Dundrum wherever.

The longer current prices are maintained/rise, the more towns like Greystones get traction, and people get settled, and the less inclined they are to leave.

So it is left to future cohorts of FTBers/trader uppers - but at current prices where is that market going to come from?

It is nice, my friends moved down 2 years ago to try it out and have recently bought. They like the atmosphere, reasons for moving were lifestyle and not affordability.
Only concern would be having too much confidence in planners to manage it properly.... will infrastructure - schools, transport etc - keep up with demand? Especially when Starbucks opens, there will be a stampede out of Dublin.
I think affordability, although very important, shouldn’t be the sole determining factor when looking for somewhere to live.

Reins

Paragraph from the Irish times that Idbatterim linked

" Mr Cassidy said both factors were likely to place upward pressure on house prices. “We already have a shortage of housing, so this is exacerbating a pre-existing problem,” he said.

However, he said there were offsetting factors, which could work in the opposite direction, such as unemployment and the uncertainty around future income, which would make it more difficult for buyers to secure a mortgage. Typically demand for housing falls when unemployment rises. "

Going forward do posters see a liklihood of mortgages being harder to secure?

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

It is nice, my friends moved down 2 years ago to try it out and have recently bought. They like the atmosphere, reasons for moving were lifestyle and not affordability.
Only concern would be having too much confidence in planners to manage it properly.... will infrastructure - schools, transport etc - keep up with demand? Especially when Starbucks opens, there will be a stampede out of Dublin.

Schools currently a problem, but no more so than many parts of Dublin, and rumour has it there are more in the pipeline. I think it stands a better chance than most places of being managed well - three out of five of Wicklow TDs, two ministers, live in Greystones. (though I suspect one will be toast at next election!)

Hubertj wrote: »

I think affordability, although very important, shouldn’t be the sole determining factor when looking for somewhere to live.

For sure, but that advice tends to be most valuable to people who don't have affordability issues in the first place! For those that do, it is the one area that you don't have any leeway with!

ebayissues

Working 1/2 days per week won't make me change my attitude to living within close proximity to city, i.e Clontarf, Raheny, Ballsbridge etc. It just won't.

If I could work one week at home and the other week in work, then maybe.

Covid is not here to stay, once it goes things will be back to normal and employees will be wanting to get back to work. Young people wanting to go out to party, travel, restaurants making up for most time.

Those buying far houses out in the middle of nowhere based on covid which is short term will likely regret in a couple of years.

If there was better transportation infrastructure, it would even make the reason more compelling but there isn't.

I've friends who live in Lucan and the commute to Dublin is a ****ing joke.

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

<SNIP>

Dublin is riddled with vacancies and the number is rising. Bit odd, as it is not what you'd expect in a housing crisis, but there you go.

Your Census reported decrease of vacancy between 2016 and 2011. There was no update since 2016 as far as I know.

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

Your Census reported decrease of vacancy between 2016 and 2011. There was no update since 2016 as far as I know.

It’s your census too.

Geodirectory reporting rising vacancy numbers in Dublin.

Timing belt

Reins wrote: »

Paragraph from the Irish times that Idbatterim linked

" Mr Cassidy said both factors were likely to place upward pressure on house prices. “We already have a shortage of housing, so this is exacerbating a pre-existing problem,” he said.

However, he said there were offsetting factors, which could work in the opposite direction, such as unemployment and the uncertainty around future income, which would make it more difficult for buyers to secure a mortgage. Typically demand for housing falls when unemployment rises. "

Going forward do posters see a liklihood of mortgages being harder to secure?

If you would get a mortgage today and nothing changes in your personal circumstances then you will get a mortgage going forward. If however there is uncertainty about your employment or even your employer then you might have difficulty securing a mortgage but this is to be expected.

There is talk about tightening credit standards by the banks across Europe but that is mainly been driven by a few countries where they have relaxed lending Criteria over the past few years. Ireland because of the CBI rules do not need to tighten credit standards in the same way as some of their EU counterparts.

When unemployment is on the rise people tend to put off big decisions like buying a house and tend to increase their savings as they are unsure as to what the future brings.

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

It’s your census too.

Geodirectory reporting rising vacancy numbers in Dublin.

Last time you wasn't happy with Geodirectory number, thus you had a need to recalculate it to fit your purpose.
1.3% vacancy, is not massive vacancy by any measures.

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

Last time you wasn't happy with Geodirectory number, thus you had a need to recalculate it to fit your purpose.
1.3% vacancy, is not massive vacancy by any measures.

Nonsense.

Timing belt

schmittel wrote: »

It’s your census too.

Geodirectory reporting rising vacancy numbers in Dublin.

Yes the vacancy no's for Dublin have increased by massive 0.1% in the year up-to June 2020

Vacancy rates
The average vacancy rate across the State was 4.5% in June 2020, down 0.3 ppts from the corresponding rate in June 2019.
• In 25 of the 26 counties, residential vacancy rates declined in the 12
months to June 2020. Dublin was the exception, where vacancy rates rose marginally by 0.1 ppts.
• Despite the increase, Dublin continued to have the lowest vacancy rates
in the State at 1.3%, followed by Kildare (2.0%) and Wicklow (2.9%). All three Counties are within the Greater Dublin Area.
• Leitrim recorded the highest vacancy rate at 14.6%, although it declined by 0.6ppts year-on-year. After Leitrim, Roscommon (12.6%) and Mayo (12.5%) recorded the next highest vacancy rates. All three counties are in Connacht, the province which had the highest vacancy rates (9.6%) in June 2020.
• Leinster continues to have the lowest average vacancy rate at 2.3%. Just two of the 14 counties that recorded vacancy rates above the national average were in Leinster.

*Vacant addresses as a proportion of total residential stock, excluding buildings under construction
Source: https://www.geodirectory.ie/getattachment/Knowledge-Centre/Reports-Blogs/GeoView-Residential-Buildings-Report-Q2-2020/GeoDirectory-GeoView-Residential-Issue-13-2.pdf?lang=en-IE

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

Nonsense.

Well you wasn't looking to recalculate Census data, but you have a need to come up with some logic when numbers is not good to you.

As Geodirectory have decide these categories are "more of a transition or temporary vacancy rate" and not counted in their vacancy rate, it means that the 1.3% vacancy rate in Dublin represents 1.3% over the 6% base rate.

or to put it another way - 1.3% oversupply in Dublin, 2% oversupply in Kildare and 2.9% oversupply in Wicklow.

Which begs the question why as a housing crisis worsens from 2017 to 2020 are vacancy rates in Dublin, Kildare and Wicklow above the expected base rate and rising?"

Ursabear

DataDude wrote: »

This resonates very strongly with what I have experienced over the last 12 months. I know stories from one individual rarely mean much...but for what it's worth:
I'm fortunate to work in a profession where I meet/work with a fair few 20 somethings with annual incomes in the range of 100-250k (unaffected by COVID-19). Myself and 4 others have been actively searching for homes since late 2019. All 5 of us were set on purchasing between Booterstown and Sandymount (price ranges between 700-1.2m). We have a Whatsapp group where we regularly share properties for others opinions.

Over the last 12 months it has been amazing to watch the group (and my own) perspectives change. Sandymount quickly became removed from all filters, mid last year it was beginning to be Blackrock/Glenageary/Dun Laoghaire...then late last year with us all now having confirmation of between 2-4 days WFH in perpetuity - the properties going into the Whatsapp are now overwhelmingly Greystones/Delgany/Enniskerry/Bray etc.

I'm probably lagging the group to some extent and still haven't ruled out SCD, but once the first of the group bought his stunning house/land in North Wicklow for a pittance compared to Dublin, it's become almost embarrassing to send in a 180m2 4 bed semi D in Booterstown for €900k.

So in our little bubble, 5 high value sales in D4 will now become at least 4 lower value sales in Wicklow (Kildare/Meath etc. are also feasible) solely due to WFH. I know 5 people is a tiny sample size, and it's dangerous to extrapolate your own experiences onto a wider population - but if even 10-20% more young high earning professionals, precisely those who support the most expensive housing markets, turn their back on SCD...I can't see how prices don't suffer in the coming years - it's certainly opened my eyes enough to put any potential purchase on ice!

This mirrors our situation exactly too! We are renting in SCD and first offers we made were SCD but went through the exact scenarios and with our friends too that you played out in your post! We are a similiar sized bubble of friends that you describe.(However we are older)

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

Well you wasn't looking to recalculate Census data, but you have a need to come up with some logic when numbers is not good to you.

It was geodirectory who felt the need to recalculate the census data, not me. Geo figures strengthen my thesis not weaken it.

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

It was geodirectory who felt the need to recalculate the census data, not me. Geo figures strengthen my thesis not weaken it.

Not it wasn't, they just explained difference. You just trying your best to find why GeoDirectory vacancy figures can not be used on it's own.

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

Not it wasn't, they just explained difference. You just trying your best to find why GeoDirectory vacancy figures can not be used on it's own.

Indeed they did. Here it is:

GeoDirectory report a vacant stock of 96,243 address points or units in June 2017, while the 2016 Census reported a vacant stock of 183,312 address points or units, as of April 2016. Thus the GeoDirectory figure is around half the Census figure, which is a substantial difference, of the order of 87,000 dwellings. The average vacancy rate across the State is 4.9 per cent, according to GeoDirectory (Figure 10), compared with 12.3 per cent, according to the Census of Population.

Drilling down further, however, it is possible to explain some of this substantial difference. The CSO has provided some data on the reasons why vacant dwellings
were vacant at the time of the Census of Population for a small sample of vacant buildings (i.e. around 57,000 dwellings or close to one-third of the total). For this
one-third of vacant dwellings, they include dwellings classified as for sale (10,948 dwellings), for rent (10,350), owner in nursing home (4,165), renovation work underway (3,678), owner in hospital (1,469), and owner with relatives (847).

Some of these categories could be construed as dwellings which might not normally be classified as vacant in the context of vacant long term, but would represent more of a transition or temporary vacancy rate, i.e. while properties are waiting to be sold or rented out. In the aggregate they represent a total of around 31,500 properties out of the 57,000, or 55 per cent, implying that 25,500 of this total would be deemed to be vacant. As these explanations were only provided for one-third of vacant dwellings, (if it is assumed that 55 per cent of the remaining two-thirds were similarly classified, leaving 45 per cent as representing the true vacant total) this would reduce the CSO figure for the number of vacant dwellings considerably to around 83,000, which would be closer to the GeoDirectory figure of 96,243.

So when Geodirectory compared apples with apples using their own methodology they found vacancies 16% higher than the CSO: 96,243 vs c. 83,000.

As I said, it strengthens my theory rather than undermines it.

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

Indeed they did. Here it is:



So when Geodirectory compared apples with apples using their own methodology they found vacancies 16% higher than the CSO: 96,243 vs c. 83,000.

As I said, it strengthens my theory rather than undermines it.

Geodirectory and Census are 2 very different methods, different meaning to define vacancy. They simply try to explain difference, as other reports, there is no much information on Census, so obviously its very hypothetical estimates.
Instead of being fair, using 2 reports on it's own. You happy with Census numbers, as it's larger, but for Geodirectory working hard to go deep to the wording, to get into this never ending circles.
Your argument can equally work both sides why Census should be adjusted to GeoDirectory calculation.

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

Geodirectory and Census are 2 very different methods, different meaning to define vacancy. They simply try to explain difference, as other reports, there is no much information on Census, so obviously its very hypothetical estimates.
Instead of being fair, using 2 reports on it's own. You happy with Census numbers, as it's larger, but for Geodirectory working hard to go deep to the wording, to get into this never ending circles.
Your argument can equally work both sides why Census should be adjusted to GeoDirectory calculation.

I'm fine with using either sets of figures - CSO or Geodirectory. Both tell the same story:

Dublin has a surprisingly high number of vacancies given that we have a housing crisis. Geodirectory figures since the Census date indicate that number is rising as the housing crisis worsens.

I just think that is odd. I get that you don't.

Graham

schmittel wrote: »

Dublin has a surprisingly high number of vacancies given that we have a housing crisis. Geodirectory figures since the Census date indicate that number is rising as the housing crisis worsens.

I just think that is odd. I get that you don't.

I'd have said 1.3% is a surprisingly low rate but there you go.

Either way I don't expect it's going to change much over the year in either direction.

BredonWimsey

I'm not sure of this has been talked about yet so apologies for bringing up old ground if it has - but anyone else think the papers have an agenda with saying house prices rising, houses in short supply (well we know this is the case) but doesnt it then drive up demand even further. its like going once, twice, sold to the man in the green hat- they are trying to increase demand and interest in cohorts with the real estate agents. but maybe thats me being cynical. thoughts?

PropQueries

Graham wrote: »

I'd have said 1.3% is a surprisingly low rate but there you go.

Either way I don't expect it's going to change much over the year in either direction.

But can anyone explain what happened all those ex AirBnB and ex student rental properties in the Dublin market.

Have they now re-entered the long-term rental market or are their owners keeping them empty until the pandemic has past?

BredonWimsey

PropQueries wrote: »

But can anyone explain what happened all those ex AirBnB and ex student rental properties in the Dublin market.

Have they now re-entered the long-term rental market or are their owners keeping them empty until the pandemic has past?

they have hit the rental market - just check out daft.ie.

Zenify

BredonWimsey wrote: »

I'm not sure of this has been talked about yet so apologies for bringing up old ground if it has - but anyone else think the papers have an agenda with saying house prices rising, houses in short supply (well we know this is the case) but doesnt it then drive up demand even further. its like going once, twice, sold to the man in the green hat- they are trying to increase demand and interest in cohorts with the real estate agents. but maybe thats me being cynical. thoughts?

Haha welcome to the real world. Unfortunately everyone has an agenda. That doesn't just involve the papers and property. It's everywhere, lobbies and other organisation's will always push to their advantage. Sure The Journal is probably Ireland's main media source now and they have an interest in Daft.ie....

Davy who do a lot of the reports on the property market in Ireland and are one of the largest property investors in the sate (last time I checked). I don't think they completely lie, sure Davy forecast a drop in property prices at the start of the pandemic which turned out to be too pessimistic. However I say they are concerned about their interests.

BredonWimsey

Zenify wrote: »

Haha welcome to the real world. Unfortunately everyone has an agenda. That doesn't just involve the papers and property. It's everywhere, lobbies and other organisation's will always push to their advantage. Sure The Journal is probably Ireland's main media source now and they have an interest in Daft.ie....

and we are all so influenced by the media -its really insane.

Browney7

BredonWimsey wrote: »

I'm not sure of this has been talked about yet so apologies for bringing up old ground if it has - but anyone else think the papers have an agenda with saying house prices rising, houses in short supply (well we know this is the case) but doesnt it then drive up demand even further. its like going once, twice, sold to the man in the green hat- they are trying to increase demand and interest in cohorts with the real estate agents. but maybe thats me being cynical. thoughts?

Impossible! The Irish times owning My Home.ie could never conflict them and other associated media outlets

BredonWimsey

Browney7 wrote: »

Impossible! The Irish times owning My Home.ie could never conflict them and other associated media outlets

aww interesting - feel so naive - didnt know that - surely there is some conflict of interest and journalistic integrity criteria they are violating for reporting on it so.

hometruths

Graham wrote: »

I'd have said 1.3% is a surprisingly low rate but there you go.

Either way I don't expect it's going to change much over the year in either direction.

Why do you think it is "surprisingly low"? What reason would you make you expect it might be higher?

Browney7

BredonWimsey wrote: »

aww interesting - feel so naive - didnt know that - surely there is some conflict of interest and journalistic integrity criteria they are violating for reporting on it so.

They do give dissenting voices a platform - Dermot desmond penned a piece a year or so ago and McWilliams gets a weekly slot - but headlines on house prices gets traffic as a high % of the population have a passing interest in it

Zenify

BredonWimsey wrote: »

aww interesting - feel so naive - didnt know that - surely there is some conflict of interest and journalistic integrity criteria they are violating for reporting on it so.

common practice really. Anti tobacco charities actually set up by tobacco companies, they control the advertisements and use young cool looking actors etc. Same with the anti alcohol groups.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thejournal.ie/smoking-case-big-tobacco-5326755-Jan2021/%3famp=1

BredonWimsey

Zenify wrote: »

common practice really. Anti tobacco charities actually set up by tobacco companies, they control the advertisements and use young cool looking actors etc. Same with the anti alcohol groups.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thejournal.ie/smoking-case-big-tobacco-5326755-Jan2021/%3famp=1

wow thanks for the info - must research this

Zenify

BredonWimsey wrote: »

wow thanks for the info - must research this

Don't research it too much. You'll become far to skeptical like me and doubt everything. Sometimes I feel like a tin foil hat man.

Zenify

Sure I even believe their are paid posters here by some of the property interests. How crazy is that....? Some of the pro property posters here must honestly spend hours each day on here. Just look at some of the names and how often they post. That's how skeptical you can become.

BredonWimsey

Zenify wrote: »

Sure I even believe their are paid posters here by some of the property interests. How crazy is that....? Some of the pro property posters here must honestly spend hours each day on here. Just look at some of the names and how often they post. That's how skeptical you can become.

wow thats crazy (and a bit shameful on their part) i did have that thought actually when i saw some of the names of the posters )

BredonWimsey

Zenify wrote: »

Don't research it too much. You'll become far to skeptical like me and doubt everything. Sometimes I feel like a tin foil hat man.

haha!!:pac:

Graham

Mod Note

take the conspiracy theories to the appropriate forum please.

Do not reply to this post.

Villa05

DataDude wrote:

So in our little bubble, 5 high value sales in D4 will now become at least 4 lower value sales in Wicklow (Kildare/Meath etc. are also feasible) solely due to WFH. I know 5 people is a tiny sample size, and it's dangerous to extrapolate your own experiences onto a wider population - but if even 10-20% more young high earning professionals, precisely those who support the most expensive housing markets, turn their back on SCD...I can't see how prices don't suffer in the coming years - it's certainly opened my eyes enough to put any potential purchase on ice!

Interesting, I would have thought that an exodus from Dublin would be led and dominated by people priced out of the market. When you have the highest earners doing it we could have a very interesting few years ahead of us. The pandemic may well solve our housing crisis

BredonWimsey wrote:

I'm not sure of this has been talked about yet so apologies for bringing up old ground if it has - but anyone else think the papers have an agenda with saying house prices rising, houses in short supply (well we know this is the case) but doesnt it then drive up demand even further. its like going once, twice, sold to the man in the green hat- they are trying to increase demand and interest in cohorts with the real estate agents. but maybe thats me being cynical. thoughts?

It was identified as a contributing factor to the last boom bust. Group think driven by media with a vested interest

Along with
Cif and other developer lobbyists having the government in their back pockets

Interest rates far too low for an economy that was booming

Areas that are different this time include

The nations public debt is nearly 6 times higher so little leeway to cushion a downturn.
The pension reserve fund which aided the correction is gone.

The recovery dividend has been wasted on policies that increased house prices.

Future social housing has been outsourced at peak rent prices on long term leases to the private sector.

New House prices are dictated at the upper margins by reits and investment trusts on unsustainable rents and a 0 tax policy on these institutions plus access to 0% finance.

The bank lending rules helped in softening the increases, but reits and investment trusts operate outside these controls plus the government is persistent in circumventing these rules

The endgame is obvious its just a matter of time

My daughter in junior infants had the story of the emporor with no cloths as part of her home schooling this week.
I wonder how long it will take our nations leaders and others to learn the lesson of that story

BredonWimsey

Villa05 wrote: »

Interesting, I would have thought that an exodus from Dublin would be led and dominated by people priced out of the market. When you have the highest earners doing it we could have a very interesting few years ahead of us. The pandemic may well solve our housing crisis




It was identified as a contributing factor to the last boom bust. Group think driven by media with a vested interest

Along with
Cif and other developer lobbyists having the government in their back pockets

Interest rates far too low for an economy that was booming

Areas that are different this time include

The nations public debt is nearly 6 times higher so little leeway to cushion a downturn.
The pension reserve fund which aided the correction is gone.

The recovery dividend has been wasted on policies that increased house prices.

Future social housing has been outsourced at peak rent prices on long term leases to the private sector.

New House prices are dictated at the upper margins by reits and investment trusts on unsustainable rents and a 0 tax policy on these institutions plus access to 0% finance.

The bank lending rules helped in softening the increases, but reits and investment trusts operate outside these controls plus the government is persistent in circumventing these rules

The endgame is obvious its just a matter of time

My daughter in junior infants had the story of the emporor with no cloths as part of her home schooling this week.
I wonder how long it will take our nations leaders and others to learn the lesson of that story

I love that story - it is so apt and I think of it from time to time. very interesing points you raise - thanks.

Hubertj

Villa05 wrote: »

Interesting, I would have thought that an exodus from Dublin would be led and dominated by people priced out of the market. When you have the highest earners doing it we could have a very interesting few years ahead of us. The pandemic may well solve our housing crisis




It was identified as a contributing factor to the last boom bust. Group think driven by media with a vested interest

Along with
Cif and other developer lobbyists having the government in their back pockets

Interest rates far too low for an economy that was booming

Areas that are different this time include

The nations public debt is nearly 6 times higher so little leeway to cushion a downturn.
The pension reserve fund which aided the correction is gone.

The recovery dividend has been wasted on policies that increased house prices.

Future social housing has been outsourced at peak rent prices on long term leases to the private sector.

New House prices are dictated at the upper margins by reits and investment trusts on unsustainable rents and a 0 tax policy on these institutions plus access to 0% finance.

The bank lending rules helped in softening the increases, but reits and investment trusts operate outside these controls plus the government is persistent in circumventing these rules

The endgame is obvious its just a matter of time

My daughter in junior infants had the story of the emporor with no cloths as part of her home schooling this week.
I wonder how long it will take our nations leaders and others to learn the lesson of that story

Add in fantasy populist policies from opposition parties that it can be easily solved and you have a great combination.

hometruths

Villa05 wrote: »

Interesting, I would have thought that an exodus from Dublin would be led and dominated by people priced out of the market. When you have the highest earners doing it we could have a very interesting few years ahead of us. The pandemic may well solve our housing crisis

People on big money are a lot more price sensitive than most realise. I've made this point a few times against the sure we have plenty of high earners in MNCs to keep the show on the road logic.

FTBs at the lower end of the market with 20% deposit and HTB and whatever shared equity etc are more sensitive to the amount they can borrow rather than the purchase price.

They calculate the max they can borrow as a multiple of salary under the CBI rules and work backwards, then calculating the deposit they need for 20% and get saving. If that works out at buying power of 350k they start looking at properties to bid up to 350k on. Purchase price sensitivity is out the window, they want to buy whatever they can for 350k, get on the ladder, stop paying the rent, sure the mortgage is cheaper.

However if you look at people paying 8/900k+ the rational is different. Because affordability is less of an issue, the pressure of getting out from under the landlord etc is not there, they will be much more value orientated in what they can get for their money. They are far more likely to say - Hang on, this is the guts of 1m for 180sq m semi d with a pokey back garden, do I really need to be in this location, surely I can do better than that for my budget?

DataDude and friends a case in point.

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

Add in fantasy populist policies from opposition parties that it can be easily solved and you have a great combination.

Whether they are fantasy or not, they might be gaining traction - below is a January 2018 opinion poll based on housing tenure. Poll taken in last days of Gerry Adam's SF leadership, so presumably they are more voter friendly now:

<MOD SNIP>
No wonder FF/FG keen to do whatever it takes to get more people owning houses, even if it means buying 30% of it for them!

Villa05

Hubertj wrote:

Add in fantasy populist policies from opposition parties that it can be easily solved and you have a great combination.

Well the current Gov comprises of the main leaders and main opposition since the foundation of the state

So current policy includes that

Welcome back

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

Whether they are fantasy or not, they might be gaining traction - below is a January 2018 opinion poll based on housing tenure. Poll taken in last days of Gerry Adam's SF leadership, so presumably they are more voter friendly now:

<SNIP>

No wonder FF/FG keen to do whatever it takes to get more people owning houses, even if it means buying 30% of it for them!

Of course such policies gain traction. It’s easy to promise the sun moon and stars especially when you see the balls up that has been made of it.

Look at other headlines relating to the property market recently - “prices” increasing 6%-7%.... people go mad about it..... it’s only people who look past the headline realise it’s just asking prices etc.

So you get SF rolling out a lad that can actually speak properly and doesn’t have a criminal background (that we know of). He promises cheap and/or free houses for all..... of course people pay attention. But he’s lying..... just like people saying shared equity and other policies won’t increase prices.

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

Of course such policies gain traction. It’s easy to promise the sun moon and stars especially when you see the balls up that has been made of it.

Look at other headlines relating to the property market recently - “prices” increasing 6%-7%.... people go mad about it..... it’s only people who look past the headline realise it’s just asking prices etc.

So you get SF rolling out a lad that can actually speak properly and doesn’t have a criminal background (that we know of). He promises cheap and/or free houses for all..... of course people pay attention. But he’s lying..... just like people saying shared equity and other policies won’t increase prices.

Of course he won't be able to deliver cheap/free houses to all, but if he implements policies that makes your house and my house relatively cheaper a lot of his base will consider that a good start!

bluelamp

schmittel wrote: »

People on big money are a lot more price sensitive than most realise. I've made this point a few times against the sure we have plenty of high earners in MNCs to keep the show on the road logic.

This.

The high earning / high wealth individuals didn't generally get there by making poor financial choices. I'd imagine they would be the last people to be ripped off.

BredonWimsey

bluelamp wrote: »

This.

The high earning / high wealth individuals didn't generally get there by making poor financial choices. I'd imagine they would be the last people to be ripped off.

on the other hand - they may have so much money they dont know what to do with it or its family money so they have no attachment to it. Its a bit more nuanced i think. older people also with alot of money are swindled all the time. Also have you heard of Catfishing. Yup its a thing. so happens across the board regardless of bracket.

anyway i need to go and count my millions - i'll be right back.

hometruths

BredonWimsey wrote: »

on the other hand - they may have so much money they dont know what to do with it or its family money so they have no attachment to it. Its a bit more nuanced i think. older people also with alot of money are swindled all the time. Also have you heard of Catfishing. Yup its a thing. so happens across the board regardless of bracket.

anyway i need to go and count my millions - i'll be right back.

If you've got so much money you don't know what to do with it, I can guarantee you're not buying 180 sq m semi d's in Booterstown!

BredonWimsey

schmittel wrote: »

If you've got so much money you don't know what to do with it, I can guarantee you're not buying 180 sq m semi d's in Booterstown!

maybe you do if you want to rent it out.


anywho i just dont think sweeping statements represent the ins and outs of all matters.



just my 2 million cents :pac:

PokeHerKing

schmittel wrote: »

People on big money are a lot more price sensitive than most realise. I've made this point a few times against the sure we have plenty of high earners in MNCs to keep the show on the road logic.

FTBs at the lower end of the market with 20% deposit and HTB and whatever shared equity etc are more sensitive to the amount they can borrow rather than the purchase price.

They calculate the max they can borrow as a multiple of salary under the CBI rules and work backwards, then calculating the deposit they need for 20% and get saving. If that works out at buying power of 350k they start looking at properties to bid up to 350k on. Purchase price sensitivity is out the window, they want to buy whatever they can for 350k, get on the ladder, stop paying the rent, sure the mortgage is cheaper.

However if you look at people paying 8/900k+ the rational is different. Because affordability is less of an issue, the pressure of getting out from under the landlord etc is not there, they will be much more value orientated in what they can get for their money. They are far more likely to say - Hang on, this is the guts of 1m for 180sq m semi d with a pokey back garden, do I really need to be in this location, surely I can do better than that for my budget?

DataDude and friends a case in point.

To sum up what you've said there is more money equals more options. Hardly a revelation.

hometruths

PokeHerKing wrote: »

To sum up what you've said there is more money equals more options. Hardly a revelation.

You'd be surprised how many posters on here don't get it.

BredonWimsey

schmittel wrote: »

You'd be surprised how many posters on here don't get it.

you teach them - obi wan kenobi

DataDude

schmittel wrote: »

People on big money are a lot more price sensitive than most realise. I've made this point a few times against the sure we have plenty of high earners in MNCs to keep the show on the road logic.

FTBs at the lower end of the market with 20% deposit and HTB and whatever shared equity etc are more sensitive to the amount they can borrow rather than the purchase price.

They calculate the max they can borrow as a multiple of salary under the CBI rules and work backwards, then calculating the deposit they need for 20% and get saving. If that works out at buying power of 350k they start looking at properties to bid up to 350k on. Purchase price sensitivity is out the window, they want to buy whatever they can for 350k, get on the ladder, stop paying the rent, sure the mortgage is cheaper.

However if you look at people paying 8/900k+ the rational is different. Because affordability is less of an issue, the pressure of getting out from under the landlord etc is not there, they will be much more value orientated in what they can get for their money. They are far more likely to say - Hang on, this is the guts of 1m for 180sq m semi d with a pokey back garden, do I really need to be in this location, surely I can do better than that for my budget?

DataDude and friends a case in point.

Nail on the head.

At risk of making myself completely identifiable to my friends who follow this forum:

As well as my professional circle of very high earners, we have another circle of friends on my partner's side who would have a more typical income profile. In my circle, there are two home owners out of 8/9 individuals. In my partners circle we are the only ones who who are not.

They fit precisely into your description above and often ask us "so, when do you think you'll be able to buy". I'd usually deflect not wanting to cast any negative sentiment on their recent purchase, but when pushed I might say something like

"oh well we're just not sure now is the right time, Dublin seemed to hit peak affordability in late 2018 and I guess I have some concerns about where the economy goes from here and particularly any tax hikes coming down the road"

I may as well be speaking German with the looks I get. Not that our approach is "better" (in fact if things keep on going this way, perhaps we are the fools) but for them it has always been a case of "I need to save X amount, I immediately run to the bank and take as big a mortgage as I possibly can and buy whatever that will get me". The idea that people who can buy, don't and are happy to wait and see is completely foreign to them.

The luxury of being able to buy is directly correlated with not feeling the need to buy.

And to add to that, I often read on various property forums comments like "ah well if you can afford to pay €1m you won't mind paying €1.2m, money is not an issue". From all my experiences, that is complete nonsense.